Dec. 8, 1941 – “As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory. I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.”
Oct.22, 1962 – “But it is difficult to settle or even discuss these problems in an atmosphere of intimidation. That is why this latest Soviet threat-or any other threat which is made either independently or in response to our actions this week-must and will be met with determination. Any hostile move anywhere in the world against the safety and freedom of peoples to whom we are committed-including in particular the brave people of West Berlin-will be met by whatever action is needed.”
October 27, 2009 – I think that what the administration has said very clearly is that we’re going to speak truth to power. When we saw all of the distortions in the course of the summer, when people were coming down to town hall meetings and putting up signs that were scaring seniors to death, when we have seen commercials go up on television that are distorting the truth, we’re actually calling everybody out. So, this isn’t something that’s simply directed at FOX. ”
I’m confused . They seem to specialize in nonsense and distortions ..
don’t know much about Roosevelt but I do know that kennedy and hussein’s inexperience are the authors of their stupidity. The first damn near got us into anuclear war with the USSR, and the latter is still looking for his great stumble
Obama will have another Beer Summit with Beck, that will be two things he has done… The Teleprompter is a little slow…and boring…
The Medicare (old folks) will be lined up at the Emergency door getting the free primary care they didn’t know about, but used by every illegal Alien and the uninsured (7 Million in California)
Dumb move Congress, you are screwed…
“We are sitting down with some of the most powerful, some of the most interesting women in the country, Madeleine Albright, Dara Torres, and one of President Obama’s closest advisers, Valerie Jarrett.”
Or maybe not.
GYM: I agree, I still don’t understand why JFK is considered to be a “great president”. He strikes me as just slightly more competent than Jimmah, although he was a good speechifier (without a TOTUS).
Excerpt from link:
“…BROWN: So do you think FOX News is biased?
JARRETT: Well, of course they’re biased. Of course they are.
BROWN: OK. Then do you also think that MSNBC is biased?
JARRETT: Well, you know what? This is the thing. I don’t want to — actually, I don’t want to just generalize all FOX is biased or that another station is biased.
I think what we want to do is look at it on a case-by-case basis. And when we see a pattern of distortion, we’re going to be honest about that pattern of distortion…”
ShUUUuure you are…Soetoro & co. are going to call out MSNBC when they judge them to be kissing their a** too much?
LMAO!
OK, people: Japanese, Soviets, Glenn Beck…. one of these existential threats is not like the other.
so when does the US of A realize that the TOTUS is some guy that cant run an icecream stand with two flavours ,
what a dangerous situation they have put the whole world in.
We have gone from Ich bin ein Berliner to Ich bin ein wiener.
By the way, you overlooked
“I have lusted after women in my heart” — J. Carter and of course,
“I did not have sexual relations with that, umm, woman,” from Boy Clinton not so long ago.
So it has been a long slippery slope, no?
Ezra Levant has been the only person to speak truth to power lately. ‘Progressives’ are warped, cowards or both.
More of Kate’s dishonesty. The first two quotes are presidential speeches. The third quote is an interview with a political advisor.
How about apples to apples for a change, K-K-Kate?
I love that “speak truth to power” catch. I hope we can agree that one of your duties, as president and commander-in-chief of the world’s superpower, is that you have to stop using that phrase. At what point in Obama’s career did it become utterly inappropriate for him to claim to be a powerless victim? senator? presidential hopeful? state senator? professor? editor of Harvard Law Review? lawyer? ivy-league Law student? middle-class teenager?
How about apples to apples for a change, K-K-Kate?
That’s going to be tough considering the latest occupant of the whitehouse and his staff are banannas.
Man, some of you people just don’t get it.
In the first two examples, the threat is/was external to the United States and great Presidents dealt with them forcefully.
In the third example we have an Administration that considers The People to be the threat (the “power” are those who disagree with the Dems’ asinine health plans). Glenn Beck, Fox, etc. are simply extensions of The People.
LOL I do not like to watch Campbell Brown but the smiling artful skewering of Jarrett with the MSNBC question was priceless and I may start watching her on occasion, na probably not.
Nothing like rocking someone back on their heels for the rest of the exchange. I think Campbell Brown was not at the secret meeting at the Whitehouse or did not get the memo.
The Whitehouse is so full of career losers that now they are in charge they do not know what to do. When in danger instincts take over, hence the Truth to Power statement, automated persecution complex, it is a liberal trait.
Perhaps Obama will have his “great moment” after a suitcase nuke detonates on US soil.
All the fruity comparisons don’t change a thing, balzac. Presently we have an administration that controls everything: both houses, oval office, media, unions, Hollywood and supposedly at least half of the population that would bid on his bathwater. (Likely including you.) It will never be better for them.
And they’re stalled. Can’t do a thing except yell about one TV station and one talk show host. It may be the result of a clumsy transition from opposition to power, but i suspect it’s deeper. The dem culture has become one of victimization and passivity, blaming political enemies and oppressors, and alleged social injustice.
If the big giant brain in the white house can’t do better than this on the home front, how is he going to work wonders with foreign leaders and threats? The “fierce urgency of now” has become the fierce urgency of maybe later, if he’s not playing golf and it isn’t a tough decision.
HJB
First American president that I am aware of that has set a harsher tone with his own people than he those outside the tent, that do need a serious slapdown, and by implication a distinct difference from the other two noted above.
Hey, does the same guy write all the speeches at the White House?
This political advisor sounds just like the BIG-O:”we’re going to speak truth to power … when we have seen commercials go up on television that are distorting the truth, we’re actually calling everybody out …” I can imagine the Obamessiah saying exactly the same things, with the same self-righteous, now-you-listen-to-me inflections.
And, uh-huh, unlike former leaders who took responsibility for their country’s safety and security, looking the enemy in the eye and clearly saying to their aggression NO WAY, we’ll fight you to the end to defend our freedoms, this Presidential wimp blames everybody else — It’s not my fault, it’s his fault, it’s her, fault. It’s FOX’s fault. I didn’t do it; she did it, he did it, it did it. FOX did it. Don’t blame me.
With Obama, there’s no proportion at all; demonstrations by American citizens exercising their democratic right to disagree with the political process carry the same weight as foreign powers threatening the life and liberty of American citizens.
No, wait, they don’t carry the same weight: Obama is much more likely to appease enemy foreign powers while doing whatever he can to disable and marginalize legitimate dissent at home.
Isn’t this upside down? Isn’t this Alice in Wonderland take-a-small-pill-jump-down-a-hole-Twilight-Zone territory?
The only scary thing here is what’s under her scalp.
OK, people: Japanese, Soviets, Glenn Beck…. one of these existential threats is not like the other.
Yes but JFK and FDR also had to contend with the know-nothings of their day. The angry right fringe
and the powerful interests that find their idiocy useful still have to be contended with. Non unlike coyotes.
They’re not the only thing, or the biggest thing, but they are still a pest.
Speaking of pests…
As usual Pillboy has it wrong again.
JFK and FDR had problems with the angry .LEFT. fringe, JfK with his LEFTIST idiots trying to sneak some nukes into Americas backyard and FdR with a well known LEFTY who was into genocide.
Where do you get your info from Pillboy?
Where you from?
Speak truth to power! The administration is power. What is truly Orwellian about this is not merely that Valerie Jarrett would utter such crap but that a servile media would fail to call her on it. This is what you get after 40 years of dumbed-down education, and it’s depressing.
So when this bureaucrat “speaks to power” she is actually acknowledging where the true power in America lies, the people. Or is she of the belief that any media source (not just FNC, those haters) actually has the power?
It seems the libunatics have not wrapped their programming around the fact THEY are the power that needs to have the truth spoken to them. Loudly.
It is telling that despite controlling the White House and both Congress and the Senate they can get no (zero) radical changes rammed through.
“FOX” we don’t get that station in Ontario.
Do they broadcast in Canada?
I know the Commie News Network (CNN)is everywhere.
Still speaking truth to power? Fox News? These utter imcompetents can’t even get their rhetoric straight. They ARE the power now. Well, in a wussy, little sissy sort of way.
What a tangled web of comments.
In my view, the key difference, and it’s a vital difference, is that the presidential office in the first two perspectives, saw a dangerous threat against the American people (got that? “a dangerous threat against the American people) by some foreign agency.
In the Obama White House, and this includes Obama himself, the situation is not a ‘dangerous threat against the American people’ but some American people who criticize the Obama Realm.
Obama, to repeat it ad nauseum, is a pathological narcissist. He lives in a virtual world, a cocoon, wherein he must control all interactions with him. And such interactions must be confined to adulation. He rejects dissent and criticism. His first reactions against such will be to accuse these voices of bias (ahh, how handy that racial smear!)and then, he’ll try to silence their voices by His Power.
That means using His Power in silencing the voice-power of the American people. If he cannot do even this, he’ll ignore them; they will cease to exist. This is important. If you are not actually or potentially controllable by Obama, then for Obama you have no existence. You aren’t simply invisible; you don’t exist.
Obama’s world consists only of people whom he controls. Others are literally non-existent for him. That’s why he cannot get his ‘head’ around such issues as foreign policy. It has no reality for him because he cannot control the foreign population into adulation. If he cannot achieve this, these people don’t exist.
The people demonstrating for democracy in Iran didn’t exist for Obama because they were not demonstrating for Obama..but for someone else. And they were thus not adulatory of Obama. The Afghan situation has no reality for Obama because it isn’t about Him.
Obama feels no kinship with America, no sense of its history of achievement, no sense of ‘being American’. He feels no obligation to, as president, protect and promote America and Americans. His realm was long ago reduced to a cocoon of Himself and his outreach refers only and strictly only to those whom he can capture in the greed and narcissistic stickiness of His Net.
GYM: I agree, I still don’t understand why JFK is considered to be a “great president”. He strikes me as just slightly more competent than Jimmah, although he was a good speechifier (without a TOTUS).
He certainly wasn’t a great President, but he was orders of magnitude better than Carter. When the Soviets started installing missiles in Cuba, he stood up to them; when the Iranian mobs took over our embassy in Tehran, Carter tried one badly mis-managed mission to rescue the captives. We didn’t have gas lines during JFK’s administration, nor did we have double-digit annual increases in the consumer price index. To be fair, JFK had the immense good fortune to have followed Eisenhower (one of the best Presidents we have ever had, IMHO), while Carter did have some messes left over from Johnson and Nixon, which Gerald Ford (a very under-rated President, IMHO) had not had time to clean up.
Real smart move, telling the world that FNC has more power than the Obama administration. That sound you hear is Putin, Dinnerjacket, etc. falling down laughing.
Fox has been emboldened by this “war”. O’Reilly declared Fox News the most powerful news organization on the planet the other day.
blanks re Fox – it’s been mentioned before, but here again – to get Fox on your computer search “PCTV Fox” and you’ll get a link. If you have a laptop it’s awesome, you can drag it around the kitchen while you cook and/or clean up after cooking. Totally awesome.
ET et al – Things have certainly changed, and a major societal change surrounded the 1960s/70s – (and I’m not even going to get into birth control, abortion, etc etc.)
Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy had experience with war, the latter three as actual combatants. War in their experience was waged with others who wore uniforms, and applied certain rules, although those rules were often discarded.
Those presidents following (excepting dealing with the Soviet bloc) dealt with many shadowy combatants – eg Viet Cong – who used non-Marquis of Queensbury rules for combat. I think this type of conflict extends currently into the situation in the Persian Gulf – hard to know who your friend or enemy is.
You’re not digging trenches and planning front line assaults (remember how the Republican Guard was wiped out in the First Gulf War in such a situation?)
So, Obama is facing a tougher more complex situation than before. I don’t envy him. But despite what some call charisma, he quite honestly lacks the experience and determination to achieve successful outcome.
(yes, lots of generalizations and oversimplications above, nature of blog comments)
ET is right, right, 1000 times right.
At first, when she was describing Obama as a narcissist, I was partially sceptical, along the lines of: Gosh, a narcissistic politician, how novel, we haven’t had one of those since Clinton/Kerry/Gore etc. (I have no love for Republican politicians per se, but the recent Democrat pols do seem to me to be more… how you say?… f*(ked in the head.)
But Obama is something else. The President (that would be the most powerful man in the world) is “speaking truth to power” – i.e. the one news organization that isn’t madly in love with him. (And I do blame him for what Jarrett said. It’s his administration, he sets the tone. He could always distance himself from her remarks. He won’t.)
I know narcissists. This will never stop. Nothing will ever be his responsibility, and everything will always be everyone else’s fault. Reality will never matter; only His Specialness will ever matter. A shallow, childish radical with no agenda beyond power-hunger and angry self-pity.
There is still something unreal about this presidency. I keep expecting to wake up.
ET is right, right, 1000 times right.
Yup, she’s spot on with the ad nauseam aspect.
Philboy – I don’t really know if FDR and JFK had to content with know-nothings.
I do know that JFK had to deal with WWII guys like “Bombs-Away” LeMay – who was pretty trigger happy with nuclear weapons re Cuba in 1962 – using past experiences for basing present decision making.
Cuba was a problem because Eisenhower was a ditherer much like the current president. (See Truman’s take on Castro and his thoughts on what he would have done after the revolution).
I had underappreciated the rationality and measured thinking of Krushchev in his correspondence with Kennedy – I don’t mind posting something long in a near dead thread:
“What would a war give you? You are threatening us with war… I have participated in two wars and know that war ends when it has rolled through cities and villages, everywhere sowing death and destruction.”
___
“If you did this as the first step towards the unleashing of war, well then, it is evident that nothing else is left to us but to accept this challenge of yours. If, however, you have not lost your self-control and sensibly conceive what this might lead to, then, Mr. President, we and you ought not now to pull on the ends of the rope in which you have tied the knot of war, because the more the two of us pull, the tighter that knot will be tied. And a moment may come when that knot will be tied so tight that even he who tied it will not have the strength to untie it, and then it will be necessary to cut that knot, and what that would mean is not for me to explain to you, because you yourself understand perfectly of what terrible forces our countries dispose.”
Awesome!
Erik Larsen – no, I don’t think that the change in reaction by the White House is due to the fact that the ‘new enemy’ so to speak, is not an official national military but a set of radical terrorists unaffiliated with any specific nation.
After all, Bush was quite able to deal with this new style of attack against America, by his Patriot Act, Guantanamo, and the Iraq War..this war was intended to enable democracy to emerge in the Islamic tribal nations, and it is their tribalism that is the root cause of Islamic fascism.
What is preventing Obama from dealing with Islamic terrorism, is that, for him, it literally has no reality.
We can see this in his renaming ‘the war against terrorism’ to ‘the overseas contingency operation’, a form of Newspeak that is utterly, word by word, and as a whole, meaningless. It refuses to define the American action and refuses to define what America is fighting.
Terrorists are no longer such; they are ‘insurgents’ (against what?).
And, of course, he’s now dithering because he has moved the Afghan war from a fight against Islamic fascism to a political definition of ‘good fights’ versus ‘bad fights’ – and, a ‘good fight’ is carried out by the left only within talk, talk, talk.
Obama himself considers that all and any must succumb to the miracle of His Talk. If you don’t, he’ll ignore you; you don’t exist. It isn’t that Obama lacks the experience and determination to deal with Afghanistan. It has no reality for him.
In Obamaland, the only reality is what can be controlled by Him, by his charisma, his magic talk, and the response has to be singular: adulation. The people of Afghanistan are indifferent to such magic talk; they are interested in things that are Not-Obama. Therefore, to Obama, they are outside His Reach and therefore, literally, don’t exist. That’s why he can’t deal with this war. After all, if you live in a totally Fictional World, as does Obama, then whatever is outside that realm, has no reality for you.
ET – I think my point is different. Obama is in the White House in part because the “enemy” in this “war” is different, and their tactics discredited the previous president, leading to what should have been an electoral cakewalk for the Dems (but in fact was surprisingly close).
The First Gulf War was “easy” – fought conventionally – think of the thousands of Republican Guardsmen buried in trenches/bunkers, and the long line of trucks and tanks smoldering from American bombardment. It’s easy for Americans to be confident in their global superpower status.
With GWB, things had changed. The might of the American army is constantly challenged by IEDs using bombs coupled with cell phones planted by non-uniformed men. Snipers disappear and blend with the populus.
The public quickly loses support for such a conflict where propagandization cannot be used. It shakes their self-confidence. A president becomes discredited – and a Democrat becomes elected.
People don’t care about the things that didn’t happen (eg, bombings of Los Angeles predicted by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, allegedly averted because of waterboarding), and don’t care about attacks on US soil or abroad that *didn’t* happen. It’s just like Y2K – people think – well, there never was a problem in the beginning, it was all just a hoax.
People are not long term thinkers, in general our brain is not built that way.
Erik – I see your point, but my comment was directed to the three speeches. The first two were made by presidents dealing with attacks against the American people. The last one, by Obama, deals only with attacks against him. My point is that for Obama, there is no reality outside of his own self. Therefore he can’t acknowledge any attacks against the American people.
I also don’t think that Obama was elected because this is a different style of war. Remember that Bush was elected for a second term in this very same war against terrorism. I think that Obama was elected because Americans were tired of war and they fell for his verbiage about his fictional world rather than the actual world.
And he has quickly, verbally, redefined reality to remove all hint of war. It doesn’t exist anymore because his language doesn’t refer to war but only to ‘overseas contingency operations’ and ‘insurgents’.
And no, I think that a certain proportion of the population, any population, are long term thinkers. They might not be logical about the long term future but they do insist on continuity of the present wellbeing into the future. It’s called the need for ‘normative habits’ and all peoples insist on customs and norms to be followed, whether authorized by culture or religion.
Conpiracy with Democratic United State how deal with their Muslim:
The investigation project on Terrorism
-http://www.investigativeproject.org/maps.php
-http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/detroit-islamic-leader-killed-during-gun-battle-with-feds/news-36589/
Verses:
More new news:
by American Prostitution women all sizes :
-http://www.sodahead.com/living/women-of-all-sizes-are-gorgeous/news-36507/
-http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/number-of-women-buying-handguns-increasing/news-36531/
-http://www.sodahead.com/news/
==
More Info:
-http://www.sodahead.com/religion/obama-administration-rejects-un-anti-defamation-of-religion-resolution/news-36025/
world government torture innocent Muslim in world
Blame it to thier government and nonMuslim women
I said months ago that “it’s war” and that’s exactly how the Obama administration is treating it, or at least that’s what they’re saying.
The way I interpreted the comment is that the Whitehouse is not only at war with FOX news, but they’re also at war with the tea-baggers and everyone else that would disagree with the agenda. Also, if I remember correctly the majority of “domestic terrorists” at the town hall meeting were old people. I guess the old people are scaring themselves, Right?
The bottom line is when the Department of Homeland Security declared regular American citizens and heroes “rightwing extremists” and a “threat to national security” the line was drawn.JMO
Hey Furred J. Skinbag, do you ever get tired of publicizing your complete and utter lack of wit and insight?
“If the big giant brain in the white house can’t do better than this on the home front, how is he going to work wonders with foreign leaders and threats”
They’re bankning on our current allies sitting idle as we befriend our/their enemies.
“What is preventing Obama from dealing with Islamic terrorism, is that, for him, it literally has no reality.”
Politics, that’s what! He will attempt to secure the votes of the leftwing of his party on the healthcare bill (without the public option) before he pisses them off by sending more troops to Afghanistan. This seems like the most reasonable analysis of his “dithering”.
my comment was directed to the three speeches.
The first two were made by presidents dealing with attacks against the American people.
The last one, by Obama, deals only with attacks against him.
Except the last was NOT a speech by Obama.
Another ET et nauseam looney toons thesis bites the dust.
To heck with not feeding the trolls…
philboy …. besides being a died in the wool lefty and perpetually wrong about every important matter you deign to chirp in about…. the perfect example of why the terms leftard and lefticle were coined and deservedly employed.
It is well past time for you go back to your corner and carry on with you thumb sucking.
Infantile and ignorant and frankly just plain stupid you are.
Hey, the best quote to date from a Democrat preznit was the immortal “Ah did not have sex with that woman!”
It’s the lack of accomplishments that The Anointed One has performed, that is his signature.
Well, he has accomplished 24 rounds of golf…..and he got a dog. Oh yeah, a few too many mag covers, and TV appearances, acting like a clown, rather than a head of state
But, he has managed to spend well over a trillion dollars of debt, (with more to come, of course)
He can’t pass a health care bill, even his own party is rebelling that option.
And his dithering is causing untimely deaths of American troops in Iraq, and Afstan, because he can’t make a decision to withdraw, or add troops. Again, he’s afraid to do anything, other than be a figurehead…….for the BackRoom Gang
As it was said above, Obama is truly at war with his own nation, rather than defending his nation against other oppressors, or potentials, like the Norks and Ahmadinnerjacket.
What a morn he, and his defenders (Gates, fillerupboy, and Furry nutbag, don’t forget bleach)
Let’s face it, Obama is all image, ask any soldier.