WOOF! Watchdogs of Our Freedom

Archive for November, 2013|Monthly archive page

THE ROAD TO TEHRAN

In "Springtime for Terror" Forum on November 25, 2013 at 5:13 pm

road to splash use

The road to Tehran….

Oh noooo, President Obama has once again taken an interest in the politics of the Middle East—and even worse, he’s taken an interest in nuclear gamesmanship with Iran. WOOF is prepared to view these latest developments objectively, looking at both points of view. This means allowing on the one hand for the inevitability of any Obama initiative leading to disastrous outcomes because the president is privately committed to advancing Muslim interests while reducing the potency of American influence and doing whatever he can to contribute to the ultimate destruction of Israel, which he despises. On the other hand, to be fair, we must allow for the inevitability of any Obama initiative leading to disastrous outcomes because the president is an idiot. Long time readers know that WOOF is a stubborn defender of President Obama against all those critics who claim he is simply inept and stupid—because we firmly believe that the president, while not the sharpest light bulb in the six pack, is a conscious and not unintelligent component of the worldwide totalitarian socialist conspiracy, who governs with the firm intent of laying waste to our economy, our defenses, and our prestige abroad. And if the president is not himself enamored of seeing Israel come under nuclear assault during his second term, suffice it that Valerie Jarrett is, and it is Valerie Jarrett, a native-born Iranian communist, who makes policy and controls events, at least in the West Wing.

The Hillary Years

Nobody at the State Department speaks Russian? Now, that's hard to believe, somehow!

Nobody at the State Department speaks Russian? Now, that’s hard to believe, somehow!

The Hillary Clinton era of middle-eastern diplomacy may be said to have come to a squawking halt with Her Magnificence’s hysterical testimony before congress (which testimony was considerably delayed by the mysterious bump to the head Mrs. Clinton evidently received immediately following the assault on our consulate and its annex and the murder of Ambassador Stevens). The details remain even fuzzier than her congressional testimony. But as Obama’s secretary of state she cut a broad swath, beginning her career at State by handing the Russians a red button that was supposed to say “reset” but actually bore the Russian word for “overcharged.” Her Magnificence not only oversaw the total collapse of Russo/American relations, she engineered the overthrow of Gaddafi and the collapse of Libya into terror-driven chaos. 

Gadaffi--just dead after a long cross-town tour.

Gadaffi–just dead after a long cross-town tour.

Americans almost completely overlooked this horrendous misjudgment coupled with an unconstitutionally waged war by the Commander in Chief—possibly because those who remembered Gaddafi at all remembered him as the bad guy Ronald Reagan bombed into neutrality in the 1980s. But that is precisely why eliminating Qaddafi made no sense at all…at least from an American perspective. Gaddafi refrained from exporting any further mayhem after Reagan blew up his air force, bombed his palace and sank his navy in 1986 . He renounced terrorism publicly in 2003, agreeing to dismantle his WMD stores and shut down his nuclear program while declaring his intention to join in the fight against Muslim extremism in North Africa.  Given these facts, Hillary and Barack could not get rid of the guy fast enough. America flew air cover for Al Qaeda, slowly attriting the loyalist forces in Libya until Gaddafi was captured strapped to the hood of a car and driven around his home town until he’d been pummeled, shot, and stabbed to death, at which point Hillary famously cackled, “We came, we saw, he died!” (And they say she has no sense of humor!)

indexhilllaff

But the reduction of Libya to mob rule was not Hillary’s first contribution to regional extremism. She and Barack turned on Gaddafi only after toppling our staunchest Arab ally, Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak. It was with Mubarak’s unceremonious ejection from office following considerable internecine violence and at least one head-turning manifestation of the 4th horseman of the Apocalypse trotting through the riot-torn streets of Cairo [check it out here ]  that the American media first began chirruping about “Arab Spring.” To hear CNN or MSNBC on the subject, a fresh passion for human liberty was sweeping the region like a cosseting vernal breeze. Meanwhile, in the real world, the Muslim Brotherhood electioneered its way into the presidential palace in Cairo and set about clamping down on Egyptians with—what else?–Sharia Law. This was exactly what the Obama administration expected and desired, but it caught the media by surprise. An amusing irony inherent in  Obama’s snug relationship with the American press is that while the media almost universally adore Our Beloved Helmsman, they have never understood the man, nor fathomed his motives. To an air head, the jabbering media elitists genuinely expected a golden age of democracy to sweep the middle east following fast on the heels of Hillary Clinton’s demolition jobs, but only sectarian violence and Islamo-fascist oppression manifested themselves.

The Fourth Horseman? You probably had to be there.

The Fourth Horseman? You probably had to be there.

Her Magnificence’s contributions in brief 

Zelaya--describing the Israeli mercenary force that jumped him in bed!

Zelaya–describing the Israeli mercenary force that jumped him in bed!

To innocent bystanders, Hillary’s record at State appears to consist of a series of inexplicable bungles. First, (following her conspicuous failure to master the vagaries of the Russian language), came her now-long-forgotten efforts to restore the communist Manuel Zelaya to power in Honduras after his removal in a bloodless coup d’état authorized by the Honduran Supreme Court. Zelaya’s 2009 ouster was noisily, even bellicosely decried by Her Magnificence and by Obama himself, but in the end Honduras ignored their bombast and Comrade Zelaya found himself exiled to Costa Rica, taking calls from his pals Hugo Chavez and Raul Castro, and complaining that “Israeli mercenaries” had snatched him from his presidential bed.

imagesCAR4AB22

Mrs. Clinton bellows her “reasonable question.”

Then came the transformation of Egypt and Libya from stabilizing influences in the region to chaos-riven terror states, which transformation was driven home by the attack on our Libyan consulate in Benghazi carried out by Al Qaeda-allied forces and resulting in the death of Ambassador Stevens, his aide de camp, and two SEALs. Clinton never explained her refusal to lift a finger to reinforce the consulate’s security running up to the incident. She never explained why, in the face of repeated pleas from Stevens that she strengthen his security, she did the opposite and out-sourced the consulate’s protection to a rag-tag batch of locals. She never explained her mysterious absence from her post during the entirety of the crisis, nor her refusal to testify in the wake of the incident on the grounds of having bumped her head. The closest she came to clarifying such matters when she finally consented to address the joint House and Senate committee was when she balled up her fists and shrilled, “What difference, at this point, does it make?” And lest anyone doubt that liberalism is akin to clinical psychosis, let it also be noted that The New Yorker’s Amy Davidson called that “a reasonable question.” But we digress.

Morsi, we hardly knew ye….

TIME did all it could to help Morsi out, but apparently not enough Egyptians read Time.

TIME did all it could to help Morsi out, but apparently not enough Egyptians read Time.

While the nattering classes on both east and left coasts scratched their heads in bewilderment, Obama celebrated the installation of Sharia-law fanatics in Egypt by showering them with world-class jet aircraft and Abrams battle tanks, presumably to assist President Morsi in the elimination of his Israeli neighbors whom he famously considered, “bloodsuckers…warmongers…the descendants of apes and pigs.” When the Egyptian army and a considerable portion of the Egyptian people saw fit to rebel against the strangle hold imposed by Morsi and the Brotherhood, Obama shouted shrill admonitions against such contumacy and warned of dire consequences if Mohammed Morsi’s all-terrorist, anti-constitutional despotism were in any way obstructed from attaining its aims. And one of those aims, WOOF has frequently contended, was the kidnapping of Ambassador Stevens in order to effectuate a swap with the United States in which our Ambassador would be returned in exchange for Omar Abdel-Rahman,  otherwise known as the Blind Sheik—the militant mullah rotting in federal prison for masterminding the first attack on the twin towers during the Clinton administration. (A van bomb in the basement, remember? It failed to bring down the house.) WOOF has previously asserted, based on information available to us, that the entire Benghazi incident was a kidnapping effort that went lethally wrong when heroic Americans intervened despite Valerie Jarrett’s best efforts to quash any attempts at rescue. Many of you thought we were crazy, remember? Well, we do. But since we posted that article in August, Accuracy in Media (AIM) convened a September 16 conference with the Citizens Commission on Benghazi (CCB), during which, four-star Admiral James “Ace” Lyons, went on record with his belief that the 9/11/12 assault might well have been a kidnapping operation gone awry. Thanks, Admiral! We hate being crazy all by ourselves!

Admiral Lyons exposing the Administration (of course, let's remember that things, even if formerly true, once said on FOX NEWS become lies!)

Admiral Lyons exposing the Administration on TV. (Of course, let’s remember that things, even if formerly true, once said on FOX NEWS become lies!)

Hillary, as we all know, resigned as Secretary of State, turning her not-inconsiderable posterior to Foggy Bottom forever, just in time to be praised by most of her congressional inquisitors rather than interrogated about her culpability in helping to spawn Benghazi and lying to cover it up. Despite her debris strewn career at State and her resounding diatribes at the hearing, (which the liberal establishment media described as “feisty”) Mrs. Clinton was treated to effusive accolades from almost everyone present. John McCain, as usual, summed it up most irrationally, assuring the outgoing secretary, “We thank you for your outstanding dedication to this nation. We are proud of you. All over the world you are viewed with admiration and respect.”  Only Rand Paul spoke of Hillary’s performance as rating dismissal, and he was duly scolded by the Republican leadership for committing probity when flummery was clearly the order of the day.

Rand Paul chastised. "I guess somebody shoulda stopped the fight and told me it was her!"

Rand Paul chastised. “I guess somebody shoulda stopped the fight and told me it was her!”

As for Our Beloved Helmsman, it may be recalled that he waxed positively Dadaistic in praising Her Magnificence as “one of the finest” secretaries of state in American history, insisting that “hard work” lay behind “a lot of the successes we’ve had internationally.” Now, please remember, before you ask “What successes?” that the First Marxist considered the destruction of American alliances and the installation of the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt to be successes, and at the time he issued these encomia, his co-conspirators in the Brotherhood were still in charge in Egypt.

Kerry Redux

Kerry and Morsi--best friends forever!

Kerry and Morsi–best friends forever!

To make certain Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood maintained control in Egypt (given that the Egyptian army and the Egyptian people were increasingly perturbed by Morsi’s expanding personal power not to mention his one-night re-write of the Egyptian constitution, granting himself authority over essentially everyone and everything) Obama ordered his new Secretary of State to Cairo with orders to make sure Morsi remained top banana, (principal pomegranate?), and thus John Forbes Kerry, the first Secretary of State to be honored by a commemorative plaque in Ho Chi Minh City, winged his way toward  Far Araby. Once deplaned, Clinton’s successor launched into stentorian declarations of America’s unflagging support of the Morsi presidency, privately directed a variety of threats toward the disgruntled Army leadership (intended to squelch any inclination to stage coups), and released 250 million dollars in foreign aid to Morsi and the Brotherhood as a sign of solidarity. Satisfied that Morsi was firmly established in power, John Forbes Kerry returned to Massachusetts and kicked back on his yacht. He was sunning himself on the poop deck when he learned that the Egyptian Army had gone ahead and ousted Morsi despite his warnings, endorsements, and largesse. Since Kerry appeared foolish sunbathing confidently on his yacht while Morsi’s government collapsed in the wake of his ringing espousals, Kerry denied that he was sunning on his yacht; but alas, there were photos. So he decided that he had, in fact, been sunning on his yacht but that it was really okay because the removal of Morsi by his own military presaged a new age of democratic progress in Egypt, which would indeed seem the conclusion dictated by diplomacy, but Kerry, who was treasonable enough for the North Vietnamese, the infamous Madam Binh, and Jane Fonda, was evidently thought too pro-American to be let in on the Obama Administration’s darkest designs. Thus, Kerry’s sudden (sensible if typically hypocritical) shift to supporting the ascendant Egyptian military earned him the immediate wrath (yes, WOOF knows this) of the West Wing Troika, namely, Barack Hussein Obama, his immediate control, Valerie Jarrett, and his National Security Apparatchik, Susan Rice (she of the Sunday-show anti-Islamic movie alibis, remember? Say is that poor man still in jail?)

The Blind Sheik--upon whom Morsi was fixated--and who can blame him?

The Blind Sheik–upon whom Morsi was fixated–and who can blame him?

John Forbes Kerry must have wondered what hit him when he performed the perfectly traditional and time-honored maneuver of changing sides when Morsi was arrested by the Egyptian military. Suddenly an utterly insensate Susan Rice was all over his case, as was the equally rabid Jarrett. The newly minted Secretary had, after all, botched his assignment completely. Tasked with bolstering Morsi and scaring Morsi’s opponents into inaction, Kerry attended the necessary meetings, made the required speeches, handed out the customary payoffs and issued all the proper assurances, returning home to report his mission accomplished –only to be snapped by photographers relaxing on his boat while in Cairo the Egyptian army was clapping Morsi in irons. A Jimmy Carter or a Bill Clinton would have played along with Kerry’s sudden shift to the Army as pragmatic in the circumstances, but Team Obama comprises ideologues who identify with third world radicalism—and the deposed Morsi was still their anti-Israeli, anti-American hero.  Further, if Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood was complicit in the plot to kidnap Ambassador Stevens and trade him for Morsi’s idol, the Blind Sheik, a military trial posed a considerable risk of exposure. The whole idea of Morsi being a prisoner remains a nightmare for Obama’s staff, and it took weeks for the key players, none of whom realistically understood diplomacy, to get over their chagrin and accept the Egyptian coup as a fait accompli. Like it or not, the radicalization of Egypt was stymied for the time being, and the Obamans turned their attention to Syria.

The war that didn’t focus group well…

Bashar Assad in paisley--small head, big neckties. high hopes!

Bashar Assad in paisley–small head, big neckties. high hopes!

Syria was never a primary target, because its dictator, Bashar Al Assad, was an accomplished terrorist, Israel hater, and oppressor of his people—all good reasons to maintain him in place–but it would do for a distraction from the president’s mounting domestic crises, and Obama and Jarrett initially saw it as a good place to conjure up a newsworthy wag-the-dog-style war filled with cruise missiles, bomb bursts, and tracer fire, dazzling viewers with sturm und drang  and distracting them from the avalanche of scandals besetting the White house in the wake of the president’s re-election. (Actually, those scandals have been subsequently eclipsed by the overwhelming disaster that is Obamacare, but sapient readers will recall them without WOOF’s prompting.) Besides, the “rebel forces” were once again Al Qaeda-affiliated terror mongers, so supporting them not only had precedent, it could lead to the insertion of a still-more-radically terroristic government in Damascus. A win-win.

Kerry's first congressional appearance--worried about "indiscriminate slaughter" even then!

Kerry’s first congressional appearance–worried about “indiscriminate slaughter” even then!

As we now realize, the war with Syria (originally scheduled because Syria either had, or had not, used chemical weapons on its own citizens—the rebel forces on closer inspection being equally suspect) was ominously presaged by the president who left no doubt that use of WMD by either side would be blamed on Assad’s side and responded to by force of arms. Anxious to redeem his status after foolishly behaving sensibly in the wake of Morsi’s discomfiture, John Forbes Kerry boldly declared that  “The indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent bystanders, by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity,” adding, “If we choose to live in a world where a thug and a murderer like Bashar al-Assad can gas thousands of his own people with impunity, even after the United States and our allies said no, and then the world does nothing about it, there will be no end to the test of our resolve and the dangers …”

Wonderful rhetoric, delivered with a  passion Kerry customarily reserved for criticisms of America, but the Secretary of State found himself once again out of sync with the West Wing. The original expectation that a high-tech, visually exciting attack would revitalize the president’s sagging popularity and supplant discussion of his scandals, turned out not to poll or focus-group well. Congress refused to support an attack on Syria, the American people overwhelmingly opposed the idea, and only John McCain, himself freshly back from Syria where he accidentally posed for publicity photos with internationally wanted terrorists, backed the plan. Obama went all wobbly, as Margaret Thatcher would say, and Kerry was reduced to explaining that any American interdiction of Assad’s “moral obscenity” would be “unbelievably small.”  In the event, even an unbelievably small response failed to win support and the idea was scotched. Apparently the Bamster decided that living “in a world where a thug and a murderer like Bashar al-Assad can gas thousands of his own people with impunity” was preferable to any action that might further depress his poll numbers, and in the end only Vladimir Putin came away looking good—but on to Tehran.

Are we there yet?

images futureYes, Wooferines, we are here. We are now at that portion of this exposition that deals with our title subject. Relieved? Confused? We trekked this circuitous route because unless we had, it would seem entirely bizarre that we are now at the point of compounding a concatenation of apparent blunders committed across the Middle East with the manifest idiocy of a nuclear treaty that places American trust and security in the laps of the mad mullahs of Tehran, even as they race to build a nuclear arsenal fit for exportation to terror groups around the planet, and presumably for use against Israel. Why are we thus involved? Are the president and his advisers morons? Are they, as Mitt Romney liked to imply, simply in over their heads? Not really. They are ardent supporters of Islamic extremism and anti-Zionism who resent American influence and power and seek to reduce both wherever possible while advancing the cause of a Sharia-based caliphate around the world.

Consider also the dialectical properties of the Iranian peace initiative. War didn’t work out in Syria—in fact the whole war idea blew up in the president’s face, working ultimately to the profound advantage of Vladimir Putin who emerged as the rational peacenik in the room. So what to do? There is a certain psychopathic genius detectable in the administration’s decision to shift tactics without abandoning its strategy. See it? Instead of further destabilizing the Middle East by staging a war—which didn’t go over well at all—why not proceed to further destabilize the Middle East by staging a peace? Just as phony, but not so overtly appalling. Everybody likes peace.

Miss me yet? Ahmadinejad: gone, and largely forgotten.

Miss me yet? Ahmadinejad: gone, and largely forgotten.

Fortuitously, the oleaginous Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who specialized in appearing unmistakably evil and unmistakably crazy simultaneously departed the scene in Iran making way for the rise to power of the 7th president Hassan Rouhani, Islamic cleric, academic, attorney and diplomat. And the same media bobble heads who celebrated the arrival of “Arab Spring” before the Egyptian and Libyan bloodbaths, turned to celebrating the transition in Tehran, solemnly assuring one another that Rouhani was a new kind of Iranian leader—a moderate, a man of the world, a fellow who could be reasoned with, particularly in matters of international affairs. The Washington Post rushed a story to press telling us “5 Things to know about Iran’s new president,” among them that change would be incremental, that he is seen [by some unnamed entity, presumably the Washington Post] as predisposed to diplomacy and pragmatism, and that he is “perhaps the most moderate candidate [of] the country’s six-way presidential race.” So it’s all good, right?

"I don't bluff!"

“I don’t bluff!”

Obama making a nuclear deal with the blatantly psychotic Ahmadinejad would have shocked the smarmiest silver-pony-tailed nuke freeze advocate right out of hisBirkenstocks, but why not reach a concordance with a new president—one “predisposed to diplomacy and pragmatism?” That sounds perfectly fine, doesn’t it? Irresistible, in fact. And look at the baggage this unloads for Our Beloved Leader. Obama has always been adamant that under his administration Iran would not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons. As recently as May of 2012 he told the press, “I ….don’t, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But….when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say.” The president punctuated this declaration by curtly adding, “I don’t bluff!” Which assertion must have seemed less hollow before his Syrian retreat.

Given that a man of the president’s stripe can claim that he will take aggressive action to prevent an Iranian A-bomb only until the Iranians do, in fact, have an A-bomb, and must then back peddle, parse, and revise his arguments in view of the fact that he would never dream of doing anything about Iran having an A-bomb, how very pleasant to have an opportunity to allow the Iranians to develop an A-bomb after all, but not before promising not to do so in an absolutely worthless protocol. Sheer genius.

The Geneva detour

Geneva--the proper setting for such humbugs--with its famous Jet D'eau--it squirts in the air, see?

Geneva–the proper setting for such humbugs–with its famous Jet d’Eau–it squirts in the air, see?

The scene now shifts to Geneva, where everybody knows all serious peace negotiations are supposed to happen, and where, therefore, the current Kabuki performance is being staged. And as the current negotiations with Iran dragged into the weekend prior to Thanksgiving, Secretary Kerry (say, that rhymes) was hard at work hammering out a deal with Iranian foreign minister Mohammed Javad Zarif, (doesn’t rhyme) and just to add a veneer of legitimacy to the charade, dignitaries from six world powers have been invited to participate.  The idea is remarkably simple, once one cuts through the diplomatese. Iran doesn’t like our sanctions, and Obama doesn’t like armed confrontations with people he admires and who might be somewhat hard to beat—so we will dramatically reduce our sanctions, and Iran, for its part, will pretend not to be developing a nuclear bomb. Nobody will keep track of much, anymore than anybody paid much attention to whether Syria was turning its chemical weapons over to Putin after the news cycle shifted—and when Iran detonates a nuke, Jay Carney will soberly inform the Washington Press Corpse that the President is “shocked, and profoundly disappointed,” or some such eyewash.  The current theatrics in Geneva will produce a treaty all right—in fact by Sunday, Iran had agreed to “freeze” its nuclear development for six months. And there will be a spiffier sounding accord reached any minute now, and all done up in bundles of interim agreements, continuing rounds of negotiation, and “more comprehensive talks to follow.” You know the drill.  But do you remember the blue print for this fiasco? The template was created during the Clinton Administration.  Only the names have been changed, and not even all of the names!

The return of the “badass” negotiator!

Alright--the original architect!

Albright–the original architect!

In 1994 Madeleine Albright, Bill Clinton’s Secretary of state, met with representatives of North Korea to discuss that outlaw nation’s announced intention to develop a nuclear bomb and build rockets to put it on. The problem was simple. North Korea didn’t like sanctions and we didn’t want them to develop a nuclear bomb, at least not during Clinton’s term of office. After sufficient dithering and posturing, North Korea signed the “Agreed Format,” stating that it would freeze its plutonium program. For our part, we lifted our sanctions, so that North Korea could begin receiving aid from America while, naturally, continuing to develop  atomic bombs and rockets to put them on. But back in ’94 it may be remembered, Albright was the toast of the town for pulling off so marvelous a diplomatic feat. Exactly the same process, using exactly the same mechanisms, is now underway vis-à-vis Iran—and it will produce exactly the same results. The cardinal difference being: North Korea is not a stone’s throw from Israel.

"Badass" Wendy Sherman--gosh, she even looks like Kathleen Sebelius, how can we doubt her?

“Badass” Wendy Sherman–gosh, she even looks like Kathleen Sebelius, how can we doubt her?

Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu has rather understandably declined to play a part in this chimera, and the Obamans are forging ahead “over Israeli objections” which can hardly surprise anybody, especially Netanyahu. Anyone who doubts that the liberal media are determined to ooh and ahhh over whatever pile of rubbish eventually emerges from the current exertions in Geneva should consider a CNN article from November 21st, hailing the efforts of “badass” negotiator (this is actually CNN’s phrase)  Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Wendy Sherman. And what makes Sherman so “badass” in CNN’s point of view? Why, her experience as a razor sharp negotiator, that’s what. And where did she hone her awesome skills? Why, “as counselor to then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright…at the table when the United States sought a deal with North Korea to curb the development and proliferation of Pyongyang’s long-range missiles in exchange for substantial aid and civilian nuclear reactors.” Oh, and that worked out well! Thanks, CNN, you never disappoint.

Former Nobel Peace Prize winner Arafat --about whom the nicest thing WOOF can think to say is, he kind of looks like Ringo Starr.

Former Nobel Peace Prize winner Arafat –about whom the nicest thing WOOF can think to say is, he kind of looks like Ringo Starr.

The pragmatist…

As for Hassan Rouhani, WOOF predicts he will win the Nobel Peace Prize, probably along with John Kerry as soon as this travesty is inked, and, of course, before he presides over any launched nuclear warheads. It is important in this regard to understand that Rouhani is no more a moderate than was Ahmadinejad—or previous Nobel Peace Prize winner Yasser Arafat, for that matter. He’s just the least conspicuously grizzled of the three. Rouhani, in fact, is an old revolutionary hand who flew into Tehran with Khomeini and assisted in the creation of the Islamo-facistic theocracy that is today’s Iran. He held considerable influence during the storming of the American embassy and the taking of 52 American hostages. Later, as chairman of the Iranian National Security Council he helped plan the 1994 bombing of the Jewish Cultural Center in Buenos Aires. He almost certainly oversaw the bombing of the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, and must have known of and approved countless other acts of terror and assassination. His anti-American and anti-Israeli ravings are matters of record.

In 2002, Rouhani submitted to an interview with ABC News during which he insisted that President Bush was under the influence of the Zionist lobby which, he explained, fashioned American foreign policy, and added that Hezbollah was merely a “legitimate political group.” But here’s the best part: Rouhani is a long-time nuclear enthusiast and a guiding force in developing Iran’s plans for a nuclear arsenal He served as Iran’s principle nuclear negotiator between August 2003 and October 2005. During his tenure he gave a speech to Iran’s Supreme Cultural Revolution Council, in which he reassured council members that his silky tone and warm demeanor during nuclear negotiations with Britain, France and Germany were purely tactical artifices aimed at buying time for Iran while that nation’s nuclear program proceeded at full throttle. “While we were talking with the Europeans in Tehran,” Rouhani gloated, “we were installing equipment in parts of the [nuclear conversion] facility in Isfahan. By creating a calm environment, we were able to complete the work there.”

Simlin' Hassan Rouhani --the man with the plan.

Smilin’ Hassan Rouhani –the man with the plan.

Got that?  Let’s review. The Obama regime has dusted off the blueprint for diplomacy that led to North Korea putting A-bombs on the tips of intercontinental ballistic missiles. And to ensure the blueprint is followed exactly, it has placed the same chief negotiator who oversaw the North Korean catastrophe in charge of negotiating what amounts to an identical set of accords with the Iranians. And the Iranian leader with whom these points are being negotiated is an experienced nuclear negotiator himself who is on record boasting about the fact that he views negotiation as a means of buying time while his country’s nuclear program advances unchecked. If you are still asking yourself why this doesn’t bother anybody on our side, please remind yourself that nobody on our side is on our side. Except Israel, of course, whose doom we may well be sealing, and not, mind you, without criminal cognizance of the fact.

Chief White House strategist Valerie Jarrett--some have suggested she holds Israel in contempt simply because she's Iranian and a communist--but is this the face of an anti-Semite?

Chief White House strategist Valerie Jarrett–some have suggested she holds Israel in contempt simply because she’s Iranian and a communist–but we ask you, is this the face of an anti-Semite?

Is it any wonder that White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough recently characterized the Geneva negotiations as “a great opportunity for Iran?” And an opportunity also for Obama to rekindle the adulation of his lapdog media who will surely follow any announcement of a treaty with starry-eyed declarations that peace is at hand, and orgasmic asseverations that no one can any longer hold Our Beloved Leader undeserving of his Nobel Prize….all of which will remind the discerning how perceptive was Sir John Harington (1561-1612) to write:

  Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason?
    Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.

IT’S BEGINNING TO LOOK A LOT LIKE CHRISTIE–AND WOOF IS NOT AMUSED!

In "Christine in '16" forum on November 5, 2013 at 10:29 pm

untitledcc

Forget Virginia, they’re voting for Santa Claus!

You know what, just forget about Virginia!  Forget Cuccinelli versus Terry McAuliffe, okay?  We know you were told this was a vital, unprecedentedly significant election because it was “a referendum on Obamacare!” We know you were told that it was the tea-party versus establishment Democrats and that the gubernatorial election in Virginia will serve as a bellwether for all that follows on through the midterms and all the way to 2016. And WOOF is here to tell you: “Flapdoodle and horsefeathers, gentle readers!” Believe not a word of this twaddle!  What the Virginia election will undoubtedly prove is that a second-string Clintonista who made a living up until now being a fundraiser and party chairman (read hack) can take a face familiar to TV news viewers and 35 million dollars raised for him by his pals Hillary and Bill Clinton to purple Virginia and beat a lackluster conservative who had a war chest of 18 million dollars tops and was out of cash long before he skidded into election day.  It proves that airing ten TV ads for every one of your opponent’s while relying on a doggedly sympathetic “news” media and counting on a faux third party candidacy (a fake libertarian covertly financed by Obama’s money managers) to draw support from the conservative’s base is a pretty simple way to win an election. And that’s all it proves, understood? All this media blather about a referendum on Obamacare is ridiculous—because the full brunt of Obamacare is still unfelt throughout most of the nation. One hundred million Americans are about to lose their health insurance, no kidding, people!  The full brunt of this is still out on the horizon for most of us. And if you are honestly wondering how Virginians could be so stupid as to elect the sorry likes of a slack-jawed drone like Terry McAuliffe all other considerations aside, you obviously haven’t studied our profound summation of why everybody (not just Virginia) is getting dumber! [review here!]

McAuliffe and Cuccinelli--pawn beats mannequin in Virginia. (Sigh!)

McAuliffe and Cuccinelli–pawn beats mannequin in Virginia. (Sigh!)

Now here’s what really matters—the shoe-in election that was never really in question—the race nobody had any doubts about matters! Because the Republican is about to win big in a totally blue state! And that’s great news, right? Welll….no. Sorry. It could actually be bad news…looking ahead a bit.  Allow us to dilate on this point:

Early Christie backer Coulter--anyone can make a darned mistake....

Early Christie backer Coulter–anyone can make a darned mistake….

Once upon a time, there was a wonderful young firebrand of a seemingly unalloyed conservative so powerfully committed to effusions of dextral eloquence and skewering criticisms of the media, unions, and other Leftist entities that the beautiful and talented Ann Coulter pronounced him her ideal presidential candidate for 2012, and Glenn Beck found his daily reproofs of the liberal press so irresistibly winsome that he called the sound bites “Christie Porn!” (It was meant as an encomium, trust us!)

Now time has passed, and our beamish (okay, portly) Conservative solon will, by the time this story greets your eyes, have swept to victory in New Jersey so overwhelmingly as to remain the unquestioned Governor of the Garden State and at the same time emerge the undisputed front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016. So are we happy? No, of course not, we aren’t happy at all—and it would be disingenuous of us to pretend you don’t know why, gentle readers! However, just to review:

Shades of Brown….

Former Massachusetts wunderkind Scott Brown--we could have told you those were liberal glasses!

Former Massachusetts wunderkind Scott Brown–we could have told you those were liberal glasses!

In considering the many subsequent perfidies of Chris Christie, the mind naturally wanders to the political shooting star of Scott Brown who was rocketed into the senate from Massachusetts as a tea-party favorite in 2010 only to immediately betray a decidedly more, shall we say, eclectic side and presume upon his electorate’s tolerance by shifting into any number of strikingly un-conservative positions on several key votes, until his 2012 ouster by Elizabeth Warren, who, while not a real Cherokee (despite her ludicrous claims to that effect),was at least a real Democrat.

Christie, for his part, defeated the execrable Jon Corzine for the gubernatorial post and immediately set about balancing the state’s budget, as promised. He managed this without raising taxes, much to his credit, although he did reduce certain tax credits and property relief programs. Ideally, a true supply-side approach would have lowered taxes and enhanced revenues more substantially, but explaining this to New Jersey legislators might well have proved inconceivable, so no points lost there. Christie also called for an across-the board 10% flat tax plan, (two percent too pricey, though a great idea) but the legislature has yet to act on the proposal which in its current avatar will apply only to those earning less than 400 grand per year. A flat tax would, in fact, increase revenues garnered from the wealthy, but politics relies on the marketable, not necessarily the actual, and Democrats like to appear to be giving the rich a good soaking while keeping them (and themselves) in their tax shelters and deductible investments. Oh well.

Christie's Gay Supreme Court nominee, Bruce Harris, done in by the Dems.

Christie’s Gay Supreme Court nominee, Bruce Harris, done in by the Dems.

Blessed with the luxury of a line-item veto, Christie was also able to trim $1 billion from New Jersey’s proposed budget for 2011.  Over the shrieking of Democrat legislators he slashed some overstuffed welfare programs and established 23 new charter schools while toughening the tenure requirements in public education. He even got into a nice early spat with the Obama Regime when it attempted to impose some Chicago-style mobster-ism on the annoyingly right-wing governor by having its Department of Health and Human Services discover a clerical error in New Jersey’s application for school funds that struck the Department as so offensive it was forced to withhold 400 million dollars in grants, darn it. Christie responded by charging the Obama administration with abuse of its authority (as if this were a rarity) but the money remained in limbo.

So everything was looking great for a love match between the Right and his Excellency, Chris Christie—and Christie even vetoed New Jersey’s same-sex marriage bill, which was a sufficiently conservative gesture that nobody minded (at least nobody at WOOF minded) when he almost simultaneously appointed the first openly Gay man to the New Jersey Supreme Court. It is one of those ironies that must await comment from future historians (since no one in contemporary media will mention it) that the Democrat legislature refused the Gay nominee the seat—the homophobes!

Fervent Gays to the left….

But on August 19 2013, Christie signed a bill outlawing gay conversion therapy in children. Why? This was hardly a go-along-to-get-along move on Christie’s part; New Jersey’s anti-reparative therapy law is only the second such law in America. As outreach to the Gay community it makes a sort of Machiavellian sense, however, because the Gay Left reacts to conversion therapy the way Bela Lugosi reacts to a crucifix. It may be possible, therefore, to view this ban as a sop to the Gay community and to the far more populace enclaves of liberal voters who view the Gay community as a kind of protectorate.

UFO abductees are as big a demographic as Gays, but nobody panders for their votes--what's with that?

UFO abductees are as big a demographic as Gays, but nobody panders for their votes–what’s with that?

And thus, inevitably, there is the larger Gay issue, because even though statisticians keep assuring us that only about 2% of Americans are Gay—which is about the same percent of Americans who possess Ph.D.s or who claim to have experienced UFO abduction (though no overlap is implied), a major selling point for any candidate continues to be where he stands on the super-cool issue of Gay marriage—an issue that has been called “the civil rights issue of the 21st Century,” no matter how ridiculously. And because the Gay-marriage issue galvanizes the penchant for exhibitionistic sanctimony endemic to the mooncalves of Hollywood, we are exposed to torrents of advocacy through media. And on this consequently significant issue, Governor Christie has craftily—if cravenly—taken a wonderfully ambiguous non-step. He simply decided not to appeal a ruling allowing same-sex marriage, while paying lip service to the sacred connection of a man and a woman. This naturally outrages social conservatives. It also exasperates us here at WOOF—although Governor Christie is nowhere on record as caring about us here at WOOF. But he might care a little about people like Bob Vander Plaats, an influential social-conservative in Iowa, (Iowa, get it?) who told National Review that “This would suit him a lot better if he were running as a Democrat.”

But being perceived as Democrat isn’t going to damage Christie in a gubernatorial race in New Jersey. Not hardly. It will more than probably help him amass a larger portion of the vote—in New Jersey. New Jersey liked Jon Corzine, for heaven’s sake. Woodrow Wilson was governor of New Jersey, for heaven’s sake (before making the world safe for democracy), and yes, even Jim McGreevey, whose least defective characterological component was his homosexuality—proved electable in New Jersey–so Christie has not damaged himself for domestic consumption. And indeed, if the only rap Conservatism had against Chris Christie were his apparent coziness with the Gay community, there would be precious little to criticize. There is that part in John Milius’s script for the second Dirty Harry movie, Magnum Force, in which Clint Eastwood’s Harry is warned of a rumor that the new detachment of recruits whose marksmanship skills he’s just witnessed are “queer for each other.” Harry rejoins that “If the rest of you could shoot like them, I wouldn’t care if the whole damn department was queer!”  And if a kindly predisposition toward Gays were the extent of Chistie’s sins, WOOF would wouldn’t care if the Governor wanted to perform outreach in drag—although the imagery this conjures might be adjudged aesthetically criminal, we’ll grant you. But this is only by way of saying that Governor Christie has redder flags than this in his dossier.

The sharpshooting recruits from "Magnum Force"--come to think of it, they do kind of look like the Village People!

The sharpshooting recruits from “Magnum Force”–come to think of it, they do kind of look like the Village People!

Midnight at the Oasis of Good and Evil…

Mohammad Qatanani, radical, anti-Semite, Christie appointee.

Mohammad Qatanani, Sharia radical, anti-Semite, and Christie’s notion of a “man of great good will.”

The Governor’s eagerness to wax multicultural has taken him well beyond the Gay community. He is also an unabashed defender of Islam, and we don’t mean merely that he’ll stick up for a dedicated Muslim here or there. He will go the extra mile for the most radical exponents of Sharia law into the bargain. Take Sohail Mohammed. Please. Sohail is a lawyer who functions as a mouthpiece for radical Islamic groups and defends such venomous characters as the known Hamas operative Mohammed Qatanani with a lengthy record of arrests and a conviction by Israeli authorities for functioning as an agent of Hamas and providing financial and professional support to the terrorist organization. This appears not to bother Christie who appointed the radical Islamist lawyer Sohail to the state bench while defending Qatanani’s good name. Christie went so far as to publicly embrace the radical imam at a Ramadan breakfast at his mosque (while DHS was attempting to deport him), declaring him “a man of great good will.” WOOF can not encapsulate these events more succinctly than has Pamela Geller who remarked that Christie’s embrace of the radical Hamas functionary took New Jersey on “its first step to becoming a Sharia state.”  One could, WOOF supposes, remark mordantly on the irony of promoting homosexuals and Sharia law simultaneously in the name of outreach, since all the former will be stoned to death by the practitioners of the latter once the latter has attained sufficient prominence—but nobody will ask Chris Christie about such a paradox—that wouldn’t be politically correct!

Pamela Geller--not likely to become a Christie appointee in the foreseeable future.

Pamela Geller–not likely to become a Christie appointee in the foreseeable future.

Predictably, when called out for his irrational support of radical Islamic terror merchants, Christie responded with one of his patented tantrums, ranting about bigoted “Sharia crazies” who were unhappy with his appointee simply because Sohail was Muslim. That it was he, Christie, who was handing out choice jobs to authentic Sharia crazies, seemed to elude the governor completely…but Christie’s behavior in these matters is not a mere byproduct of naïveté. As Daniel Pipes has written, “Whenever an issue touching on Islam arises, Christie takes the Islamist side against those — the DHS, state senators, the NYPD, even the ACLU — who worry about lawful Islamism eroding the fabric of American life.” Witness the Governor’s hissy fit when he discovered the New York Police Department was conducting surveillance of Islamic radicals in Newark and New Brunswick, capped off with an insult directed at NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly.

While Christie also vocally maintains his staunch support of Israel, this provides small comfort as he willfully allows anti-Constitutional barbarism to extend its grip on his state.

Christie Care?

Christie distinguished himself in the eyes of an increasingly affectionate media by opting out of the crowd of Republican governors who joined in a multi-state lawsuit challenging the legitimacy of the Affordable Care Act. Christie declined to sign, citing his reluctance to commit his state to the 2,000-page statute and its attendant cost. But these reasons don’t hold water. The cost to New Jersey of joining in the suit would have been 1,000 dollars, and the 2000 page brief could have been properly vetted within a couple of business days by the legal staff readily available to the task. In fact, WOOF must conclude that Christie is a closet Obamacare supporter. Certainly, he is an effusive, even a combative supporter of RomneyCare. In fact, RomneyCare seems to be about the only thing Christie liked about Romney. Christie joined the glut of Democratic governors crowding the federal trough to scoop up ObamaCare funds for “high-risk” insurance pools. Where most Republican governors opted out, Christie raced in to score the 140 million set aside for New Jersey.  Just politics? All the more reason for circumspection, we would argue.

untitledrc

True, WOOF must acknowledge that Christie vetoed the state’s insurance-exchange legislation, but please note that he did so only at the eleventh hour and only after a massive amount of exhortation from the Right that he do so, and he felt so bad about giving even this degree of offense to Our Beloved Leader that he followed up his veto with his on-the-record assurance that  “my Administration . . . stands ready to implement the Affordable Care Act if its provisions are ultimately upheld,” which of course they were (thanks, Justice Roberts!) Christie, in fact, has long been an advocate of universal health insurance, and the governor consistently supports funding increases for his state’s “FamilyCare” — New Jersey’s state-subsidized healthcare program. WOOF realizes that many readers will argue that federalism is exactly where any “public option” belongs—as determined by the individual states, not the central government! But Christie has okayed funding for FamilyCare at the level of 350 percent of the federal poverty level, and these are not the actions of a man who would, in actual fact, ever consider repealing ObamaCare on a national level!

untitlednj

Bad RINO! No biscuit!

Remember when, earlier in this screed, we quoted Bob Vander Plaats in Iowa as having said of all this, “This would suit [Christie] a lot better if he were running as a Democrat?”  Okay, you probably don’t remember, but that’s okay—our minds wander too. Anyway, Mr. Plaats—don’t you think he is running as a Democrat? That’s the idea here, after all—and it’s the modus operendi of the RNC and the RINO population of Insider DC. It can be summarized by saying that to them, the modern, electable Republican is more or less “Scoop” Jackson, or maybe Sam Nunn, just a pragmatic Democrat from the olden days. (Remember those Democrats?) who’s not a commie and shows up at the right conventions.

Teletubbies love each other very much!

Teletubbies love each other very much!

Most readers will recall that Christie’s most deplorable display of Obama-era sycophancy came on the heels of Hurricane Sandy when he infamously threw himself into Our Beloved Helmsman’s arms and shared a bizarre, teletubbie moment on the Atlantic City Board Walk. The notorious hug! Alas, this is one of those uncomfortable moments when WOOF must interject, even into its own heated fustian, the unvarnished truth and admit that in fact, this is not what happened—the Governor never fully or entirely embraced the First Marxist, contrary to the mountains of partisan reportage both left and right that support the event’s occurrence. But the Governor’s assertion that he merely shook hands is also untrue! As an amplitude of photographs suffice to demonstrate, POTUS and Christie gamboled together along the boardwalk like mutually smitten teenagers, and even vied for stuffed animal prizes at various game stalls.

Remember--walkin' in the sand!

Remember–walkin’ in the sand!

Yes, and at one stop, Christie pegged a football through a hoop with one toss and won a teddy bear (awww!) after Our Beloved Leader missed it five times. (Did you imagine otherwise?)  And after endless displays of back slapping, mutual giggling and arm-in-arm camaraderie, Christie bestirred himself to praise the Bamster effusively, declaring, (in the midst of a heated presidential election, you’ll recall) that “It’s been a great working relationship,” and “I cannot thank the president enough for his personal concern and compassion for our state.”  Christie insisted it was his “honor” to turn the podium over to the First Marxist, saying the president had been “outstanding,” “incredibly supportive” and “deserves great credit.”  All right, this was after all the President of the United States, and the Governor’s state needed federal help after hurricane Sandy, we’ll grant you. But is this the sort of major news one wishes to make in a tightly contested election year when one’s man is supposedly Mitt Romney? You know you have trouble on the right when it takes the NY Times to center you, and it was the Times that wrote: “As the president and the governor flew over the devastated Jersey Shore, at least one resident seemed to be staying on message.  At the north end of Point Pleasant Beach, someone had etched in the sand: ‘ROMNEY.’”

In retrospect, writing his name in the sand may have been prophetic--just sayin'.

In retrospect, writing Romney’s name in the sand may have been prophetic–just sayin’.

Miscellaneous murmurings:

Then there was the Great Romney Snub—that moment during the campaign of 2012 when Christie was supposed to make the short hop from Trenton to appear with Romney at a Pennsylvania rally, but couldn’t manage to show. Instead, he was reportedly home weeping, so overcome was he by the fact that the President had Bruce Springsteen call him and thank him for his efforts in the aftermath of hurricane Sandy. Evidently this blew Romney clean out of Christie’s consciousness. He couldn’t wait to tell a Monday morning briefing that Springsteen (a rigidly conformist, establishment Leftist) had called him. Christie admitted the call left him in tears of gratitude because, he explained, he was “The Boss’s” biggest fan (which is entirely possible—okay that was low), having attended 120 Springsteen concerts despite the fact that Springsteen had doggedly refused to speak to him on numerous occasions. Given these details, one can easily see how Romney slipped Christie’s mind…sort of.

"Tramps like us, right, Bruce??" Definitely not the Romney rally.

“Tramps like us, right, Bruce??” Definitely not a Romney rally.

Consider also that the Governor recently spent 24 million on two quick special elections to replace the late Democratic Senator Frank Lautenberg when he could have easily and cheaply installed a Republican appointee to the seat for eighteen full months. Instead he appointed a Republican to serve only until the special election. While in office, said Republican’s only memorable vote was cast for “immigration reform.” So maybe the special elections were a better idea after all.

And now for something completely unrehearsed!

And now for something completely unrehearsed!

Perhaps most tellingly, Christie has gloried in public chastisements of other Republicans whom he seems to regard as annoyingly right wing. These include Newt Gingrich about whom he said, “Speaker Gingrich has never run anything,” Peter King, who attacked Christie’s Islamophilia and was dismissed by the Governor who quipped, “Whenever he mentions my name he gets himself on TV,” and the NRA, which Christie scolded for mentioning Obama’s children in a (trenchant and effective) TV commercial; and as if this were not a sufficient catalog of effronteries, dear readers, the man next saw fit to attack the beautiful and talented Sarah Palin, suggesting that her speaking was too tightly scripted. Palin shot back from the shapely hip, contending that, “[Christie’s] got a shtick going there where he’s got a YouTube videographer following him around, kind of these set-up situations sometimes so he can be seen as perhaps a little bit avant-garde and going rogue on things.” Scripted? We think not! And it will not surprise regular WOOF readers to learn that we consider the matter resolved in Mrs. Palin’s favor.

Finally, there is the remaining matter of Christie’s most recent dust-up with the pesky Rand Paul. Back in July, Governor Christie took time out of his busy schedule to reflect on Senator Paul’s political philosophy, opining that, “As a former prosecutor who was appointed by President George W. Bush….I just want us to be really cautious because this strain of libertarianism that’s going through both parties right now and making big headlines, I think, is a very dangerous thought.” On the bright side, of course, Governor Christie seems to have detected a strain of libertarianism in the Democrat Party, so he has a sharper eye than we have!  On the bleaker side, doesn’t this point up a snotty contentiousness on Christie’s part that is simply intended to ingratiate him to the Liberal Establishment Media? And isn’t that the same path to destruction down which ambled a deluded John McCain in 2008, seemingly persuaded that his “frenzsh” in the media were actual, rather than transparently temporary? Must our latest Charlie Brown take yet another run at the liberals’ football in 2016?

imagesCAQYUD2B

But what we wanted to close with was this: After an exchange of barbs that lasted a couple of news cycles, Rand Paul decided to play the bigger man (oops, we did it again) and invite Christie to resolve their differences over beers. Christie’s response was characteristically ill-tempered:

Maybe I should have said Miller Lite?

Maybe I should have said Miller Lite?

“I don’t really have time for that at the moment,”Christie told a local radio interviewer.  “I’ve got work to do here to get reelected … [and] dealing with the other issues that invariably come on the desk of a governor when you are responsible for actually doing things and not just debating.” Maybe beer is the problem. Maybe Paul should have made a second offer, tendering Diet Cokes?

Christine in '16!  WOOF remains adamant, but sensibly flexible.

Christine in ’16! WOOF remains adamant, but sensibly flexible.

No matter– by the time you read this we can guarantee you that Christie will have won re-election in New Jersey (two cheers!) and the Liberal Establishment Media will be experiencing paroxysms of giddiness, jointly envisioning him as the logical Republican candidate in 2016. “A pragmatist!” we’ll be told, “not a hopeless ideologue!” (Because only the Left gets to run those!)

We must not succumb to this propaganda, Woofketeers! We must oppose this effort by the Liberal Establishment to reinvent the candidacies of Bob Dole, John McCain, and yes, dear Mitt whom we mention fondly but without the slightest supposition that we are mentioning a man of the Authentic Right. For our parts, as you probably guessed, we continue to staunchly advocate the candidacy of our perennial favorite, Christine O’Donnell, but in the circumstances we are prepared to remain flexible.  And if the moribund RNC seems determined to take another run at Lucy’s football, we may become so flexible that….well…let’s just say Reince Priebus won’t love us any more. Are you reading this Reince Priebus? We know you’re out there. How do you pronounce that, anyway? Did you make it up or something? Are you even real? Anyhow….happy election day, everyone!  

imagesCA5ZI7QL

********************************************************************************************************************

WOOF WISHES TO ACKNOWLEDGE that this particular post resulted in our being banned from “Conservatives” on Reddit, by a moderator who accused us of spamming–but coincidentally posted a sidebar (that very day!) about how wonderful Chris Christie is. For gosh sakes, Reddit, is there no room for dialogue?

5582651_f260

Design: Mark Ewbie

%d bloggers like this: