"You're blowing it son"- Angelo Dundee to Ray Leonard
The trouble with our liberal friends is not that their ignorant, its just they just know so much that isn't so-
Ronald Reagan's 1964 "A Time For Choosing" Speech
Another green-eyed woman, Mahin, aged 52, staggered into an alley clutching her face and in tears. Then, against the urging of those around her, she limped back into the crowd moving west toward Freedom Square. Cries of “Death to the dictator!” and “We want liberty!” accompanied her. Roger Cohen NYT OP-ED June 20, 2009- Reporting from Iran
You would think that having been elected the first black President in American history, Barack Obama would be especially sensitive to the disadvantaged and the weak, both in America and around the globe.
Sadly that is not the case.
First, look at his Middle East tour. Or as I call it, his "moral equivalency tour". As far as basic human rights, these societies might as well be back in the stone ages. With limited exception, these theocracies do not allow the right to free speech or worship. Women are stoned in the streets, have no voting rights, and are treated as property.
But Obama is one of those moral equivalency liberals whose knee-jerk reaction when confronted by evidence of wrong doing in a foreign country is to say "America is bad too because......" yet the "because" is NEVER on the same level as the violation in the foreign country.
For example, while in the middle east, Obama payed lip service to the lack of women's rights and the right to worship. But, and this is where the moral equivalency comes in Obama equates these atrocities with the following:
"For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat."-Obama in Cairo
First of all, the statement above is an out-right lie. We have laws that prevent anyone from donating to charities that are fronts for terrorism. These laws apply to everyone, not just Muslims. Is there something wrong with trying to stop the flow of cash from America to the Middle East which is then used to kill & maim innocent Americans?
Next, what if it were true? Let's say we denied Muslims, and singled out Muslims in America from not donating to charities of their choice. Would that be the equivalent to laws that treated women like chattel, imposed head to toe oppressive dress codes, permitted stoning, and denied women the right to even drive a car?
Don't be silly.
So he dropped the ball on his "America is bad for Muslims" tour.
Now onto Iran.
I do not know about you, but isn't it great that Muslims are standing up for their own freedom, putting themselves in harm's way for an honorable & just cause, instead of blowing themselves up and taking innocent men, women and children with them?
And where is the American President while these historic events play themselves out? He is hiding under his desk.
He doesn't want to offend the "Supreme Leader" of Iran.
Memo to Obama: You are the leader of the free world. With emphasis on free.
You do not have to send guns or butter. But you have to clearly communicate that you are on the side of these brave Iranians who seek freedom from oppressive Islamic rule.
No time for moral equivalency here Mr. President.
You have to show your inner Reagan, your inner John Paul II, and stand up for the protesters. Talk to Soviet & Polish dissidents. You will see how much inspiration that the words of Reagan & John Paul meant to them, how it helped foster solidarity, and brought more masses to the movement.
If Obama were President during the Cold War, does anyone doubt for a second that his position would be that we have to co-exist with the Soviets, that their system of government is just as valid as ours, and that "moral equivalency" would rule the day?
Mr. President, your job here to to help bring more people into the Iranian street. By doing nothing, you are doing a lot to hurt the cause of freedom. Just speak out for what is right.
Every American President of my lifetime would have loved an opportunity like this-except this one.
By the way, this particular Iranian regime should be shown no deference.
First of all the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should have faced either an American firing squad or just be completing his 30th year in a federal penitentiary.
I say that because he has been positively identified as one of the kidnappers of 52 Americans in the American embassy in Tehran in 1979.
Why is that not pointed out in every American newspaper that mentions this thug? Why does the American President not have the Attorney General personally handcuff this guy when he comes to the United Nations? And don't tell me diplomatic immunity. That doesn't apply to crimes you committed before you achieved diplomatic status.
In my view, the 1979 kidnapping of Americans by Iranians is the real ground zero. For 444 days, "Death to America!" chants and American flag burning by these animals were broadcast all over the world-while they brazenly held our people hostage.
And America did nothing.
The message that was conveyed throughout the Muslim world during the hostage crisis: America is a paper tiger, American blood is cheap, Americans won't fight for their own people.
For the last 30 years, we have paid the price for not dealing with the Iranian hostage crisis correctly. I see a straight line from the kidnapping of Americans in Iran to the planes flying into the North & South Towers.
So, to have the American President not take sides when on one side you have a man who personally kidnapped Americans, is to say the least, disheartening.
Many people believe in the saying "Power Corrupts." I do not think that is always the case. A much more accurate description, and this is Robert Caro's theory, is that "Power Reveals". When you have it, what do you do with it? Do you use it for good or ill?
So far, in this, and many other areas, Obama is like Luis Castillo against the Yankees: he has dropped the ball.