Thursday, January 29, 2009

Dear Iran, Check Yes, No, or Maybe

It has been reported that the Obama Administration intends to send a letter to Iran in order to ease tense relations between the Persian and American governments. While official details of the letter have not been released, here is what has surfaced so far:

Dear Mahmud,

Shalom! Just kidding! How are things?

Thank you for your kind congratulatory words after my crushing defeat the Evil One, George W. Bush. If the media over here weren't completely infatuated with me, a letter like that might have been disastrous. But don't worry. Nobody even heard about it.

As you know, I recently stated that I hoped our two nations could regain the strong relationship we had "20 or 30 years ago" when I gave an interview on Al-Arabiya. I just wanted to apologize for that comment seeing as almost exactly 20 years ago, you purposely mined the USS Samuel B. Roberts which took it out of commission for over a year. This event forced us to attack you with overwhelming force in order to make sure something like that didn't happen again.

Rest assured we do not want to go back to our relationship as it was 20 years ago.

Of course the other option I gave in the interview was to go back to our relationship 30 years ago. As you and I are both aware, exactly 30 years ago, your great nation was at war with Iraq, and the United States supported Iraq during this conflict. I, again, misspoke, but I believe if we work together, we can somehow blame those [censored] Jews for that. Am I right? :)

So, clearly, we do not want to go back to that time.

It's time for us to turn over a new leaf, Mahmud. We, here in the United States, have been on the right side of morality far too long and would like to come over to your side where hating Jewish people is okay and denying the holocaust is common place.

Where women are given equal rights to all creatures that belong in a barnyard.

Where the only technology that is desirable is that which will wipe Israel off the map.

So please call off your three proxy wars you are currently fighting with us and Israel and I'll pull out of Iraq and declare peace in the Middle East. When I get the Nobel Prize like Jimmy Carter and Yasser Arafat did, I'll be happy to split the credit with you.

So as you develop nuclear missiles, rest assured we will not be able to respond, should you choose to use one on say, Tel Aviv or Jerusalem.

But can't we just be friends, Mahmud?

Really I just need things to calm down a bit until say 2017 or so, then I don't care what you do.

Your Truly,
Barry
XOXO
Here's an artist's rendering of what the letter may look like.

Valentine


Obama better hurry because the Iranian Postal Service may have trouble getting it into Ahmadinejad's hands before February 14!

But contrast, for a moment, this approach to foreign affairs and how Ronald Reagan accomplished things. Reagan developed defensive and offensive military systems in order to compete with Russia during the cold war. Democrats at the time said that Reagan, himself, was instigating World War III.

Barack Obama has already vowed to dismantle our weapons systems and to slow the production of future systems. It was policies like these that Bill Clinton used which allowed the bombings of the USS Cole and the World Trade Center in 1993 to go unchallenged.

Ahmadinejad has already expressed the desire to see our ally, Israel, destroyed and is openly supportive of Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine, and is suspected of funding and supplying the insurgency in Iraq.

Obama's solution is to mail Iran a letter to ease tensions between the two countries.

But, if you recall, Reagan did send a message to Russia. It was not one that was designed to befriend our enemy or to smooth-over relations, however. It was designed as a challenge to the Soviets to take a step in the right direction.

He addressed Premier Gorbachev directly saying, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall."

And listen they did.

Berlin Wall


And THAT was change we could believe in.

4 Shocking Things Obama Wants You to Pay For

When the government of the people provides a service, those governed often too quickly forget that the service being provided was bought and paid for by tax dollars. That is, money that was yours is now in the hands of bureaucrats in Washington. Here is a list of four shocking things President Obama expects you to pay for after his first week in office.


4. Digital Television in Every American Living Room
Do you remember in Back to the Future where Marty is sitting at his grandparents' dining room table in 1955 and they had finally gotten their first television set working? They ask Marty if his family has a TV to which he replies, "We've got two of them." They laugh and say, "He's joking. Nobody has two television sets!

1950's TV


What used to be a luxury, turned commonplace, and has now become a right.

The so-called "stimulus package" that the House passed (244-188) yesterday has a provision in the Senate's version to provide digital-to-analog converter boxes to the tune of $650 million! (Here's the text of the bill just in case you don't believe me.) Of course television is transitioning to a digital-only signal as of February 19, 2009, but this provision in the bill effectively makes digital television a right afforded to all Americans.



3. The Ability to Download Porn Faster
The internet is one of the wonders of the modern world. Almost 1.5 billion people are connected to it. It has become the storehouse of the knowledge and experiences of the entire human race. And as soon as any technology becomes available, this human race uses it to sell sex to one another.

Even fragments of papyrus discovered in an ancient trash pile in Egypt contain erotic literature and sex manuals. We, as a species, are obsessed with the topic.

Poxy

Your government understands that, so the House version of the stimulus package designates almost $3 billion for the development of wireless internet systems and broadband connectivity to rural areas. For a mere $3 billion dollars, now everyone in America can stop waiting for porn and get it now. Insert your own "stimulus package" joke here, if you must.



2. The Re-elect President Obama Campaign

Back during the 2008 presidential campaign an organization kept popping up in the news that was relatively new to most Americans. Do you remember what it was? Here are a few hints.
The organization was investigated by the FBI for suspected voter fraud.
Then the organization admitted to voter fraud.
Then the McCain campaign was accused of mudslinging for pointing it out.

And they registered these people to vote. Three times each.
Dead VoterTony Romo

If you guessed ACORN you would be correct!

Well, the stimulus package also has $4.19 billion set aside for "neighborhood stabilization activities," which groups such as ACORN fall under. This is either a way of saying, "thank you" to those who helped Obama get elected or it is padding their budgets for the 2012 run.

But with $4.19 billion dollars coming their way, it appears to be both.



1. Reducing the Number of Poor People - By Killing Them
When President Barack Obama signed the executive order to rescind the Mexico City Policy which barred federal finances from being used to support organizations that provide or promote abortions in foreign countries, he was praised by Tod Preston, Vice President of Population Action International.

Population Action International's mission statement reads, "Population Action International works to ensure that every person has the right and access to sexual and reproductive health, so that humanity and the natural environment can exist in balance and fewer people live in poverty." [emphasis mine] Which sounds pretty good until you understand that this is a group that supports making federal money available to provide abortions to impoverished women in other parts of the world.

The problem with Hitler was that he framed his purpose poorly. Instead of "extermination of the Jewish race," he should have spun it to say that under his plan, "fewer Jewish people would live in poverty."

So federal tax dollars (aka your money) will go toward killing the impoverished before they take their first breath, thereby reducing the number of people who live in poverty.

That's the difference between conservatives and liberals.

Conservatives would read that as "reducing the number of people who live in poverty."
Liberals read it as "reducing the number of people who live in poverty."

There is a subtle distinction, but one is morally good. The other is at best eugenics and at worst genocide.

Here's an idea: Let's reduce the number of poor people in the world by teaching them how to make money and provide for their families because killing them off is not an option.

That would be change we can believe in.

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Obama's First Interview as President to Arab News

So Obama sat down with Al-Arabiya News his first formal television interview as President yesterday, as the American press sat waiting by the phone and checking their hair in the mirror like a moderately attractive prom girl waits for a call from the head quarterback.

But they would be disappointed.

Obama effectively tongue-kissed his date right there on the dance floor in view of those he had left hanging. He spoke sweet nothings into her ear, and told her everything she wanted to hear.

Unfortunately it will take time to see if she responds by fawning over him or by flying another plane into one of his buildings. And judging from how she treats her own family, things don't look too hopeful. Click this link if you need an example: Saudi court punishes rape victim with 200 lashes. And yes, you read that correctly. They punished the victim of the rape.

Here's the interview and transcript.


He says in the interview, "all too often the United States starts by dictating." This is patently false. America usually starts by burying its head in the sand or being extremely patient. That's what led to Hitler taking over most of mainland Europe. It's what led to Pearl Harbor. It's what gave us 3,000 dead Americans lying under a buildings in New York and Washington.

We're patient, forgiving, and sometimes too slow to act. But when we do act the world has usually been warned by countless words and UN resolutions.

Obama also says, "But if you look at the track record, as you say, America was not born as a colonial power, and that the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago, there's no reason why we can't restore that."

Our relationship with the Muslim world 20 or 30 years ago was held together by a very fine strand called "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." In order to stop Soviet expansion, American joined forces with the Muslim World to fight this common enemy.

The Muslim world said, "Thank you" by blowing up the American embassy in Beirut in 1983, bombing the World Trade Center in 1993, the American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998. The American response to each of these was minimal at best.

After the 9/11 attacks America's response, under the leadership of Former President Bush was swift and decisive. Obama could look to Bush for how to deal with threats to our national security and to the security of our allies (AKA Israel.)

Obama also refuses to explicitly denounce a nuclear Iran near the end of the interview. The same day that Iran intends to have a nuclear weapon by the end of the year.

These comments are not only frustrating and wrong. They are dangerous. I mean seriously, do you want this guy to have a nuke?

Ahmadinejad


Our best hope is that President Obama was as truthful with Al-Arabiya as he was when he spoke about abortion with Rick Warren.

On an unrelated note, does this put Hussein back into the "usable" category when we refer to President Obama?

Is this the change we can believe in?

Monday, January 26, 2009

What do Transparency and Obama Have in Common?

During the transition and now into the first week of the Obama Presidency, the administration has been using the word "transparent" to describe the new administration's approach to governing.

The choice to use the word "transparent" was actually pretty clever because it connotes thoughts of openness of the administration. It also allows the administration to set up websites like Change.gov which featured a portion of the site for user questions. (Please click that link and note the irony of the "Open for Questions" page being closed.) It was so open, in fact, that people began to ask about Obama's connection to the Blagojevich pay-for-play scandal. Those questions apparently required too much transparency on the part of the administration, so their loyal followers took them down immediately.

"Transparency," as it was understood by many Americans, indicated that this administration would not hide information, but make it readily available. However, the word "transparent" can also be used to describe something that is virtually invisible. Which is probably more accurate for how the administration behaved by the end of last week when Obama signed an executive order to rescind the Mexico City Policy.

The Mexico City Policy denied federal money to organizations the perform or promote abortions in foriegn countries. This policy was put into place by Ronald Reagan in 1984, rescinded by Bill Clinton in 1993, was reinstated in 2001, and now Barack Obama as again rescinded the policy yet again.

When Obama signed to executive order to close Gitmo, the press was invited to witness this historic occasion and to capture it on video for the world to see.

Closing Gitmo

But when he signed the executive order to rescinded the Mexico City Policy, he did so without any cameras around on a Friday afternoon when he knew talk radio wouldn't get a hold of it until the following Monday, which would make it old news by then.

Where's Obama?

I can't identify Obama in this picture documenting the rescinding of the Mexico City Policy above. Maybe he's being transparent.

Here's the problem. At the Saddleback Forum, Obama said that he was in favor of "reducing the number of abortions" and that he has "inserted [this goal] into the democratic party platform."



When speaking to Rick Warren, an evangelical pastor, while on the campaign trail, Barack Obama portrayed himself as a leader committed to reducing the number of abortions.

But with the executive order signed on Friday providing funds given by every American taxpayer to organizations that provide and promote abortion as a means of family planning, or worse, population control, Obama reveals a very different agenda.

In the open, during a campaign, in front of a respected evangelical pastor, he said one thing. Behind closed doors, after the election, he acted very differently.

So what do transparency and Obama have in common? They both have two faces.

Note this: Obama's positions never change. What he claims to be his position is what changes depending on who's watching.

Is that change we can believe in?

Saturday, January 24, 2009

Timing is Everything

Herbert R. Axelrod was a man who loved to play the violin. Herbert grew up around music as his father had been a violin teacher. Although he did not follow his father into teaching the violin, choosing instead to become an accomplished writer and publisher, Herbert still loved music, especially the strings.

Herbert began to collect instruments, especially the rare and the most sought-after. In 1975 he purchased his first Stradivarius violin.

Stradivarius

The Stradivarius instruments are considered to be the finest musical instruments ever created. They were handcrafted during the late 17th and early 18th centuries. When one of the 700 or so instruments left in the world comes up for auction it will usually sell for several million dollars.

Herbert had become such a successful writer and publisher that he donated not one, but four Stradivari to the Smithsonian. These four instruments became known as "The Axelrod Quartet" are estimated to have a value of $50 million. He also sold 30 other pieces of his collection to New Jersey Symphony Orchestra for $18 million, which doesn't sound like a deal at first, but the pieces he sold were worth upwards of another $50 million.
Herbert Axelrod

Herbert R. Axelrod appears to be a real stand-up guy, a patron of the arts, and one who used his wealth to promote the enjoyment of music through his generous gifts. But where did these $100 million worth of instruments come from? How did he manage to make that amount of money as a writer/publisher?

He made it the same way anyone else would: by refusing to pay taxes over the course of 20 years.

In 2004 Axelrod forgot to show up for his arraignment because he planned a trip to Cuba instead. Apparently he was interested in the whole non-extradition agreement Cuba and the US share and decided to take advantage of that. Germany, however does not have such an agreement, and the German authorities were more than happy to hand him over to the US when they found Axelrod in Berlin a few months later.

In 2005 Axelrod was found guilty of tax fraud and was sentenced to 18 months in prison.

So when you think about it, timing is everything. Had Herbert Axelrod waited just 4 years he could have avoided going to prison entirely and instead, become Barack Obama's Secretary of the Treasury.

And as far as I know, Timothy Geithner never gave the Smithsonian so much as a kazoo while he was "forgetting" to pay his taxes.

Obama has already reformed America back into the land of opportunity, where even a tax evader can get a seat in the cabinet.

And that's change we can believe in!

Thursday, January 22, 2009

Obama to Close Gitmo

When Ronald Reagan took the oath of office, our enemies released American prisoners within minutes.

Reagan Oath

When Barack Obama took the oath of office, we released our enemies within days.



That's change we can believe in!

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Obama Inauguration Most Watched Since Reagan

Poor Barry can't beat out Ronnie's numbers.

According to Nielsen, Barack Obama's hyped up, historical first, words to be chiseled in marble, inauguration still couldn't beat out Ronald Reagan's numbers.

Obama - 37.8 million
Reagan's 1st - 41.8 million

Obama Oath<Reagan Oath


But consider what an achievement that is for a moment. In 1981 (Reagan's 1st inauguration) there was no 24 hour news building up Ronnie for months and he had 80 million fewer Americans to draw from because of the population growth over the past 28 years! And day of the week wasn't a factor because January 20th was a Tuesday in '09 and '81!

And within minutes of Reagan taking the oath, Iran released 52 American hostages. THAT's change we can believe in!