They call us their ‘enemies’ — who are they?

Barack Obama, who regularly attended a Muslim school and Muslim religious services with his mother’s Indonesian husband when he lived in that country as a youngster, told Indonesians in their own language last week as he re-visited that country with his thousands of courtiers — his $200-million-a-day royal entourage — that “Indonesia will always be a part of me.”

OK. We do not expect our presidents, visiting foreign countries, mainly to complain about the plumbing. Wouldn’t be very diplomatic. But the president also used the occasion to say the construction of new apartment buildings by Israelis in their own capital, Jerusalem, could be an obstacle to Mideast peace. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton echoed that Jewish building in East Jerusalem is not constructive, while announcing a further $150 million U.S. taxpayer gift to the Palestinian Arabs who have lived on Israel’s borders, arming for war, since they were kicked out of Jordan for trying to overthrow that country’s government a generation ago.

Spare change. Maybe she found it under the couch cushions.

Why shouldn’t Israelis be able to build housing for their own children in their own capital city — specifically, in the eastern part of Jerusalem, which they won back in war with the Jordanians in 1967 after the vastly more populous massed Arab nations attacked THEM? Because Obama and Hillary expect the Israelis to trade East Jerusalem “for peace”? The Israelis have already traded away the Sinai and the Gaza Strip and the West Bank “for peace.” Yet when have Obama and Hillary simpered that Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza arming to the teeth for their next attempt to destroy Israel — perhaps now backed by Iranian nukes — are “not constructive”? Instead they help finance the aggressors.

Such words and gestures have outcomes. When U.S. ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam Hussein that America was unconcerned about his border dispute with Kuwait, he took it as carte blanche to invade. The American War Party then had to shift into high gear, presenting the daughter of a Kuwaiti diplomat disguised as a “pediatric ward nurse from a Kuwaiti hospital” to testify before a go-along-with-the-game U.S. Congress that she’d seen Iraqi soldiers murdering premature babies (I believe there were also reports of Iraqi soldiers slaughtering and eating exotic animals in the Kuwait City zoo!) to gin up enough war fever for Americans to buy the subsequent “liberation” of Kuwait.

When was it we finally pulled our troops out of that part of the world?

When Khrushchev judged John Kennedy to be an out-of-his-depth dilettante playboy, he put missiles in Cuba, bringing America and the USSR to the brink of war. Finally Kennedy — yes, Kennedy — backed down, pulling our missiles out of Turkey. The handsome young amateur finally screwed up enough times that he was taken out by someone with enough sophistication to set up Lee Harvey Oswald as a patsy.

What if the Arabs take enough encouragement from the words of out-of-their-depth amateurs Obama and Hillary to attack Israel, perhaps backed by Iranian nukes? Would America stand behind a desperate Israel dropping nuclear bombs on Damascus and Tehran? Or would O & H. simply offer the surviving Jews a haven in West Texas? Have they thought this stuff through? Don’t you think the grown-ups should start to ask?

Jewish New Yorkers overwhelmingly voted to advance the political careers of carpetbagging then-Sen. Hillary Clinton and not-sure-where-he-calls-home Barack Obama, who has told an interviewer the Muslim call to prayer is “the most beautiful sound in the world.” Why? Could it be there’s an issue dearer to the hearts of these New York voters than preserving Israel?

Apparently, that would be the advance of world socialism — coupled with disarmament of the rural rubes who might resist — and the “punishment of the rich.”

This is not to say that everyone of the Jewish faith is a socialist on the Obama-Hillary model, thank heavens. Yet even a vast majority of well-to-do New York intellectuals and academics clearly vote for people who advance a strong central state, probably under the misguided belief that such a strong central government will use its power, like Superman, to “advance truth, justice, and civil rights,” etc. They thus ignore what history teaches us about the propensities of strong central states once they’ve ruined the domestic economy — their tendency to blame scapegoats and gird for war.

In a radio interview targeting Hispanic voters late last month, Barack Obama famously warned them they couldn’t expect much help from him unless they went to the polls and voted against “our enemies.” He did not mean Iran, Venezuela, Russia or even al-Qaida, none of whom were on the ballot. He meant the smaller-government, domestic Tea Party activists.

Those of us who favor downsizing government and ending all the bailouts, borrowing and deficit spending in order to preserve Americans’ freedom, our dollar, our economy and our property rights may not be used to thinking of ourselves as the federal government’s “enemies,” but it appears we’d better get used to it.

So, who are OUR “enemies”? What is the current Democratic coalition that returned to office the likes of senators Harry Reid, Patty Murray, and Barbara Boxer, who support Charles Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Dianne Feinstein, and all the rest?

These cynical and greedy forces of collectivism who seek to control the economy through heavy-handed regulation, desperately printing new “money” and thus driving up prices and devaluing our savings, don’t care whether their ambitions drive us deeper into Depression. Left to their own devices, they will almost certainly respond to the resulting flight of “the rich” and their capital by creating such new federal crimes as “hoarding,” “speculation,” and “moving assets offshore.”

And make no mistake, they are still in charge. Funded by your tax money routed through the public employee unions, kept in office by the efforts of the SEIU, AFSCME and the votes of the idle, gluttonous, out-of-wedlock welfare classes anxious to keep their checks coming, they control the White House and the Senate; they are one more Obama appointment away from controlling the Supreme Court. They want vastly higher taxes, and they still want “card check.”

Before we even get to the Next Big War, what are the likely near-future outcomes of the disastrous economic policies they’ve already put in place?

For starters, watch your grocery and electric bills.

3 Comments to “They call us their ‘enemies’ — who are they?”

  1. Bruce D Says:

    Once was a country that quit doing what the people wanted. It had a huge welfare system, entertainment was provided to the public free of charge. Tax rates grew so high that the rich moved their assets (anything that wasn’t nailed down that the state said was theirs by right) offshore. The people who did work for a living left if they could get away and werent being watched because if they were close at hand to the center of power they were taxed beyond incomprehension. Their military often took people in and trained them. After a time they returned to their own country and took up arms against them. Soon, neighbors began picking away at the bones, though it’s currency traded for hundreds of years after its fall. Gold is like that. Might be time for everyone to read again the book “The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire”.

  2. John Taylor Says:

    Speaking of Indonesia: I wonder how many remember that the anti-communist ‘coup’ in Indonesia in 1965 was a major catalyst in US involvement in Vietnam?

    Or that the subsequent Suharto dictatorship in Indonesia was McNamara’s paradigm for Saigon?

    Then, as now, much of American foreign policy was “all about the oil”.

  3. Burke101 Says:

    If Indonesia is part of Obama, did the Indonesian customs people make him walk through an x-ray scanner and then do a slidesearch on him?

    Maybe they can post video online?

Comment:

RSS 2.0" title="Subscribe to this posts comments via RSS 2.0">RSS subscribe