BloggeRhythms

The incumbent’s colossal mistake of abandoning the U.S. foothold in the Middle-East in order to please political constituents, will likely go down as one of the greatest presidential errors in modern history. Not only was the result of the original effort thrown away, but the door was left open to a terrorist resurgence that now calls for repeating the investment, or perhaps even more, in treasure and lives.

 

However, what is truly amazing is that while politicizing the Iraq war while campaigning for the presidency, the incumbent consistently hammered the point that not only was our involvement abundantly wrong, but “W” Bush himself was evil incarnate without hint of doubt.

 

Yet, despite the inane rhetoric spouted during the campaign, the “real world” has finally forced the incumbent come to grips with the fact that our enemies don’t care a whit about his speeches, but are totally focused on doing us in. Which means an acknowledgement that we have to fight back. And in that awakening process, not only is the incumbent now slowly rising to that task, it’s hard to believe who his role model’s become.

 

Carrie Budoff Brown of Politico, via El Rushbo’s website, writes about “Obama’s new muse: George W. Bush.”

 

Ms Brown begins, “President Barack Obama drafted most of Wednesday’s United Nations speech by himself, but it often sounded like he had a ghost writer: the predecessor he mocked.

 

Obama didn’t just run against Bush’s foreign policy. He used to ridicule it. His rejection of the Bush worldview was so emphatic that it seemed to prompt the Nobel Peace Prize committee to give him the award just for getting elected.”

 

Nonetheless, Ms. Brown suggests that typing “Obama’s money phrase — the evocative description of the Islamic State of Syria and the Levant as a “network of death” — into thesaurus.com and George W. Bush’s “axis of evil” could very well come out, as many tweeters and former aides to the 43rd president noted.”

 

Furthermore, she explains that, “Bush’s famous slogan, offered an explanation. “When dealing with an ideology that inspires beheadings and mass murder, the English language only offers so many words that carry sufficient moral weight. Evil’ and ‘death’ are two of them.” Even so, the parallel was striking given Obama’s attitude toward Bush.”

 

Then, while “Obama argued Wednesday: There can be no reasoning — no negotiation — with this brand of evil. Bush, in an address to airline employees weeks after the 9/11 attack, declared: “We face a brand of evil, the likes of which we haven’t seen in a long time in the world.” And in a 2006 speech before Congress, Bush stated: “These radicals have declared their uncompromising hostility to freedom. It is foolish to think that you can negotiate with them.”

 

Also, similar to Bush, Obama has framed the fight as an ideological struggle, stating, “In this century, we have faced a more lethal and ideological brand of terrorists. It is time for a new compact among the civilized peoples of this world to eradicate war at its most fundamental source: the corruption of young minds by violent ideology.”

 

In a 2006 speech, Bush said, “This is the great ideological struggle of the 21st century, and it is the calling of our generation.”

 

Additionally, as a reader pointed out, “Let’s not forget, Obama ridiculed Romney for wanting to attack Syria.”

 

Which brings us to the very sad conclusion that always pans out when fact trumps fiction. While one of the most tragic and immature errors a person can make is believing their own BS, if the person deluding themselves happens to be POTUS, the whole nation bears the cost of the disastrous results.

 

On another issue, some very disheartening but quite true comments were made by famed chef Emeril Lagasse, as quoted by Bryan Preston of PJ Media via Drudge.

 

The chef says, “it’s becoming all but impossible to be a successful restaurateur in America today. The government just gets in the way too much.” He specifically singled out the current president’s policies, as follows:

 

“It’s becoming a very challenging industry to become a very successful average restaurateur. I can’t charge $300 a person in my restaurant or I would not be in business. Am I using any different ingredients? Not really. Am I using any caliber of service staff? I don’t think so. I think our service is as good or better than most places.

 

“And then you add all the Obama nonsense to what it’s become in the last several years. I don’t have anything against Mr. Obama. I’m just saying the way that, you know… the government should stay out of things. Pretty soon, they’re going to wipe a lot of the middle restaurateurs and restaurant cooks. If it continues, then watch: you’re going to have high-end, and you’re going to have fast food, and you’re going to have chain restaurants.”

 

So, although I’m sure he threw in the line about not having anything against Mr. Obama because the chef would like to avoid a retaliatory IRS audit, his comments echo the woes of every small business owner regardless of type. 

 

However it seems incredible that Democrats in general, whose major goal is always fleecing the successful for all their worth, don’t ever grasp the simple fact that when they drive all those who produce income out of business, there won’t be anyone left to support them financially at all.

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios