About Me

Name: flagwaver
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Full Circle in Iran

As everyone knows, the United States and Iran have a long and tangled history dating back to the middle 1950s. It was then that the CIA helped to overthrow Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq and reinstall the Shah of Iran as the leader of the country. The thinking at the time seems to have been that Mossadeq would have moved the country into the orbit of the Soviet Union, while the Shah was very open to an alliance with the West. During the height of the Cold War it was almost inconceivable that an American administration would allow such an important ally fall to the hated Soviets, and the US went to the mat to prevent that from happening. So the Shah was returned to power and all was well with between the US and Iran… until the Iranian Revolution of 1979.

It was in 1979 that President Jimmy Carter (D-Ga) decided to abandon the Shah in the face of the Iranian Revolution that was being led by the religious conservatives in the nation, and who drew their spiritual inspiration from the long exiled Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. President Carter reasoned that the Ayatollah Khomeini would be a wise and benevolent ruler, especially since he was such a religious man. Unfortunately for the Iranian people, the Ayatollah Khomeini was a hard line Islamic cleric who instituted Sharia law, seized control of the press, and became a power hungry dictator…while wrapping his megalomania in the veneer of religious piety. And the Ayatollah bequeathed to the Iranian state several things that plague the nation to this day: a theocracy that subjugates the people and that seeks to export the “revolution” by making Iran the leading state sponsor of terrorism in the world. They bankroll Hamas, Hezbollah, and the “insurgents” in Iraq that work so hard to destroy the budding democratic government in that country.

But to the complete and utter shock of the ruling mullahs the Iranian Revolution has come full circle, and now the Iranian people seek their ouster. In 1979 the young people of the country took to the streets to demand the end of the Shah’s tyrannical reign, shouting “Death to the dictator”; today the young people of Iran take to the streets seeking the death of the religious dictatorship foisted upon them by Khomeini. Then the young people were confronted by the police and security forces of the shah; now they face the thugs sent after them in the name of the Ayatollah Khameini. The 1979 revolution ended with the splintering and replacement of the Shah’s regime, and we can only hope that this revolution meets with similar success.

From the moment that the mullahs attempted to certify a clearly fraudulent election result that would return their hand selected puppet Mahmoud Ahmadenijad to the presidential office, the Western world had been open in recognizing the election for the fraud it was. The European Union, the Germans, the British, even the United Nations has openly questioned the election results in Iran. Yet the leader of the free world, one Barack Hussein Obama has done his best to appear both strong and noncommittal at the same time. His reactions have been lukewarm at best, starting with some pap about “vigorous debate” within Iran to his most recent statement that lets the mullahs know that “the world is watching.”

What Obama seems not to understand is that the world is not just watching the happenings in Iran, but that the world is watching him as well. Our allies are watching him to see how he handles a crisis, and what the United States is willing to undertake in the defense of freedom around the world. Our enemies are watching to ascertain the same things, and to see whether the president is strong or weak. And so far they have seen nothing from President Obama but abject weakness. He seems bent on being non-offensive so that the Iranian junta will be willing to sit at a conference table with American diplomats, instead of supporting the forces that could overthrow the very junta that he seeks to engage.

Obama must realize that at some point, his ‘above the fray’ posture needs to give way to a more realistic position in the foreign relations arena. Pretty words at an Egyptian university do not excuse the President from taking a stand on issues that scream for his attention. The President and his advisors, who are so keen on European opinion, can this one time look to the Europeans and follow their lead. He can follow them in their support for the freedom of the Iranian people who so obviously are demanding their liberty from a repressive, backwards regime. A government for, by, and of the young people of Iran could be the greatest engine of democracy in the Middle East ever seen. These are people who are not antagonistic towards the Western world, who are actually looking to us as a model of what they can be, and ask only that our leadership let them know that they are not alone in standing for freedom. The Senate and the House have answered the call by passing resolutions that affirm that they stand with the people in their fight to be heard and respected by their government, so now is the time for President Obama to finally take a stand for freedom.

Concerns about past acrimony and shop worn bromides about ‘diplomacy’ should be cast aside in favor of taking a stand for freedom. Mr. Obama has plenty of words for his friends at CBS, CNBC, ABC, and the White House Correspondent’s dinner, so why not a few for people who are risking their very lives seeking their freedom? We are waiting to see if Mr. Obama is eloquent in the defense of freedom, or simply grandiloquent in the pursuit of his own power. I pray that the President will find his voice and start to become a leader on this issue.

Now is the time for the President to live up to the words of the Marine’s hymn, “to fight for right and freedom.” Now is the time to lead Mr. President, the world is watching, and history will be your judge.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (10) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Father & Son: Special Edition

This Spade posting is going to be a bit different from the norm, because this one is going to be written by someone else. I usually don’t give space up here to other writers, unless they have something to say that I think is very powerful, cogent, and may be missed by my usual readers. I have given up space to a writer from the American Spectator, a local columnist in my area, reprinted an interview with Justice Clarence Thomas, and most recently reprinted excerpts from Ronald Reagan’s 1975 speech at the CPAC conference. And for the most part, that has been it. So it should tell you something that I am giving up space to someone else to actually write a post on my little blog.

The person that I am going to turn the Spade over to this time is my 13 year old son. He listens to me talk politics…ok rant…all the time and he has started forming his own political identity. You see, my wife is a Democrat, as are his grandparents whom he loves very much, respects, and listens to. Yet he has compared and contrasted their political views with mine, and he has come down on my side of the ideological fence. His reasoning as stated to me on many occasions basically boils down to this: When his mom and grandparents talk about politics it all boils down to feelings and emotions. Whenever he asks why they support a certain position they lead off with emotions and seem to end with the standard “Democrats are for Black people” sentiments that so many people have come to believe. When he talks to me, even when I am in my most worked up state of mind, I am able to explain to him WHY: WHY a policy won’t work, WHY a decision is faulty, WHY I hold the views I hold. And it never devolves into an emotional response or an attack on the other Party. So he has decided that conservatism simply makes more sense, is more logical, and can be expressed and defended much better than liberalism.

Last night he and I stayed up late shooting the political bull, and I began to ask him questions about the current president and why he thinks so lowly of him. You see, since the campaign season and definitely since the election, my son has expressed many times that Obama actually scares him. So I started to probe him last night on just what it is that scares him so much about Obama, what it is that he dislikes in the Dear Leader, and what he wants to see happen in this country. See, we adults are always saying that we are worried about the future of the Republic and that we are worried about the future that our progeny face…but we often don’t ask them about the future they would like to see. So I asked him about his feelings for Obama, his thoughts on the Obama foreign policy, what he wants to see in a leader, and where he wants this country to go…because it is, after all, his country too.

So while many of these thoughts and opinions are going to be familiar to you, please take the time to read and ponder them closely. This is the next generation of our nation and of our movement speaking to you. This is the voice of the people we work so hard every day to nurture, to protect, and whose futures we are striving to safeguard. So without further ado, and with a tremendous amount of pride, I yield the Spade to my son, Christian.

FOREIGN POLICY

President Obama is a coward when it comes to world affairs. He will not come out and say what he means or thinks because he does not want to be offensive. NEWSFLASH! Some people won’t like us no matter what; some people love to be offended because they love to be in the spotlight. DO NOT sugarcoat things because Iran, China, North Korea, etc. won’t sugarcoat their feelings about us! As president, Obama can’t show any weakness or our enemies will move to exploit them.

MEDIA ADULATION

The press loves our president and everyone knows it. For example, on June 17 during an interview he swatted a fly and John Harwood {the interviewer} was so excited that he killed a fly(!) he nearly jumped out of his chair! My father has killed flies, spiders, and other insects…but that wasn’t on the news for two days straight! The media talks about Obama all the time, and it is never anything negative. Fox News is the only place you can get straight news without the anchor offering an opinion, while NBC News pats Barrack Obama on the back so much it’s a wonder his back doesn’t get raw!

DUMB DECISIONS

Take GITMO as an example: GITMO is going to close, so you send these terrorists in training to Bermuda?! Heck, I know law abiding citizens that would LOVE to go to Bermuda, but they can’t go…but the government pays for the Uyghur’s to relocate there. Hey, why not just send a serial killer to Hawai’i? This is one of the dumbest things ever! And speaking of dumb decisions, I don’t think the founders wanted the president to take over private companies like Obama has done with GM and Chrysler.

TRULY SCARY

Face it, Obama is a big boob! He has no plans, and whenever he does he can’t explain it. He has no experience and it scares me that we have three more years or more with him as our president. He has a hissy fit anytime someone disagrees with him, and the person disagreeing is quickly labeled as a racist. He doesn’t understand that the government of Iran doesn’t like us; the leaders there still call us “The Great Satan”, yet Obama wants to sit down and talk with these people. And he refuses to realize that Islam is not a ‘religion of peace’ as he claims it is. Islam is divided into the House of Islam and the House of War; basically that means that if you are not a Muslim you and infidel who must convert…or die. We cannot find peace with people that think that way.

WHAT A PRESIDENT IS SUPPOSED TO BE

I believe that the Founding Fathers knew what they were doing and I believe that Americans should be free. I think the president should be strong in foreign affairs and in domestic affairs. I want a president who isn’t going to beat around the bush about issues, but can be blunt without being bellicose. Lastly, a president should be honest, straightforward, and not buckle under the least bit of pressure. In other words, the president shouldn’t be a thin-skinned ego hound who constantly needs his ego stroked!

So there you have it, the thoughts, fears, and ideals of the next generation of conservatism. So don’t believe the libs when they say that we are losing the nest generation, they just haven’t looked hard enough to find them. As long as we teach our kids that America is great, was great, and it is up to them to maintain that greatness, conservatism will continue to thrive!

Eric and Christian

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (9) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Democratic Diplomacy

 

There are many reasons to distrust the Democratic Party, among them their penchant for tax increases, governmental interference and growth, and their tendency to support social engineering as good policy. But the issue that gives people the most pause with the Democrats is their seeming fundamental fumbling with foreign policy. The last two Democratic administrations have presided over the loss of Iran to Islamic extremists, the loss of valuable secrets to the Communist PRC, and the complete boondoggle of building nuclear reactors in North Korea in exchange for their “abandoning” their pursuit of nuclear weapons.

This morning on Fox & Friends we were treated to another shining example of the obtuseness of Democrats in the field of foreign policy. Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM) was being asked by host Steve Doocy about the recent Iranian missile tests and the prospects of actually sitting down and negotiating with Iranian President Ahmadenijad. In answer to the inquiries, Gov. Richardson goes into this speech about how we should negotiate with Iran, but not with their President; according to Richardson, we should be talking to the “moderate” clerics in Iran, and besides Ahmadenijad is not looking too strong in the next Iranian presidential elections!

To which I say, WTF!?! This is just the type of foolishness you can expect from Democrats in the realm of foreign affairs, and it would be funny if it weren’t so serious. In what world does Mr. Richardson live, where the presidential politics of Iran even matter? Does he not understand how things work in Iranian politics? And who are these “moderate” clerical plenipotentiaries that he expects to negotiate with?

In case Gov. Richardson doesn’t understand, there are no free elections in Iran, so their presidential elections do not matter. The President does not run anything in Iran, the Guardian’s Council does, and no one is even going to be on the ballot unless the Council allows it. And you can bet that anyone serving as President of Iran is but a mouthpiece for the Council; that person is no more independent of the Council than Quisling was independent of the Nazi Party. So worrying about upcoming Iranian presidential elections is a waste of time and energy, because whoever occupies that office is still the puppet of the Council.

As for the idea that there are “moderate” clerics for us to talk to, that is laughable. There may be some moderate clerics in Iran; as a matter of fact I am pretty sure there are some. The only thing is, they don’t sit on the Guardian’s Council, and they damned sure are not the highest cleric in the land! You can talk to a million moderate clerics, but that will not do you any good so long as the Guardian’s Council exists. They are the only group of clerics in Iran whose voices matter, and they are committed to the Islamic Revolution launched by Ayatollah Khomeini and have actively worked to export their revolution all over the region. And these are the people we are supposed to be negotiating with?

This is what makes the Democrats so dangerous in foreign policy; they see everything as analogous to our political system. You see it when they urge endless jawboning when action is urgently necessary, and you see it when a person who should know better puts his faith in a change of the President in a country ruled by a council of twelve clerics! They fail to realize that these foreign governments don’t work like ours, and mostly are not interested in working with us! Iran is not interested in negotiating with us; they are interested in our ultimate destruction and in their ascendance to the position of primary power in the Middle East. Nothing else really matters to them, and the quicker the Democrats figure that out the better off they will be. Then they can have a say in the foreign policy of the United States that makes sense, and is not diametrically opposed to our national interests.

God help us if these people get their hands back on the foreign policy apparatus of the United States, because they are a disaster waiting to happen.

 

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (6) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »