Bruce and I have similar worldviews, but very different ways of expressing them. Yesterday, shortly after reading Glenn Reynolds’s post saying Obama should resign for dispatching law enforcement to arrest* the man who made a crude film attacking the Muslim prophet Mohammed, I shared the link with some conservative Facebook friends, asking if they agreed with Glenn’s conclusion.
At the time, I wasn’t ready to post on the topic, wanted to sort out my thoughts a bit before I did. A few moments after I posed my question on Facebook, I checked the blog and found that Bruce has already run with the story; he, however, did not include as question mark as I had. My co-blogger agrees with Glenn; Barack Obama should resign.
Now, given that Mr. Obama’s resignation would mean the inauguration of Joe Biden as President of the United States, I tend to be wary of resignation as an option, preferring instead defeat at the ballot box. And the Democrat’s actions this past week (not to mention what we’ve learned in the past two weeks) show him to be a most ineffective chief executive, leading from behind, as it were, particularly in regards to this crude and offensive film.
The White House dispatched the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to call a crackpot preacher with a tiny congregation and ask him to end his mean-spirited diatribes. The Obama team asked YouTube to remove the film. And now, they’ve gone and gotten the filmmaker arrested. He may have misrepresented the Muslim prophet in a mean-spirited manner, but the First Amendment protects his right to say offensive things.
The First Amendment also protects the rights of others to criticize the film for its flaws and defend the faith he faults. That is how critics should respond.
And that is how the President of the United States should have responded to those, including Egypt’s President, who demanded the United States prosecute the filmmaker and/or censor the film.
Eugene Volokh thinks “suppression” of such films “would likely lead to more riots and more deaths, not less. Here’s why”:
Behavior that gets rewarded, gets repeated. (Relatedly, “once you have paid him the Dane-geld, you never get rid of the Dane.”) Say that the murders in Libya lead us to pass a law banning some kinds of speech that Muslims find offensive or blasphemous, or reinterpreting our First Amendment rules to make it possible to punish such speech under some existing law.
What then will extremist Muslims see? They killed several Americans (maybe itself a plus from their view). In exchange, they’ve gotten America to submit to their will. And on top of that, they’ve gotten back at blasphemers, and deter future blasphemy. A triple victory.
Bold in original. Via Patterico. “Giving in to the terrorists incentivizes further terrorism,” observes Ilya Somin, “while refusing to do so reduces the risk of future violence.” (Via Instpundit.)
In seeking to suppress this film and prosecute the filmmaker, the president has given in to the terrorists. He should instead have stood for free speech and encourage his Islamic interlocutors to challenge the film with words and ideas rather than with threats and violence.
RELATED: The Picture That Should Cost Obama His Job. (Via Instapundit.)
*Apparently as per the comment below, he was not arrested, just taken in for questioning. If they just wanted him for questioning, why then would they need that many law enforcement officials (as depicted in the picture included in Bruce’s post).
FROM THE COMMENTS: “According to several clips” reader Sandi
viewed there was NO ARREST, and don’t understand why ya’all keep repeating that it was.
That said I think the voluntary questioning on possible parole violation thing was a pretext to try and pin something on him.
UPDATE: Filmmaker released, now in hiding.
Resignation is not gonna happen, so it’s beside the point.
BTW, is there any evidence that the President called for the midnight arrest or had a hand in it? If not, why should he resign over this?
Islam, by nature, and especially in its current Middle Eastern incarnation, can only see any appeasement as weakness to be further exploited. It will only lead to further demands for accomodation to Muslim status and power.
Violence between Islam and the West will continue no matter what the West does. They are incompatible and antagonistic systems.
With Islam, it’s either/or. Either you accept their parameters and rules…in which case you participate in your own dhimmitude. Or you set your own and endure their acting out. You may get violence and reaction, but you at least keep your own cultural and civilizational self-respect.
According to several clips I viewed there was NO ARREST, and don’t understand why ya’all keep repeating that it was.
That said I think the voluntary questioning on possible parole violation thing was a pretext to try and pin something on him.
Why are the Feds involved in a parole violation of a state crime?
Sandi, the issues are in multitude with this Arrest/voluntary trip to the station.
A: The FBI went after the identity to find who it was.
B: Those are Deputies “escorting” the supposed director in all those multitude of photos … They should not be involved with any “voluntary” surrendering to custody on Federal Parole violation questioning. If it is not the Federal parole and is state, then the feds didn’t need to be involved at all.
C: Why were the press notified they were bringing the person in for questioning and showed up to film the apprehending … err …escorting of the individual?
D: Anyone wanting to attack this person, or his family, or even just the neighborhood now knows where it is, and with the several shots of the “director’s” front door will know what house and area to attack … seeing as they’ve already killed and rioted and claimed this as an excuse, that is an altogether likely thing.
To put it another way…this only seems to work if you are a ‘thinking’ liberal, but imagine the consternation if GWB had the FBI investigate and bring in for questioning those directors who made films showing him assassinated, or were otherwise extremely critical of him, like say Micheal Moore?
Margret Thatcher was vociferously criticized by Rushdie often over the years. When the Fatwa was put out for him to be killed she sent people to protect him immediately. She didn’t criticize him and have MI5 and MI6 harass him and lead those wanting to kill him to his location.
She stated it was his right and they’d damned well protect him and his right.
The question to ask here is, why is Obama so afraid of Russia?
I don’t know how you can call them “interlocutors” when they are raping and murdering people.
Please stop creating stories to fit your narrative.
http://www.timesnews.net/article/9051689/feds-interview-but-dont-arrest-filmmaker-connected-with-anti-islamic-movie
Walker said Nakoula traveled voluntarily in a squad car with deputies.
“He went to the Cerritos station to talk with probation officers. He’s not under any arrest,” Walker said.
“The probation department is reviewing the case of Nakoula, who was previously convicted on bank fraud charges and was banned from using computers or the Internet as part of his sentence. The review is aimed at learning whether Nakoula violated the terms of his five-year probation.”
Turns out the new right wing hero has been arrested for intent to sell meth, many tax crimes and felony bank fraud. The felony was his last crime and he is not allowed to use a computer as part of his probation.
So when it turns out he might be using a computer the feds see this as a potential parole violation.
Thus he gets interviewed to see if he violated his terms of parole and committed another felony.
Its pretty simple. But you protect him and create stories just to sully the President whom you hate. Why? Obama has many many faults. But you ruin your credibility when you make these stories up.
#9: “Turns out the new right wing hero has been arrested for intent to sell meth, many tax crimes and felony bank fraud. The felony was his last crime and he is not allowed to use a computer as part of his probation. So when it turns out he might be using a computer the feds see this as a potential parole violation. Thus he gets interviewed to see if he violated his terms of parole and committed another felony. Its pretty simple. But you protect him and create stories just to sully the President whom you hate.”
Of course an O-bot like mike takes the position that federal probation officers showing up at Nakoula’s home and transporting him to their station to be interviewed concerning any possible violations of his parole is just a federal agency carrying out its routine law enforcement duties, just like it does on any other day of the week. Because if there’s anything the Obama Administration has made a priority, it’s law enforcement, right?
I mean, we’re talking about an Administration whose DOJ dismissed the New Black Panthers voter intimidation case, has an internal policy not to pursue black-on-white hate crimes, declines to prosecute financial criminals like Corzine, and refuses to comply with congressional subpoenas. And we’ve seen this Administration’s attitude concerning the enforcement of our immigration laws–first, by issuing an executive memo declaring deportation laws subordinate to “prosecutorial discretion” (essentially nullifying them), and then enacting The Dream Act via executive fiat because it failed in Congress but “was the right thing to do.” And let’s not forget that this Administration’s party had an admitted illegal alien speak at their national convention.
But yeah…federal probation authorities are so ON TOP of their duties that a parolee even touching a computer in violation of his parole conditions should expect a visit from the feds at any moment. Routine. Happens every day. Nothing unusual about it at all…bwahahahahaha!
“Obama has many many faults. But you ruin your credibility when you make these stories up.”
Yeah, Dan. With this post, you’ve lost all credibility with mike. I suspect the only way you can possibly get it back is to focus on REAL Obama faults. You know, the ones mike agrees with, such as:
–how Obama has been too amenable to compromising with Republicans and failing to detect their nefarious plans to stab him in the back after he gives them everything they demand in proposed legislation;
–how Obama hasn’t been liberal enough, i.e., getting a fully-nationalized healthcare systems implemented, raising taxes on the rich & corporations, outlawing all domestic energy production except solar and wind, etc.
–how Obama is too intelligent and his rhetoric is too complex & brilliant for most idiot Americans understand all the wonderful things he’s done for them;…
See Dan? mike’s not saying you can’t criticize Obama or his Administration. He’s just saying you should focus on Obama’s “many many” REAL faults, like those I’ve listed above. Only THEN can you expect to have any credibility with people like him.
Oh, lighten up and get off your high-horse mike. No one is ‘making up stories.’ Ask yourself this: Why does it take 4 or 5 Sheriff’s Deupties to bring in one individual for ‘voluntary questioning’ (with a towel over his face to boot).
Yes, the man is a scumbag; but he’s being used as a scapegoat to cover the assess of a feckless President and SecState. Glad you’re okay with that.
Barack Obama follows Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood’s lead. Why?: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/09/16/Morsi-jump-Obama-how-high
This is just another manifestation of Barack Obama’s hatred of America & the Constitution. He’s betrayed the Constitution & should resign. Will he? No. Obama is imploding anyway.
You are a very civilized fella, Dan. You refer to the film as crude, misrepresentative and mean-spirited. I’d like to point out that a professional, accurate and historical film about Islam’s founder would provoke riots and threats as well. In part because Muslims abhor representations of him now, also because it would be done by non-Muslims, and if it followed the canonical texts, it would be very unflattering.
Nakoula is not the right wing’s “newest hero”. The issue here is government intrusion into something that is not illegal. Focus on the issue, Mike, not the shiny object designed to distract you from the truth.
Of course, it’s good to see the State Department condemn “The Book of Mormon” musical as inciting hatred.
Oh wait, our Sec of State watched that w/o comment.
*You know who else “literally” sends brown shirts to the doors of Americans? UPS.
I don’t know how to more succinctly convey how inane it is to dwell on the fact that the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputies who took him in for questioning wore khaki uniforms. I mean, argue they’re figurative brown shirts if you like. But I very much doubt Reynolds thinks L.A. County Sheriffs are at all like Nazi storm troopers. His “literally” is about as illegitimate a rhetorical ploy as you’ll see.
And what are we to make of this excerpt from his post (emphasis added)? “By sending — literally — brownshirted enforcers to engage in — literally — a midnight knock at the door of a man for the non-crime of embarrassing the President of the United States and his administration, President Obama violated that oath.” There are all sorts of reasons federal authorities might want to talk to this guy, given world events at the moment. The presumption that the real reason is that he embarrassed Obama is totally unsupported by any evidence, and raises a significant question: Why should the Obama Administration be embarrassed by the film or the reaction of the Muslims who rioted, apparently in protest of it?
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/what-instapundit-get-wrong-about-nakoula-basseley-nakoula-and-civil-liberties/262454/
mike,
The First Amendment is become a real problem with liberals, what with all those assault weapon type guns in fundamentalist Christian hands and the fish-eating Katholicks not providing contraception far and wide and now a “film maker” upsetting Bette Midler.
International PEN states this objective: to emphasise the role of literature in the development of mutual understanding and world culture; to fight for freedom of expression; and to act as a powerful voice on behalf of writers harassed, imprisoned and sometimes killed for their views.
When Salman Rushdie for a death fatwah on his head, there was fear everywhere for the clerks in bookstores who would handle and sell a copy of The Satanic Verses. Intelligent people were worried sick about the unconditional results of “insulting” radicals of Islam.
Rushdie went into protected hiding and Islam and the fatwah won.
What this “film maker” did is to stir up a hornets nest to some degree or another. Now, it would appear, that he has managed to go from making meth and being on parole to being the possible human sacrifice to both radical Islam and the corruption of the First Amendment at one and the same time.
You apparently, have the typical liberal’s “nuanced” view of the First Amendment as a sort of situation ethics guideline that the politburo can ignore when the First Amendment “guarantees” seem inconvenient.
This “film-make” is no hero of the right wing. We do not want our men and women put in harms way because of his foolishness. But, we place the Constitution higher than you or any of your “nuanced” views. The First Amendment covers this guy. If we censor him, we can easily censor the little stuff, like campaigning for gay marriage or living with three mules in your bedroom.
rusty,
I am not up to speed on the details of this case.
If the guy was wanted for questioning in a normal flow of things relating to his parole, the “optics” could have been handled a whole lot better.
If he “volunteered” to come in and he wanted his face covered so that the radicals could not identify him, he had a lot of options open to him and so did the police department.
The photo that has emerged certainly signals a major concern on the part of the police that they considered him a flight risk, or …….. they wanted so have a dramatic photo to show the Islamists that “we….mean….business.”
It is all about the optics. Nothing more. I doubt you have anything more than your own opinion on this.
But we conservatives are guardians of the First Amendment and Constitution in general. So, is this give being scape-goated for a dead ambassador and three others?
Hillary says the film caused the deaths. Ambassador Rice says the film caused the deaths. The government had puny protection on the 9-11 anniversary date.
Just maybe there is culpability beyond the film. (Which I have not seen.)
And then there is YouTube which will not take the film down. Where are you on that issue?
How has this “film maker” caused these issues headlined on Drudge:
War Drums: Syrian Jets Hit Lebanese Territory
Pakistanis Try to Storm U. S. Outpost; 1 Killed
Hardline Islamic TV spurs anti-Americanism in Egypt and beyond
Panetta Warns of War
Netanyahu warns Tehran only months away from nuke weapons trial
U. S. Diplomats in Beirut burnign classified material
LIBYAN OFFICIAL WARNED USA ‘3 DAYS BEFORE ATTACK’
Ambassador Rice: Attack Spontaneous
Libyan president: “Completely unfounded and preposterous’
Video Purports to Show US Ambassador Dragged; Cheers From Crowd
Rushdie: Free speech under threat from “religious extremists”
U.S., allies in Gulf naval exercises as Israel, Iran face off
Dollar hovers near seven-month low; Euro gains
Merkel defends role against citizens ire
Or did Romney cause all of this? And did Obama really succeeding in keeping the lid on a terrible situation all the while he played golf and took multiple exotic vacations and skipped his intel briefings?
#18: “But we conservatives are guardians of the First Amendment and Constitution in general.”
With Obama and his minions in charge, we have to be. Here’s more evidence revealing the Administration’s view of the First Amendment: DOJ official Edward Perez refuses to confirm that the agency will not attempt to criminalize blasphemy [against Islam] in the future.
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/150861/
Resignation would complicate matters. Assuming Obama resigns, and Joe Biden becomes President. does he automatically become the Democratic nominee for President? It would seem the obvious is to elect Mitt Romney, but he has to give compelling reasons, besides his resume, to move the voters. Obama is incompetent whose radical left policies is practically bankrupting the country. Yet, is in a dead heat but has leads in swings states and he enjoys a positive ¨likeability¨over Romney and that seems to be enough to carry him back for another four years. Obama has practically given Romney the gift of election which he has failed to exploit, Obamas domestic failures, the Fed diluting the value of our money, the Middle East Crisis, and equally important, two or three nominations to SCOTUS. More Sonia Sotomayers and Elena Kagens will insure Obama´s legacy for forty more years. A liberal SCOTUS will definitely abridge our First and Second Amendments rights; allow international law to take precedence over establish U.S. Constitutional law and the Constitution of the U.N. will take precedence over our Constitution. The U.N has passed a resolution to criminalize criticism of islam. With a future like that, how can anybody justify voting for Obama?
Turns out the new right wing hero
So, I guess anyone who conservatives say is having his rights abused is a “hero” to them, even if they disagree with what he is saying and is a lowlife. Okay.
Blockquote didn’t work for some reason.
Oh, well then, THAT makes it OK. /sarc
As Ezra Levant has said, the process is the punishment. It is designed to deter free expression. That is more than offensive; it means that America is not a free country.
You’re just making up bullshit. You’re pulling the flight risk thing out of your ass, and the idea that Islamists are scrutinizing American media to determine what kind of business we mean is completely ridiculous. It’s far more likely that the police provided a large escort because of the individual’s new-found notoriety, a precautionary measure that happens all the time in this country.
Which right is violated? Now that we know this person did time in federal prison, and part of his probation upon release involved not working on computers, which of his rights were violated by federal investigators interviewing him about possible parole violations?
When they start rounding up the other people involved in making the video that don’t have criminal records, you might have a point. Until then, you don’t.
Gee, remember when the left used to peot
Gee remember when the left used to protest about how unconscionable and wrong it was for the government to harass and detain people. But It’s okay now that Obama is in charge, I guess.
Exactly. For them, it’s pure partisanship. Whereas for me, it’s principle: I would have the same view of Bush or Romney or Reagan injecting Federal officials where they don’t belong, in apparent retaliation for the person exercising his right to criticize a world religion.
The left is lecturing the right on “lowlife” heroes? Really? The heroes of the progressive left include a klansman (Hugo Black), a rapist (Ernesto Miranda), a cop killer (Mumia Jamal) and a racist psychopathic mass murderer (Che Guevara).
Set aside the fact that the right is not lionizing this individual, just pointing out that his Constitutional rights are being trampled in the name of appeasing Islam. But I guess we cannot expect low-life-worshipping leftists to get that.
#29
I hope you’re not serioulsy equating this to the rounding up of innocent folks and torturing them are you?
A spokesman with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department says Nakoula Basseley Nakoula’s relatives left their Cerritos home about 3:45 a.m. Monday. Deputies gave them a ride and they were reunited with Nakoula, then taken to an undisclosed location.
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula — the man widely credited as being the force behind “Innocence of Muslims” — once cooperated with federal authorities, according to court documents obtained by The Smoking Gun.
The movie, which features an unfavorable portrayal of Muhammad, has prompted violent riots in a number of Arab countries.
The Smoking Gun published a sentencing transcript detailing Nakoula’s cooperation with investigators over the course of a 2009-2010 bank fraud case. Furthermore, Nakoula’s counsel directly mentions the defendant’s “detailed debriefings,” in which Nakoula “implicated Mr. Salamy,” another suspect in the case. “There is no question but that Mr. Salamay at some point is gonna [sic] be indicted if he hasn’t already been.”
(Please excuse me while I explain to Levi what he so clearly misread in my comments.)
I don’t have any idea whether the “film maker” was a flight risk. Neither do you. But, if the police had reason to believe so, that would account for the gang of them taking the guy in “voluntarily.”
If the police were trying to safely escort him for his own safety, I doubt seriously that he would be as opened chested to a weapon as he was to a photographer. They would have used the surround, duck, cover and run method. Instead, they offered up the perp walk.
We have a guy who is the center of blame from Ambassador Rice and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and (by extension) Barack Obama being a”voluntarily accompanied by police” for parole violation and a very public photo of his “non-arrest”. You apparently can’t see anything remotely curious about the absence of the ACLU and Amnesty International in being totally AWOL in defending this guy’s freedom of speech. (Why didn’t the man use his hands to hide his face in the photo? Were they “available” to him? Or was he “voluntarily” hand-cuffed for his own protection?)
Whether or not the government has probable cause and a quick and clear explanation of their actions, the same government has made it abundantly clear that the government is mighty upset with the man’s speech and this “coincidental” photo makes the government’s case knottier.
You are being the usual useful idiot here. If George Bush were President over all of this, you would be demanding he be skinned alive and his head pegged on the White House gate.
It’s very simple: Levi, mike, and the other liberal trolls are demanding that someone be arrested and imprisoned for blasphemy.
And of course the Islamists know this, Levi; they are aware that you and your fellow liberals are a) insane anti-Christian and anti-Jewish bigots, b) desperate to keep your Obamamessiah in power by any means necessary, and c) cowards who will collapse before the mere threat of violence.
In short, you will support them because a) they hate and kill Jews and Christians like you wish you could, b) they will pull strings to stabilize and support Obama if you do as they say, and c) you are pissing your pants at the thought of what they have already demonstrated they will do to you.
NDT,
Levi is a statist and he would be perfectly comfortable being Dhimmi so long as the Caliphate allows him to negotiate his way around the mall without threatening his survival.
He will accept the theocracy and the imposed moral code and the fundamental mentality, because for the first time he is impressed with the certainty of slavery or death if he doesn’t bow obsequiously to his oppressor. Jihad can work wonders on the spines of people like Levi.
Dan
Thanks for clarifying your post by making your post reflect the facts of the case
However now the “Feds” are HELPING his family by moving them away from their home to keep them safe!
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/family-anti-islam-filmmaker-joins-hiding/story?id=17255528#.UFfFzIHx1yU
“”They decided they would be safer where they could move about and live a normal life,” said Steve Whitmore, a spokesman for the Sheriff’s Department. “All we did was pick them up and reunite them with Mr. Nakoula.”
Looks like you will have to re-write this post again Dan as indeed Free Speech is alive and well.
Maybe now I think we can rightly ask why this meth dealing fraudster is getting special treatment from the Gov?
Video showing U.S. Ambassador Stevens being dragged out of Consulate in Benghazi, Libya:
http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com/2012/09/via-breitbart.html
Notice what the Obama Regime is not doing: Standing up for the First Amendment.
I wonder if Levi and lower-case-mike would be so sanguine if artists who create anti-Christian art were being harassed by the Government. I think we know the answer.
Anybody else remember Newsweak’s bullshit story on flushing Korans at Club Gitmo?
Figure Behind Muhammad Movie Also Connected to Anti-Mormon Site
September 14, 2012
Steve Klein, one of the men behind the anti-Muslim video tied to riots in the Middle East and North Africa, doesn’t restrict his fervor to attacks on Islam: He also runs one of the most prominent anti-Mormon sites on the web.
Klein, an insurance agent and Christian activist from California, has become the face of the movie, “Innocence of Muslims,” promoting it in the press as movie’s director is, reportedly, in hiding.
His most recent foray into religious provocation though, was hardly his first. In 1977, Klein founded a group called Courageous Christians United, whose main focus is to expose Mormonism and Islam — both “false religions” and “cults” according to Klein — with protests outside their places of worship, low-rent media productions like the now-viral Youtube video, and SEO-efficient web properties.
Could someone please go over Obama’s motivation here? The guy is two months away from an election, but he just up and decides to have one guy semi-arrested because he is supposed to feel embarrassed by him? That doesn’t make sense to me, does it make sense to any of you? Obama would go out of his way for this small measure of revenge? Obama’s so vindictive he would take the risk of appearing to semi-arrest someone for engaging in free speech two months before an election? Why did Obama just send his secret police against this one man and not the others? Why would he immediately let him go? If you’re going to take on the political heat of having someone arrested for free speech because you’re lusting for vengeance, why would you turn around and let him go so easily?
I have an alternative explanation – the Republican candidate stepped in it big time, there is no way to defend what he said/did coherently, so conservatives make up a story about how Obama is sending out his personal guard to arrest people for talking and he should resign. This is what conservatism is all about: taking a story about Republicans making stupid, election-losing statements, and making it about why the Democratic opponent should resign. I think that’s a simpler explanation, wouldn’t you agree?
Nice straw man, but…… you forgot to reveal what “the Republican candidate” said or did that is “stepping in it big time.”
Levi: What did Romney say/do which has caused us to give him cover?
Spell it out, spit it our, edumacate us so we can accurately see your straw man.
@rusty,
I think this goes back to Sec. Clinton enjoying the Mormom musical.
No Mormons rioted, or hunted these people down.
@mike I guess that Andrew Jackson ‘helped the Cherokee move’ as well? Or the Baatan Death March was a “government assisted relocation.”
You choose to ignore that rather than defend their right to free speech, the government instead condemned their actions.
@Levi,
What you choose to fail to see is that Romney’s statement matches Sec Clinton’s prior to backpedalling. What you also choose to fail to see is that ‘spontaneous demonstrations’ don’t include Rocket Launchers compromised intelligence, and Obama ignoring intelligence briefs to go golfing.
Now hush Levi, the adults are talking.
Mitt Romney has his No Apology book, which he uses to attack Obama, contrasting himself to the President he claims goes around the country apologizing for America. So Mitt Romney sees a tweet by some foreign services worker who is besieged by a crowd of angry rioters in Egypt, and decides he’s going to use this tweet as an example of Obama apologizing for America, even though it wasn’t an apology and it wasn’t a statement made by Obama.
To be fair to ol’ Mitt, this was before the Libya episode occurred, so Mitt probably thought this was going to some low-interest news event and he’d be able to get away with a little potshot that happened to go nicely with his little No Apology theme. I’m sure he didn’t think it would receive a lot of scrutiny and that he’d be moving on to the next thing in no time.
Then, of course, the Libya situation started, and suddenly the issue became much more serious. Americans are dying, Americans are in danger, and when you look around, and Mitt Romney is standing there having just made a statement about how Obama sympathizes with the mob. Again, when Romney said that, nobody had been hurt, and it was a nice little bone to toss to the conservative base who very much believe that Obama does sympathize with terrorists, Islamists, rioters, whatever. That’s why he has his No Apology book in the first place.
However, trying to score crappy little political points like that just kind of looks horrible when an issue you thought was going to be minor and insignificant turns into a life or death situation for some people. It was a nice little throw-away line to say that Obama sympathizes with the mob, but what are the implications of that sympathy now that people are dead? If he had sympathy with the mob, does that mean he’s glad to see them breaching the walls and killing Americans?
And by “harassed”, we mean “denied taxpayer dollars to create it”.
It’s funny how both the screaming Levi and mike insist that denying funds equals censorship and demand that all forms of anti-Christian and anti-Jewish art and activity receive public funding — but then want blasphemy laws preventing slurs against Islam.
And look at that, rusty; unlike your Obama Party and the gay and lesbian community, Mormons have not been rioting, burning down buildings, and demanding anti-blasphemy laws.
So why don’t you comment on that? Why do you and your fellow gay liberals support blasphemy laws banning “offensive” statements about Islam, but then insist on taxpayer support of anti-Christian, anti-Mormon, and anti-Jewish art?
Because, Levi, as I already explained:
You and your fellow liberals, including Obama, are a) insane anti-Christian and anti-Jewish bigots, b) desperate to keep your Obamamessiah in power by any means necessary, and c) cowards who will collapse before the mere threat of violence.
You and Obama will support anything the Islamists tell you to do because a) they hate and kill Jews and Christians like you wish you could, b) they will pull strings to stabilize and support Obama if you do as they say, and c) you are pissing your pants at the thought of what they have already demonstrated they will do to you and Obama’s legacy in the Middle East if you don’t do as they say.
In short, they know you support their goals and are desperate to be re-elected. Hence why Obama did exactly what Egypt’s President ordered him to do and had the guy arrested.
Unfortunately, Obama has screamed and pissed that Romney is responsible for the actions of anyone who has ever worked for him, including people who worked at Bain both after and before Romney was in charge there.
Therefore, Obama is being held to the same rules. You can either follow them or admit that Obama is a lying and incompetent hypocrite who cannot manage by or follow the rules that he demands of others.
And this was precious:
Unfortunately, Barack Obama screamed and pissed about and politicized the death of American citizens with your full endorsement and support.
Therefore, Obama is being held to the same rules. You can either follow them or admit that Obama is a lying and incompetent hypocrite who cannot manage by or follow the rules that he demands of others.
NDT, I knew I could count on you, showering me with your sweet attention. . .
Commenting on Mormons . . . Well just seems like Mr Klein has more opinions
Klein claims credit for inspiring “Sam Bacile” to produce “The Innocence of Muslims,” promising him he would be “the next Theo Van Gogh,” referring to the Dutch columnist who was murdered by a Muslim extremist. Of the attacks in Libya, Klein said, “We went into this knowing this was probably going to happen.
But there you go again, NDT, tossing rolls of toilet paper.
Wrong! Bucko. Immediately upon assuming office Obama went around the WORLD apologizing for America.
1. Apology to France and Europe (“America Has Shown Arrogance”) [April 3, 2009]
2. Apology to the Muslim World (“We Have Not Been Perfect”)[ Jan. 27, 2009]
President Obama, interview with Al Arabiya, January 27, 2009.[2]
My job to the Muslim world is to communicate (…) 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.
3. Apology to the Summit of the Americas (“At Times We Sought to Dictate Our Terms”)[President Obama, address to the Summit of the Americas opening ceremony, Hyatt Regency, Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, April 17, 2009.]
4. Apology at the G-20 Summit of World Leaders (“Some Restoration of America’s Standing in the World”) [London, United Kingdom, April 2, 2009.]
5. Apology for the War on Terror (“We Went off Course”) [Washington, D.C., May 21, 2009.]
6. Apology for Guantanamo in France (“Sacrificing Your Values”) [Strasbourg, France, April 3, 2009.]
7. Apology before the Turkish Parliament (“Our Own Darker Periods in Our History”) [Speech by President Obama to the Turkish Parliament, Ankara, Turkey, April 6, 2009.]
8. Apology for U.S. Policy toward the Americas (“The United States Has Not Pursued and Sustained Engagement with Our Neighbors”) [ “Choosing a Better Future in the Americas,” April 16, 2009.]
9. Apology for the Mistakes of the CIA (“Potentially We’ve Made Some Mistakes”) [Remarks by the President to CIA employees, CIA Headquarters, Langley, Virginia, April 20, 2009.]
10. Apology for Guantanamo in Washington (“A Rallying Cry for Our Enemies”) [Washington, D.C., May 21, 2009.]
And then there is Egypt, Germany, Japan and India all later in the year. The new President sure had a burr in his saddle about undermining the morale of his own State Department, Military and CIA in hopes of scoring points as Mr. World Citizen who had no compunctions about “putting the United States in its “place” as he sees the picture.
Do we know even yet how Obama views America and its “place” in the world?
Dinesh D’Souza sure gives an overwhelmingly logical assessment. I recommend Obama’s America to those who can read. Even if you wear blinders and kneepads.
That’s not an apology. I think invading Iraq and assuming everything would go perfectly and we’d be in and out and it would be cheap and there would be weapons of mass destruction all over the place was arrogant, and I’ll be the Europeans who questioned our evidence and the morality of invasive wars think so, too.
That’s not an apology. It’s also demonstrably true. Lots of innocent civilians died in Iraq both directly and indirectly as a result of our invasion. Could you possibly disagree with that? Do you think we should go around the world telling everyone that we have been perfect?
What’s so horrible about that? Would you recommend he went around saying he would bomb all the Muslims into submission?
That’s not an apology. We did more or less force Western Civilization to invade Iraq.
That’s not an apology. We do need to restore our standing after George Bush shredded our credibility in Iraq.
That’s not an apology. We did go of course when we invaded Iraq.
That’s not an apology. Guantanamo is a legal black hole that represents the anti-thesis of due process and justice.
That’s not an apology. Boy, this is getting stupid. Should we pretend we never had darker periods in our history? Should we be going into foreign countries telling people that we’ve never made mistakes, we’ve never had dark periods, and that we’re perfect?
That’s not an apology.
That’s not an apology. We have made mistakes, the CIA especially. And if you asked anybody that’s in the CIA or intelligence community, they would completely agree that we’ve made mistakes.
That’s not an apology, and we know it’s been a rallying cry for our enemies.
After taking stock, I don’t see a single apology. What I do see is a lot of criticism of George Bush’s foreign policy, which I guess is what has you confused, since most conservatives seem to think the Iraq War is a flawlessly-executed masterstroke, I guess? Yeah, we have no reason to be contrite for that little gift to the world, do we?
Contrite being my word, before you get too excited. I happen to think we have a lot to be sorry for, but I wouldn’t go around the world saying that if I was President. Obama didn’t do that, either. I’m expecting a few words to show up, words like apologize, or sorry, or remorse, or regret, or forgiveness, or maybe even a ‘my bad.’ But it’s not there. You’re taking completely reasonable, often times objectively factual statements and just saying that they’re apologies when they’re not. How are you apologizing for Guantanomo by correctly identifying it as a rallying cry for our enemies? Who is he apologizing to – the terrorists? Americans?
Oh I’m very familiar with Dinesh’s ‘logic,’ and I’m sure it is very persuasive to you who can conjure apologies out of thin air. I’m sure Dinesh will persuade me with his political arguments as well as he did with his religious ones.
Let’s not forget Levi’s an admtted truther and refuses to admit there were chemical weapons in Iraq and that Hussain was in violation of his cease fire. Also there were terrorists in Iraq too so it wasn’t off course.
And of course he’s still a racist too.
So of coruse the little boy is going to pout and suck his thumb and continue to deny the evidence in front of him.
Now hush Levi, the adults are talking.
Levi has ruled that Obama did not apologize for America 1.) showing arrogance; 2.) having deteriorated relations with Muslims; 3.) for America dictating terms; 4.) having slipped in the world standing; 5.) going off course by starting a war on terror; 6.) sacrificing values at Guantanamo; 7.) having darker periods in our history; 8.) not pursuing and sustaining engagement with our neighbors; 9.) making mistakes through the CIA; 10.) establishing Guantanamo.
Levi walks right into it up to his eyebrows. He says each one was a blot on America and true and Obama said the same, but did not apologize.
Huh? What was Obama doing by bringing each item up as he flitted about?
Obama went on an extensive blame America tour and he made apologies for past actions and strutted his stuff wherever he went.
Blame, blame, blame, blame, blame, blame ….. jut out the old Obama chin and claim a new day dawning.
Nice work on the Muslims, Obambi. Also, nice work on US relations with the world, Obambi. How’s that righteous war in Afghanistan working out? More Americans killed on your watch there than in the 8 Bush years.
And so forth.
Well, those weren’t apologies. I don’t know what to tell you, you’re pretending he said things that he didn’t. Admitting that the United States has made foreign policy mistakes in its past, an undeniable fact, is not apologizing.
Why shouldn’t the President being blaming the previous administration for wars they started, mismanaged, and never planned an end game for? Especially as he’s just coming into office. Blaming people isn’t necessarily a bad thing, especially if there is a concerted effort by people responsible for huge disasters to try to rewrite history and absolve themselves.
Can you find a single instance of Obama saying “I’m sorry” or “I apologize for America?” You know you can’t, and yet, APOLOGY TOUR! Republicans are understandably upset that they no one takes for granted anymore that they’re the foreign policy experts. Republicans preside over the biggest terrorist attack in history, they start a couple of hopeless wars, one on a completely fabricated premise, but then they just want it all to go down the memory hole. Who is to blame for Afghanistan and Iraq? Oh, we’d better not talk about that. Let’s just put words in Obama’s mouth and that will be how we conduct ourselves.
Levi has a cement block for a head.
Why does a President go on a campaign to talk about the “faults” of his country and, thus, project that his country has screwed up and do all of it in front of the people and in the places where the alleged screw-ups had impact?
He didn’t do a mea culpa because he is never to blame in his mind. No, he was blaming others (Bush, Reagan?) for past sins of America and, by admitting them, he was implying that he would put America on the correct path.
Levi calls all these charges straight out fact. He sees no apologies in the reassurance of a course correction.
Obama goes to the CIA and tells it that what it did in the past was wrong and he will fix it. The CIA is directly under the president’s control. Therefore, Obama was saying to the CIA that what they did under a different President’s control was wrong. Why, pray tell, do you undermine the operatives who were working under the direction of superiors? Why, pray tell, do you politicize the CIA? Why, pray tell don’t you sit down with the CIA director you appointed and get your orders in place and make the changes you want in an orderly, non-public, non-political manner?
Why, pray tell, does the President have a Department of State and all the network of operatives in place to change policy in a diplomatic way? Why does the President get out in front and make political speeches against his own country?
H-m-m-m-m-m-m?
Bush’s foreign policy was an abrupt, unprecedented, and catastrophic diversion from what our foreign policy had been for years. We got lots of people killed, we demonstrated the limits and weakness of using our military, we compromised our credibility by speaking in certain terms about intelligence we knew wasn’t reliable, we lost our moral authority by implementing a torture program, and we generally gave the world the impression that we didn’t know what the hell we were doing. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with identifying why and how we made these mistakes, and I would argue that a course correction is absolutely necessary, and most likely welcomed by the rest of the world.
But none of that really matters, because the bottom line is that Obama didn’t apologize. Blaming the previous President for his terrible policies isn’t apologizing. Listing the mistakes made by the previous administration isn’t apologizing. Stating that you will be attempting to correct the problems is not apologizing. Being reflective and self-critical and not simply assuming that your country is inherently right about everything is not apologizing.
You want to talk about undermining CIA operatives?
You undermine CIA operatives when you go on TV and tell the entire world that your intelligence agencies have provided with you guaranteed information when they haven’t. You undermine CIA operatives when you task them with torturing information out of people, word of which inevitably gets around, and compromises their ability to effectively gather intelligence. You undermine CIA operatives by flooding them with a bunch of false confessions that they have to track down, wasting hours.
The intelligence community does not remember George Bush fondly. Members of the intelligence community are big kids and their feelings aren’t hurt when someone criticizes the prior leadership.
But again, all of this is mostly beside the point that Obama did not apologize. Again, blaming your predecessor and identifying the mistakes he made is not apologizing.
In addition to not apologizing, he was not making speeches against his own country.
I guess maybe this would go quicker if you just said what Obama is allowed to say. Is he supposed to go around telling everyone that America has invented the ideal form of society and that they should all emulate everything the Americans do and that we’ve never made a mistake and that we’re perfect?
Related to 9-11, maybe? We went to war. It was declared and supported by Congress and taken before the U.N. and all the “i’s” were dotted and all the “t’s” were crossed.
We are all too familiar with you people coming along later with your “Bush lied, people died” crap and your “General Betrayus” and Kerry’s slander of our troops and Kennedy’s plot to “make this war into George Bush’s Vietnam” and Durbin’s Nazi charge against the President and the Pentagon.
And now, St. Obama has chosen General Betrayus to head up the CIA. How nice. And Kerry says he voted against the war before he voted for it. And Obama calls the war in Afghanistan and then proceeds to bumble and blunder so that 70% of U.S. military fatalities in 11-year Afghan war have occurred during the President Barack Obama watch. Furthermore, just weeks before US troop deaths under Obama hit 1,000, Obama announced his strategy to a troop drawdown in Afghanistan. 80% of the troop injuries in Afghanistan have occurred under President Barack Obama’s watch.
Under George Bush, the media counted each death loud and clear and held a special shout out when numbers like 500 and 1000 were reached as if some sort of records and score were being kept. Just like they did in Vietnam and just like Kennedy said when he promised to turn the wars into George Bush’s Vietnam.
But the MSM has zero interest in numbers and records under Obama.
And now that we don’t mention “terrorism” and Major Husan has incorrectly engaged in “workplace violence” and all the other doublespeak by the liberals….. now …… Levi shows up saying that “Bush’s foreign policy was abrupt !!! Classic.
What do these people drink to make their minds work in such an obtuse and demented way?
That is the single most idiotic blathering you have ever babbled.
There is no way to know the mind and temperament of the amorphous “intelligence community” and to say one does is to claim a power beyond human capability.
There you have it!
Who you going to believe? Your own lying eyes and ears or Levi’s definition of apology and talking down your own country?
Obama: Speech by President Obama, Rhenus Sports Arena, Strasbourg, France, April 3, 2009.
This NOT speaking against your country in a speech in France. It is just giving up facts. And, if you don’t say you are going to “fix” things, it is neither an apology nor a promise to “right wrongs.”
I can do the same excerpt job on each of the other nine I listed….but why?
Levi has his doublespeak and he is sticking to it.
As in the President of the United States speaking for the United States and saying: “So we must be honest with ourselves. In recent years we’ve allowed our Alliance to drift. I know that there have been honest disagreements over policy, but we also know that there’s something more that has crept into our relationship. In America, there’s a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.“
These are Bush’s wars. Bush initiated the policy, he managed the policy horribly, couldn’t complete the mission in 7 years, and handed a mess to his successor. Bush created a terrible predicament and moral dilemma for whoever followed him in that staying and leaving are both terrible options. I don’t know what Obama should do. But I’m not going to pretend like it’s his fault that there are more soldiers dying there now. Can you link that assertion to any policy of Obama’s, or is this supposed to be a side effect of his going around and apologizing to the world, or something?
It’s Bush’s war, it’s the neocons’ war, its conservatives’ war, and you guys are responsible for the body count. If you don’t like that, maybe next time you shouldn’t invade countries?
We had never invaded a country before, and we certainly never invented a pretext out of whole cloth (read: LIED) to invade a country before. That’s abrupt and unprecedented. And regardless of any of that, the wars turned out to be huge blunders that were by any metric a mistake for us to engage in. Admitting that isn’t apologizing, it’s being realistic.
I’ll just say I have insights. Anecdotal, to be honest, but I buy it.
Excuse me, but do you pay attention to conservative media? When is the last time you heard a conservative say something positive about Europe?
Arrogant, dismissive, derisive. Check, check, check. This is not speaking against your country, it’s speaking frankly about a particular ideology that motivated a previous administration’s policy. Don’t conflate criticism of conservatives with criticism of the country.
It seems to me that all of this is true, and I don’t have a problem with anyone saying that. Why you could allow your self to get worked up by such an obviously true statement is beyond me.
If you want to call these apologies, have at it, I guess. But let’s be realistic – if you insist on calling them apologies, they’re apologies for George Bush’s policies, not America.
And the relationship of “a conservative” to the President making a formal speech is ……?
Conservatives, almost across the board, are arrogant, dismissive, and derisive towards Europe. The previous administration was no exception. If you must call his statement an apology, call it an apology for the conservative foreign policy that George Bush was shoving down their throats. But it’s not an apology for America. One more time – you can’t conflate conservatism, conservative foreign policies, or conservative politicians with America. Criticizing one is not criticizing the other. Apologizing for one is not apologizing for the other.
Oh this is funny, “We weren’t attacked on 9/11, we attacked Afganistan and Iraq unprovoked! There weren’t WMD in Iraq! There weren’t terrorists in Iraq! 9/11 was a plot!”
We had never invaded a country before, and we certainly never invented a pretext out of whole cloth (read: LIED) to invade a country before.
More lies from Levi.
yesterday
“The 2012 Economic Freedom of the World report was released this week by the Cato Institute and Canada’s Fraser Institute, and it showed that the United States has plummeted to 18th place in the ranked list, trailing such countries as Estonia, Taiwan, and Qatar. Even such notorious welfare states as Finland and Denmark, not to mention Canada, have freer economies than we do.”
(nations in Europe bolded for the factually challenged)
Now hush, Levi. The adults are talking.
There we have it. Who are we going to believe, the brilliant Levi or our own lying eyes and ears?
Meanwhile, what do liberals say about the United States and Americans? Oh, that’s right, they scream “God damn America”, insist Americans are “little Eichmanns” who deserve to be killed by terrorists; indeed, the Obama Party base represented by Sandra Fluke, Michelle Obama, and other women called our own troops “uninvited and unwelcome intruders”in their own country.
Levi only reflects his Obama Party, which somehow manages to combine complete and total contempt for Americans with demands for American money, American rights, and American privileges. It’s the same mindset that one sees in a spoiled brat, and that’s all the pathetic Levi is — a spoiled brat.
Levi,
While your head is up there, maybe you should wriggle your arms in and cut some of the polyps and save yourself full inspection by a stranger who charges a lot to deal with your rear portal and the polyps beyond.
#63 Levi: Your anecdotal “evidence” comes from the people you talk to who agree with you or sources you read that comport with your pre-formed opinions.
You are Ed Schultz. You are fully enrolled in the Joseph Goebbels School of Doublespeak and Spin. Now you have reached the point of looking the truth in the face and answering like Ahmadinejad or Baghdad Bob.
You wrap your tongue around your eyeteeth until you can’t see what you are saying. You shift, you twist, you wriggle and you crawl on your belly like a snake. You have dismissed integrity as an unfair roadblock. The only saving grace you retain is your refusal (so far) to play the victim card.
You do not have it within you to actually understand and celibate this:
Nope, you would scream for government relief. You have no DNA for coping with the hand you are dealt. You look at the cards and scream “misdeal” and “I quit” and “transfer the wealth from those who get better hands.”
There is no loser like a willing and determined loser.
So, Levi’s excuse for liberals trash-talking America at every opportunity is that conservatives don’t say nice things about Europe.
The Progressive mind at work, I guess.
Uh-huh. Tell me where I get my information from, because I’m sure you know better than I.
You said Obama was undermining CIA operatives. Do you remember how Republicans leaked the name of a covert CIA operative for political reasons? I dunno, it would seem like purposefully leaking national security secrets to the press would ‘undermine CIA operatives’ more than, well, admitting that the previous administration made mistakes such as leaking national security secrets!
And hey, remember when Bush turned out to be completely wrong about weapons of mass destruction, and instead of taking responsibility for making a bad call or not being diligent enough, he’s just kinda spent the past decade complaining that he got bad intelligence? Does that do anything to undermine our CIA operatives, the ones who knew from the beginning exactly how flimsy the evidence for weapons was?
But whatever. Obama comes in and says we’ve made mistakes and that’s supposed to be some kind of morale-crusher. Like people are totally disillusioned and retiring in droves…
Your ratio of meaningful contribution to boring insults that nobody cares about is moving in the wrong direction.
What? What is there to understand? Why wouldn’t I celebrate that? I lived in Hawaii, I’ll be back there (on Kauai) next month, I’ll be bringing my dad back some Red Dirt shirts, most likely. It’s a cool story, but what is your point? Do you think that I’m supposed to be outraged about this or something? Do you think the Red Dirt people are who I’m talking about when I say Big Business has captured our government and controls the economy?
I don’t know why you think you know so much about me, but suffice it to say, all of your assumptions about my work ethic and employment history are completely off the mark. You don’t know anything about the ‘hand I’ve been dealt’ or how I’ve dealt with it, so why are you talking to me like you have any idea? You do realize that I know these facts about myself, and that every time you and your fellow conservatives gather around to pretend like you’re making educated guesses at what my life is like and how I make money, you’re just eroding away what remains of your wounded credibility, because you’re as wrong as you could possibly be. But what’s another thing for a conservative to be completely wrong about anyway?
Moving on, but keeping with the cards metaphor. Sometimes a misdeal is a misdeal. Sometimes the dealer is crooked, and sometimes the people with the better hands got their better hands by cheating. You don’t hear me complaining about my situation, do you? I’m not complaining that Red Dirt caught a lucky break, am I? I “would scream for government relief” – oh would I? It is possible to support social programs and a tax structure that don’t directly benefit you, are you capable of understanding this? You couldn’t very well accuse someone like Paul Krugman of supporting universal health care purely because he wants the government to give him something for free, he supports universal healthcare because he thinks it’s the better option morally and economically. If I say that the income distribution is too skewed in the wrong direction, it doesn’t mean I’m asking for someone to just send me a check to even it all out.
Oh, but why bother? You guys need to hate me so totally, I can’t even be a hard worker!
Again, criticizing conservatives, conservative policies, and conservative individuals is not the same as criticizing America. Conservatives have unabashedly treated Europe with arrogance and derision, and liberals have criticized conservatives for doing so. Read this ten or eleven times so it has a chance to penetrate: criticizing conservatives is not the same as criticizing America. Conservatism does not OWN America, it’s not synonymous with America, and it most certainly doesn’t represent American values very well.
Wow! The little fascist has come unhinged.
Don’t flatter yourself.
At least he admits he’s a fascist.
Uh huh, like Barack Obama leaking the name of Dr. Shakil Afridi, the Pakistani doctor who made it possible to verify the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden.
That also shows how stupid you are. Plame was not “covert”; she drove into Langley every single day. Only Obama idiots like yourself believe that anyone DIDN’T know she worked for the CIA.
Now any foreign national who works with the CIA know their name will be leaked and they will be punished, because Barack Obama and his idiot shill Levi care more about publicity and pandering than they do protecting peoples’ lives.
What do you think THAT has done to the intelligence community, Levi? How easy do you think it will be for the CIA to recruit operatives and sources to obtain intelligence when the entire globe knows that Barack Obama and his idiot supporters like you support leaking their names?
Can you answer? Of course not; you’re a coward who runs away from facts.
That’s funny, because the CIA said she was covert when they sued the Bush administration for leaking the information. But I’ll defer to you, I guess. You probably have a much better idea of who is and isn’t a covert CIA agent than, you know, the CIA. Right?