Thread: Worse. Than. Carter.

But Carter won a Nobel Peace....oh wait...

Yes. Barry is fast approaching, and probably will eclipse Carter as one of the worst presidents in American history.

Barry now need an enduring federal bureaucracy akin to FEMA to really finish things off.

Originally Posted by gunnut

But Carter won a Nobel Peace....oh wait...

Yes. Barry is fast approaching, and probably will eclipse Carter as one of the worst presidents in American history.

Barry now need an enduring federal bureaucracy akin to FEMA to really finish things off.

We're gonna get one, too. Utterly transformative of the United States, and not in a good way.

On the barest-majority party-line vote.

Wildly unpopular, and they do not care. Because they're not playing for the next electoral cycle. They're playing a Long Game, and it's SO obvious that we Americans are not being represented. INTERESTS are.

Did it to ourselves, in the large sense, even though I believe I personally don't have much to apologize for.

Well, 1776 to present day is still respectable.

Back to the debacle that our foreign policy has become in 11 months.

I was going to make this a new thread, but I think it appropriate to post it here:

The Democrats are right. Sleazy bribes and pork payoffs didn't start with their government health care takeover bill. They've been doling out taxpayer-funded goodies for votes all year. Harry Reid's latest Cash for Cloture deals are the culmination of Washington's 2009 shopping spree at our expense.

Go back to January and February. The multitrillion-dollar stimulus bill was the mother of all legislative Christmas trees. The ruling party used the economic downturn to redistribute wealth from struggling Americans to favored congressional districts, phantom districts and special interests from golf-cart makers to fly-by-night beauty salons.

According to a new study by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, Democratic districts have raked in nearly twice as much porkulus money as GOP districts -- without regard to the actual economic suffering and job loss in those districts. In fact, the researchers found that far more stimulus money went to higher-income areas than to lower-income areas.

That includes Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's backyard -- where a $54 million no-bid contract was awarded to a firm with little experience to relocate a luxury Bay Area wine train due to flood concerns.

And it includes Barack Obama's home state of Illinois, which reaped the single biggest earmark in the porkulus bill -- $1 billion for the dubious FutureGen near-zero emissions "clean coal" plant earmark championed by disgraced Democrat and former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin.

And it includes Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's backyard -- where he secured billions in high-speed rail stimulus earmarks from which he plans to fund a pie-in-the-sky public transportation line from Los Angeles to Las Vegas.

When taxpayers objected to business as usual masquerading as economic recovery, New York Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer sneered: "You lost." He jibed on the Senate floor while wagging a grabby finger, "And let me say this to all of the chattering class that so much focuses on those little, tiny, yes, porky amendments: The American people really don't care." The "American people" Schumer was referring to, of course, were the privileged minority of stimulus beneficiaries -- not the rest of us "chattering" dissenters stuck with the bill for those billions in "little, tiny, yes, porky amendments."

No legislation has been immune to congressional shakedown. After the Congressional Black Caucus balked loudly enough, Democratic Rep. Barney Frank -- chairman of the House Financial Services Committee -- larded up the majority's Wall Street regulatory "reform" bill with $4 billion in payoffs to minority special interests -- including former failed Air America radio partner Inner City Broadcasting Corp.

The cash-strapped firm is run by Percy Sutton, a New York City crony of Charlie Rangel's and Al Sharpton's. The money will come out of the ever-morphing TARP bank bailout fund -- which went from a toxic assets purchase plan to a capital injection plan, back to a toxic assets purchase plan, then to a life insurance company bailout and on to an auto-supplier bailout.

Leading the charge for the Cash for Cronies of Color drive: California Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters, who had already extracted $12 million in TARP funds for OneUnited, a minority-owned bank that is one of her key campaign donors and a company in which both Waters and her husband own massive amounts of stock.

Which brings us to Demcare, the latest wealth redistribution scheme disguised as health care reform. In addition to the infamous $300 million "Louisiana Purchase" for Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu and the (at least) $45 million "Cornhusker Kickback" for sellout Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Harry Reid threw around other, less-publicized gobs of cash for cloture votes to cut off debate and ram the bill through. He tossed in a Hospital Helper of $100 million to Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., whose re-election bid is in hot water.

There are bennies for insurance companies and hospitals in Michigan, and "frontier freebies" for hospitals in Montana, South Dakota, North Dakota and Wyoming. There's a New England's Special Syrup for Vermont and Massachusetts -- who will get similar (though less generous) special treatment by the feds to that of Nebraska in covering Medicaid expansion costs. Combined with Nebraska's tab, the exclusive clique's payoffs will cost taxpayers at least $1.2 billion over 10 years.

There's also an ACORN/community organizer-friendly provision for minority health bureaucracies that was sought by Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., according to John McCormack of the Weekly Standard.

And there's a $10 billion socialized medicine sop to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders for "community health clinics" serving in essence as universal health care satellite offices. "We are talking about a revolution," Sanders enthused during the Senate's sneaky Sunday session.

No, revolution will come when taxpayers have a chance to kick these reverse Santa Clauses posing as saviors out of office. It can't happen a minute too soon.

Michelle Malkin : Beltway Christmas: Cash for Corruptocrats - Townhall.com

From PowerLine:

Obama's foreign policy bears its criminal fruit
December 21, 2009 Posted by Paul at 10:03 PM
President Obama's kowtowing to anti-American dictators was a source of embarrassment throughout the first year of his presidency. Now, as his second year approaches, Obama's Carteresque tendencies are producing real-world consequences that border on the criminal.

Exhibit A is Lebanon. The freedom agenda of President Bush's first administration helped produce the Cedar Revolution. After Syria sponsored the assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, the Syrians, under pressure from a newly assertive U.S. government, withdrew from Lebanon ending 30 years of occupation. There was hope that an international tribunal would arraign Syrian dictator Bashar Assad for the murder of Harriri, and that Lebanon would become a genuine Arab democracy.

But now, as Jonathan Tobin explains, these hopes have been dashed. Indeed, the situation in Lebanon is so bad that Hariri's son, Saad, has just journeyed to Damascus to pay tribute to his father's murderer. Syrian troops have not returned to Lebanon, but they don't need to - Hezbollah, a proxy for both Iran and Syria, supplies the muscle. Meanwhile, Syria's influence is again unchallenged in Beirut, as Hariri's visit demonstrates.

What happened? For one thing, Israel failed to defeat Hezbollah during the 2006 war. But according to the New York Times, no less, the main factor in Lebanon's national humiliation and downfall is President Obama's decision to "engage" Syria and its butcher of a leader:

[T]]he United States and the West have chosen to engage with Syria, not isolate it. And Saudi Arabia, which has long backed Mr. Hariri and competed with Syria for influence here, reconciled with the Syrians earlier this year, leaving them a freer hand to guide politics in Lebanon as they once did.

Or, as Tobin puts it, "those who thought they had the West's backing for resisting the thugs of Damascus have been forced to swallow their pride and swear loyalty to Assad in order to save their lives." Thus, Lebanon stands humiliated, its hopes for freedom and independence dashed probably for at least another generation.

But the real humiliated party is the United States. Its president, with his fetish for engagement with tyrants and his indifference (at best) to the aspirations of those who oppose tyranny, has sold out the Lebanese. And for what? A Nobel Peace Prize awarded by those who share the same absurd fetish and the same disgusting indifference, plus the well-earned contempt of the tyrants he shamelessly appeases.

UPDATE: For a more optimistic, though hardly sanguine, view of the situation in Lebanon see this piece from last month by Peter Berkowitz, which we linked to here. Peter's analysis was written before Hariri's highly symbolic trip to Damascus.

MORE: From Michael Totten.

I concur they should return to the practices the republican party used 2001-2004. Hey anyone catch that vote on the defense appropriations Both parties horse trade for votes both have used earmarks. If we actually returned to the practices of 2004 we'd not only have twice as many we wouldnt know who inserted them. 60 percent is not a slim majority.

Obama inherits disaster and some hope it will get worse. We won't really know his foriegn policy sucuss or failure for at least a few years. It is not unreasonable to think if Karzai thinks we will stay forever his govt will never develop a real central army. It's been 8 years already. Lets see what happens in 2011 before we pronounce failure.

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

Lets see what happens in 2011 before we pronounce failure.

Like the Democrats did with Iraq?

Originally Posted by TopHatter

Like the Democrats did with Iraq?

I was speaking apolitically. I still think Irq was a maistake. We have been succussful there and I hope the succuss is ongoing but it was a distraction from Afganistan any way you slice it.

If it's just a partisan matter then yeah republicans can call him a failure and democrats can call the people saying that treasonous in complete role reversal What the hell they already reversed roles on the defense appropriations bill. I think we really need a third paty if only to shake up the awful partisan games both sides now play. They are a dis service to all of us.

Originally Posted by TopHatter

Like the Democrats did with Iraq?

Not fair! They voted for it before voting against it.

Other than Afghanistan this is a pretty weak list...

The White House’s betrayal of US allies in eastern and central Europe by reneging on the deal to establish Third Site missile defences sent a clear signal that Washington was more concerned about appeasing Moscow than defending its friends. It symbolized all that is wrong with Obama’s foreign policy – including the willingness to curry favour with brutal enemies while giving the boot to some of America’s closest partners.

Mehhh their public didn't want missile defense.

Not only did Barack Obama order the closure of the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay within hours of becoming president, but he also embarked upon ending the entire War on Terror, which was swiftly renamed an Overseas Contingency Operation. Nearly a year later the threat from al-Qaeda remains just as great, if not greater, but President Obama refuses to describe the battle in terms of a global war, and balks at identifying the enemy – Islamist terrorists. At the same time he has given the enemy a huge propaganda victory by endlessly castigating the Bush administration for supposedly “torturing” terrorist suspects, and apologizing for the counter-terror strategy of the previous US government.

Name change, moving prisoners from gitmo which had became an embarrassment, still hunting AQ.

The Obama administration has certainly been consistent in its strategy of cuddling up to America’s enemies while kicking its friends. True to form the White House and State Department rushed to condemn the constitutional removal of left-wing, America-hating, Hugo-Chavez-backed despot Manuel Zelaya from power in Honduras, and his temporary replacement with pro-American Speaker of the House Robert Micheletti. Whatever happened to the good old days when the United States actually fought against Marxist tyrants in Latin America and backed anti-communists?

Can't come out and back a coup against a guy who actually got elected. Thought Obama accepted the November 29th election...

I’m no fan of Gordon Brown, but the treatment of the Prime Minister at the hands of the White House on his visit to Washington in March was an appalling humiliation for Great Britain. The PM was received as though he were the leader of a third world banana republic rather than America’s closest ally, denied an official press conference and even a dinner. To add insult to injury, Brown was packed off with 25 discount DVDs ranging from Toy Story to The Wizard of Oz, which couldn’t even be played in Britain.

Ok he is a idiot.

The last time I checked, Barack Obama was not a subject of imperial Japan, but his bow before Emperor Akihito was a scene straight out of the 1930s. A simple handshake with the descendent of Emperor Hirohito would have sufficed, but the president opted for a full-blown bow when the two met in Tokyo in November. It is one thing to pay respect to a monarch, but quite another for an American president to prostrate himself and his nation before a foreign leader. Needless to say, eyebrows were raised not only in America but across Asia as well. This was far from an isolated incident. Obama did exactly the same when he met with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia at the G-20 in April.

See above.

Barack Obama’s decision to throw a bust of Sir Winston Churchill out of the Oval Office within days of taking power set the tone for his foreign policy. It sent a clear signal that the president cared little about the Anglo-American Special Relationship and the transatlantic alliance in general. It spoke volumes about Obama’s disdain for Britain, a nation that he has never mentioned in a major policy speech, as well as his scorn for the kind of powerful, assertive leadership that Churchill embodied.

Don't think anyone cared, maybe see two above. But I don't think Churchill was president here...

There can be no doubt that the three months of dithering by President Obama over whether to deploy more forces to Afghanistan was highly damaging to the United States, and sowed considerable uncertainty within the NATO alliance. When Obama finally made an announcement in December to send an additional 30,000 troops to the battlefield, a huge step in the right direction, his decision was immediately undercut by the simultaneous announcement of an exit timetable, starting in 18 months. It is hard to imagine Churchill or Roosevelt declaring in the middle of the Second World War that they would fight the Nazis for another year and a half, and then start withdrawing their forces on the grounds of cost.

Wimpy of course.

If Barack Obama makes a New Year’s resolution, I hope it will be that he stops appeasing Tehran. The White House’s strategy of engagement with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been nothing short of a spectacular failure. While Obama has been busy emulating the European Union’s dismal Common Foreign and Security Policy and sending polite video messages, the Mullahs and their puppets have been busy advancing their nuclear weapons programme, enriching uranium, supplying arms to the Taliban, capturing British sailors, test-firing long-range missiles, threatening the annihilation of Israel, and killing pro-democracy protestors.

The last dude didn't burn their villages, rape their daughters and steal their crops and herds either.

’ve included this in the list because it illustrates the extraordinary lengths to which the Obama administration will go to appease the most evil tyrannies on the face of the earth. In October Obama extended the hand of friendship to the brutal regime in Khartoum led by Omar Hassan al-Bashir, responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousands in Darfur, offering to lift sanctions if there were “concrete steps in a new direction”. The moral bankruptcy of this approach was summed up by Obama’s hugely controversial special envoy to Sudan, retired Air Force Major General J. Scott Gration:
“We’ve got to think about giving out cookies. Kids, countries — they react to gold stars, smiley faces, handshakes, agreements, talk, engagement.”

Above.

Barack Obama’s Strasbourg speech will go down in history as one of the most embarrassing moments ever for a US president on foreign soil. As I wrote earlier, “The President of the most powerful nation on earth traveled to France to deliver a grovelling, massive mea culpa for US foreign policy, including the War on Terror. Utter humiliation for America on European soil in front of a largely French and German audience who bitterly opposed the liberation of Iraq – not even Jacques Chirac could have dreamt it up.”

Won him a few friends, at a time when he needed to ask for more troops. Could have said Bush strong of course and see where that got him in Europe.