The Conservative Soldier

We know Barack Hussein Obama stumbled over the Presidential Oath on Inauguration Day last January, but who among us (other than George Soros and Rahm Emanuel) could have known the depths of his simmering contempt for the Office he swore to “faithfully execute”  or the Constitution he swore to “preserve, protect and defend”?

More apparent with each passing day is that Obama spent most of his adult life resenting American prosperity at home and influence abroad, and now, the Oath be damned, is moving at warp speed to exact his revenge. He has awaited this opportunity for a very long time.

Why do Obama and his compliant comrades on Capitol Hill desire to move so fast, to pass bill upon bill before they’ve been contemplated and debated, let alone read? It is a question more people are asking. The only logical answer is that he (and they) knows the Socialist Liberals can’t possibly get away with this tyrannical agenda forever.

The trends Obama’s Mission Irresponsible are establishing, while reversible, will not be easily undone. And behind his thin veil of sincerity, he knows it.

The “Cap and Trade” Climate legislation is a massive scam based on faulty premises about so-called global warming and rooted in a massive generational wealth shift, from the productive to the “entitled”. The heavy hand this bill would impose if it became law is almost incomprehensible (except to those indoctrinated in the Obama Wealth Redistribution Society).

History might indeed prove that Obama’s only rival in the realm of wealth confiscation is the soon to be imprisoned Bernie Madoff. The Heritage Foundation’s respected Center for Data Analysis has run the numbers on Cap and “Tax”, and they are about as appealing as Madoff’s prison sentence of 150 years.

While Obama’s Teleprompter insists the bill delivers reduced dependence on foreign oil, combats the consequences of “climate change”, promotes profitable “clean energy” and creates jobs, the reality is quite the opposite.

The Cap and Trade tsunami will cripple the American economy and leave every walk of life vulnerable to passing some bogus environmental worthiness test, lest it be a target for increased taxation. The Heritage center projects unfathomable increases, including 90% spikes in residential electric bills, 74% jumps in gasoline prices and GDP reduction of around $9.6 trillion by 2035.

Obama is probably smart enough to know that government-run energy and health care programs are destined to fail, which is why he supports them. He has lusted for a lifetime for an America gripped by chaos, taken down a notch, and ridiculed by the world.

On the foreign policy front, the same twisted logic prevails. Obama stands back, tongue tied, as a dictator terrorizes the people of Iran, but then quickly and bluntly admonishes Honduras for sending its president into exile though he boldly ignored the nation’s constitution in order to extend and strengthen his power.

Obama has Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemning the Honduran military for unseating the renegade President Mel Zelaya, yet Clinton has been all but silent on the fraudulent Iranian election and the violence that has followed in response to uprisings in the streets.

The most unsettling part of the recent developments on Capitol Hill and in far-away lands is that we can’t know for sure which scenario Obama envisions for his own future. When America has finally awakened, will he be the equivalent of arrogant dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, backed by powerful forces in the shadows and restored to his reign against the will of a population grieving the random deaths of its sons and daughters in the streets, or will Obama be a Zelaya who has no use for his own Constitution even if it thrusts the nation into political instability, pitting the military against the corridors of the political status quo?

This weekend, I would advise contemplating America’s Independence Day solemnly and celebrating it respectfully.

Sometimes, the hypocrisy is so blatant, so pronounced, very little commentary or “set up” is required.

When U.S. citizens last year were concerned that a junior Senator from Illinois with a thin voting record, and an inclination to befriend social radicals, was gaining momentum in the Presidential race, it was denounced as “hateful” rage among hotheads. But when voters in Iran take to the streets to protest the suspect “re-election” of their notoriously dictatorial President, it is embraced by Obama as “the ability of people to peacefully dissent.”

Compare and contrast. Talk among yourselves.

President Barack Hussein Obama on Iranians reacting to recent presidential election results, June 15, 2009:
“The democratic process, free speech, the ability of people to peacefully dissent — all those are universal values and need to be respected.”

Op-Ed columnist Frank Rich, NY Times, June 13, 2009:
“… There have been indications that (American citizens’) rage could spiral out of control. This was evident during the (2008) campaign, when hotheads greeted Obama’s name with “Treason!” and “Terrorist!” at G.O.P. rallies. At first the (John) McCain-(Sarah) Palin campaign fed the anger with accusations that Obama was “palling around with terrorists.”

Don Imus was amused by “rough looking” basketball players. David Letterman found humor in a “slutty looking” public official.

Two mean spirited, ill-timed comments by on-air personalities. But look closer. Different targets. Different results.

Radio host Don Imus in 2007 was vilified as a racist/sexist and was fired after he stepped over the line while joking about the appearance of female collegiate athletes. Earlier this week, TV talk show icon David Letterman unleashed brutally pointed, scripted jokes directed at Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her daughter after both visited New York City.

Making unscripted, unrehearsed remarks on his New York-based, televised radio show (which aired on cable’s MSNBC) two years ago, Imus was chatting off-air with a sports commentator and the show’s lead producer about the Rutgers University women’s basketball team. Imus had watched parts of the Rutgers-Tennessee game the previous night.

The comments were made when the radio show was in a commercial break on CBS Radio. However, MSNBC audio and video was rolling at the time. That detail is often lost, or ignored.

“Those are some rough girls,” Imus said of the Rutgers players. “They’ve got tatoos. Those are some nappy headed whoahs, man.”

Initially, Imus was suspended two weeks after a public apology. Ultimately, he was fired by CBS Radio in response to advertiser backlash. It took Imus more than eight months to return to the airwaves. His show was picked up by ABC Radio in December 2007.

Letterman, reading a scripted monologue, stood before millions of viewers and said: “One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee (baseball) game, during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.”

Letterman claims he did not know the Gov. had visited New York with her daughter, Willow, 14. He assumed the trailing daughter had been the more well-known Bristol, an 18-year-old unwed mother. In either case, his punch line was rooted in the absurd notion that the teen-aged daughter of Alaska’s governor is carrying A-Rod’s love child.

“Am I guilty of poor taste? Yes,” he said on CBS last night. “Did I suggest that it was okay for her 14-year-old daughter to be having promiscuous sex? No.” He did not suggest it. He said it.

During his famed Top 10 segment, Letterman outlined 10 things Palin did or said while in the Big Apple. No. 2 in the Top 10: Palin bought cosmetics at Bloomingdale’s to update her “slutty flight attendant look.”

Essentially, Letterman’s woeful attempt at humor at Palin’s expense stepped every bit as far over the line between humor and sexist tastelessness as Imus. Letterman inferred that the 14 year old (or, as he insists, the 18 year old) engaged in sexual intercourse with a Major League Baseball player. He more pointedly said the Gov. of Alaska chooses the appearance of a prostitute.

The contrite apology should not be acceptable and Letterman should be banished. Would the joke have been less brutal had he specified that Rodriquez impregnated the 18-year-old Bristol? Ask a father of an 18-year-old how graphic humor about a daughter’s sexual frolicking would go over around the office water cooler.

As I am writing this, I have found only a handful of editorials suggesting Letterman should be suspended or fired. In fact, the Huffington Post reported two days ago that CBS is close to rewarding Letterman with a two-year contract extension. His current annual pay is north of $30 million.

There is no doubt whatsoever that Letterman gets a free pass from the media because he is an established left wing, Bush hating liberal, who is infuriated by Palin’s conservative stance on social issues. And it is obvious there is another, unspoken difference. Letterman’s joke targets were white women from Alaska. Imus was chuckling about black women from New Jersey.

What would the reaction be if a different white male, say, Don Imus, took the “slutty flight attendant” line and went off on a few well know liberal Democrat females? I can only imagine there would be not only calls for his permanent exile from radio but death threats as well if the names Ginsburg, Pelosi, Obama or Sotomayor were uttered in the same sentence with “slutty”.

Racist? Sexist? Disrespectful? Hateful?

As we are reminded once again this week, that depends entirely on who says it and about whom it is said.