BALTIMORE, Maryland July 2, 2015 - The Iranian Legislature, such as it is, has voted to codify the so-called national agenda. What is the Iranian national agenda? Need you ask? It is, "Death to America!" What does this mean? It means that if Obama, Kerry and their band of leftist idiots in the Whitehouse go ahead and ink some kind of dorky "agreement" with the Iranians and their ruling Mullahs, they will be the laughing stock of the world community. Fifty years from now, a real historian will lament the insanity that overtook a man who we are told received a wonderful education. But education or not, the insanity continues. If Iran gets a bomb and uses it, it will be Obama's fault and every drop of blood that is shed will be his legacy.
Why is he doing this? He says it is our best chance of avoiding the possibility that Iran will get a nuke. But there is no logic that leads to that conclusion. It is a given that Iran will cheat on any agreement it signs. It is a given that it will continue on a path toward nuclear weaponry. The only way to stop Iran is to keep it, physically, from buildong a bomb. That will require one of two things: military action or a blockade and economic sanctions that have teeth so sharp that they force Iran to backtrack in order to survive. Obama's half-witted ideas will lead to neither potentially successful alternative. When the great Bibi Netanyahu risked everything to come here and speak to Congress, he spoke clearly and concisely about the risks of allowing the Iranians to continue on the path toward nuclear arms. What happened? The idiots in Congress not only ignored him, they entered into a deal with Obama that allowed any agreement with Iran to be endorsed by our legislators unless the legislators can muster a super-majority. We needed a Republican-controlled Congress to bow down to a leftist like Obama? There are those who honestly believe that Obama wants Iran to have a nuclear bomb to level the playing field in the Middle East. It sounds insane and it is, but in his twisted leftist logic, Obama is said to think that a nuke in Iran offsets the nukes in Israel. Except that no one in Israel is threatening to use the bomb, while Iran's Mullahs are licking their chops at the mere thought of pulling the nuclear trigger.
I had the misfortune of hearing an interview with the old Mr. Sulu, who is now a gay-rights activist. In real life, the old Sulu is the actor George Takei. In this interview he used anti-black language that would make a sailor blush, but he'll get away with it because he was using the vile words on Clarence Thomas.
Clarence Thomas' mere existence is the ultimate commentary on America under the uber leftist, Obama. Thomas is the smartest and best judge on the Supreme Court. He is a giant. Even when you disagree with him, you concede that his arguments are powerful, persuasive, and almost legally impenetrable. But Obama and his band of fools in the White House can't stand him and miss no opportunity to say so. In the very recent gay marraige decision, Thomas has spoken of the falacy that gays need legal marraige to protect their ultimate dignity. Thomas says that government has absolutely nothing to with dignity. Dignity clothes those who deserve it, regardless of what the government says. The Roman Empire, for over 300 years, persecuted Christians. It continued until Constantine made Christianity to religion of Rome. Did Christians lack dignity until Constantine won at the Milvian Bridge?
While we are on the subject of the Supreme Court, I would love to ask the sad Chief Judge, John G. Roberts, one question. In upholding the embarassing Obamashame law for the second time, this mental misfit held that the Congress, when it said that only "the states" could offer subsidies to Americans who signed up for Obamashame, didn't really mean the states. My question is, what language could the Congress have used if they only wanted the subsidies to be payable by the states?
Somebody asked who Credible and Justice would choose if they could designate either Obama or Roberts to resign at once. At first blush, Obama seems the obvious choice. But Roberts is the one who the law and the Constitution selects to protect Americans from tyranny. Instead, Roberts facilitates tyranny. It would be a hard choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment