sic semper tyrannis

Here’s the money quote:

“My Cap-and-Trade Plan Will Make Electricity Rates ‘Skyrocket’”

Of course, it’s all for a noble cause: global warming. Or was that global climate change? Global cooling?

Doesn’t matter. It’s Bush’s fault.

George Will wrote:

Your next car can cost less if you forgo GPS, satellite radio, antilock brakes, power steering, power windows and air conditioning. You can shop for such a car at your local Studebaker, Hudson, Nash, Packard and DeSoto dealers.

Those were the days, indeed. There’s a reason those brands aren’t available, and they have to do with those pesky market forces that a certain new administration believes can be negated and controlled from Washington.

Good luck, there. But those who live in the world of the real, and wish to pay less for an actual new car today, still have the option of stripped-down econoboxes such as the Hyundai Accent CS and Nissan Versa Sedan 1.6, both of which were somewhat mockingly reviewed in the June Motor Trend.

Both vehicles can be yours on the road for just around $11,000. Neither car has A/C, power anything, nor even a radio. As I said, they are stripped-down econoboxes. But they will get you from A to B. With much more reliability than, say, a Nash.

My first car was a 1949 Nash that I hauled from my uncle’s pond and got running. Great car for a student, me, at the time (1962). Virtually indestructible, tons of room in the back, bumpers of steel that no one would dare mess with. Just wasn’t particularly reliable, had to be started by rolling down a hill and engaging first gear (starter died sometime in the 1950s), wasn’t synchro in first (if you know what that means, don’t admit it) and drank a quart of oil every 50 miles or so. It had brakes, which worked. Most of the time.

Now? I’m not about to go get a car without A/C, disc brakes, power windows, doors, you name it. I’ve gotten soft in my old age; I like my creature comforts, and live near an infested swamp (Washington, DC). Some reliability in what I drive is nice, as well. Back in the day, I would’ve loved either of those econoboxes, had they been available and had I had the, oh, roughly $1,600 that $11,000 today translated to in 1962.

Here’s a cheery little story, about the Ark of the Covenant that’s allegedly been kept in a church in Ethiopia all these millenia.

Here’s the gist of it:

The patriarch of the Orthodox Church of Ethiopia [Abuna Pauolos] says he will announce to the world Friday the unveiling of the Ark of the Covenant, perhaps the world’s most prized archaeological and spiritual artifact, which he says has been hidden away in a church in his country for millennia, according to the Italian news agency Adnkronos.

“The Ark of the Covenant is in Ethiopia for many centuries,” said Pauolos. “As a patriarch I have seen it with my own eyes and only few highly qualified persons could do the same, until now.”

According to Pauolos, the actual Ark has been kept in one church, but to defend the treasure, a copy was placed in every single church in Ethiopia. (emphasis added)

Golly gee, sure wish I could have been one of those “few highly qualified persons.” The point is that we are all, each and every one of us, among those “few highly qualified persons.” What the patriarch likely means by his phraseology is that it is the priests and bishops of his church who alone are the “only few highly qualified persons.”

As for making copies of the ark, and placing them in “every single church in Ethiopia,” one presumes that the Ethiopians had access to a lot of gold and shittim wood. Of course, since only the “few highly qualified persons” could gaze on the Holy of Holies, they likely did not come prepared to test the gold and shittim wood for authenticity.

It’s almost certain this is a fraudulent claim, along the lines of those who claimed to have a piece of the One True Cross. Make no mistake, however: If the actual Ark of the Covenant, with the actual tablets of the Ten Commandments, were to be found, it would be a marvelous thing. But it is not a necessary thing; our faith must not depend on any artifact, however holy its provenance.

Well, who woulda thunk it? Mitt Romney’s approval ratings have improved, dramatically.

I was not a Mitt Romney fan during the primaries; thought he was too stiff; too programmed. Since then, given our recession, with his hands-on, successful experience running an enterprise, he looks golden.

On foreign affairs, Mitt would almost certainly stand tall, unlike the current occupant of 1600 Pa Avenue.

Perhaps it’s the comparison with Obama that makes Mitt Romney look good. Perhaps the sun will rise in the east tomorrow, just as it did today. But, for those who would second guess John McCain’s candidacy, does anyone truly believe that any Republican could have beaten out the Numinous One?

Nope. Republicans took the hit for the economy, for the Barney Frank-Chris Dodd-caused housing collapse, for some scandals that were given much, much more mainstream media play than Democrat scandals.

Life isn’t fair, to coin a phrase. But we already knew that. Wait ’till 2012, Barack, baby. You’ll have a tougher time against a Mitt Romney, who you won’t be able to blame for the stagflation that your socialist policies will likely cause.

Update of the previous post, concerning the Obamatons’ invitation to Iranian diplos to party on Independence Day at our embassies:

Yesterday:

Iranians will have to decide whether they want to attend Fourth of July celebrations at U.S. embassies, President Obama said Tuesday, linking their attendance to the potential for warming between the two nations.

The United States and Iran don’t have formal diplomatic relations but Obama said that it’s up to the Iranian diplomats to decide whether to use an invitation to attend embassy festivities as an opening.

“I think that we have said that if Iran chooses a path that abides by international norms and principles, then we are interested in healing some of the wounds of 30 years in terms of U.S.-Iranian relations. But that is a choice that the Iranians are going to have to make,” Obama said during a press conference in the White House briefing room.

Despite a crackdown on protesters by the Iranian government, State Department spokesman Ian Kelley on Monday reaffirmed the invitation to Iranian diplomats to attend Independence Day parties at U.S. embassies around the world next month.

Today:

The White House announced Wednesday that it has rescinded the invitations made to Iranian diplomats who may want to barbecue and watch fireworks to celebrate Independence Day. “As you all know many weeks ago the administration extended an invitation to celebrate the freedom that this country enjoys. not surprisingly based on what we see in Tehran, no one has RSVP’d,” said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

Not surprisingly? The invitation was rescinded because the Iranians did not “RSVP?”

You don’t suppose that one of Obama’s adult supervisors whispered something about how many, likely most, Americans feel about having official representatives of a terrorist state attend our Independence Day celebrations?

From the WaPo:

President Barack Obama is expressing outrage at the violent crackdown by the Iranian government against protesters of the disputed presidential election.

There is some satisfaction in seeing the Great One now join most Americans in condemning brutality and suppression. He’s not much of a leader, that man. He follows polls, or his handlers do, and he responds appropriately. His words are pretty; his deeds, feckless.

Given that the Iranian regime is brutalizing their populace after a sham of an election, we should have nothing whatsoever to do with representatives of the regime. Not the Great One. He still wants the Iranian thugocracy’s diplos to come by and schmooze on Independence Day. One wonders why.

Major Garrett asked that question at Obama’s press conference yesterday. Obama was at his teleprompter-less inarticulate worst in his exchange with Garrett; lots of “uhs” and “hmms” and open-mouthed pauses. But the message remains the same: we, or at least the Obamatons, welcome official representatives of the thugs to dine with us at our embassies on our Independence Day.

It is one thing to open our arms and our shores to the Iranian people who are fleeing tyranny. Quite another to break bread with the tyrants.

Via Hot Air:

President Barack Obama’s administration said earlier this month it would invite Iran to US embassy barbecues for the national holiday for the first time since the two nations severed relations following the 1979 Islamic revolution.

“There’s no thought to rescinding the invitations to Iranian diplomats,” State Department spokesman Ian Kelly told reporters.

“We have made a strategic decision to engage on a number of fronts with Iran,” Kelly said. “We tried many years of isolation, and we’re pursuing a different path now.”

Yes, indeed. The mad mullahs and their pet podex A’Had really, truly, believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of nuclear weapons. Except for the first two of those, of course.

“No thought to rescinding the invitations to Iranian diplomats?”    No thought whatsoever, actually. We should be shunning the Iranian regime; supporting their people as much as we can short of invading. We should apply sanctions (e.g. cutting off gasoline imports to Iran) until it really hurts.

But, no. We will, under B.Hussein Obama, continue to pretend that we and Iran are equally at fault.

Obama, in full appeasement mode, has bowed to tyrants both literally and metaphorically. His address to “the Muslim world” was one of moral equivalence and apologies for sins allegedly committed by America. The Great One also threw in sins committed by any white or Christian person in history, ever.

Obama continues to be the coward in the Iranian unrest. Giving full obeisance to the mullahs in Iran by addressing their head thug as “Supreme Leader,” something an American should never do. Taking no stand whatsoever in the crisis. While the thugs in Iran kill and suppress their people, Obama gives utmost and unctuous support to the regime.

The headline of this post is taken from a story in the Obama-friendly WaPo. Even they’ve noticed that our president is an appeaser.

Of course, they put it “U.S. Struggling for Right Response to Iran.” No American should have a scintilla of difficulty in choosing between the Iranian people’s desire to have a free election and the “Supreme Leader’s” desire, along with his fellow thugs, to keep their people down.

Obama has come down hard on the side of tyranny. There is no better explanation.

Jay Nordlinger writes “I like Panetta better when he is using his position to undermine Nancy Pelosi!”

So do I. But Panetta is no more qualified to be head of the CIA than a box of hammers. He’s a glorified accountant, but, mostly, a party hack. Anything the man says about intel is suspect; everything he says is colored by his partisan view of the world.

His alleged spat with Pelosi is almost certainly based on his calculus of “what’s good for the Obama administration.” If it helps the Obama Revolution, it’s a good thing. If not, it is is not. Dumping on Nancy very much helps Obama, making him appear to be the leader he is not.

And, mis-paraphrasing (is that a word?) Charlie Wilson, what’s good for the Obama administration is not good for America.

Today, June 14, is Flag Day. As such, the day commemorates the adoption of the Stars and Stripes as our national flag in 1777.

It is a good thing for a nation to have a flag. But more important by far is the ability to protect and defend that nation. Hence the founding, by the Continental Congress, of what would become the United States Army, on June 14, 1775. 234 years ago; a long time in anyone’s book.

It is only right and proper that our army got its start before our flag. Symbols are important. Armed force to allow freedom under those symbols is the sine qua non of freedom.

Happy birthday, Army: Get some; stay strong.

Today’s heinous killing of a Holocaust Museum security guard by a crazy coot of a white supremacist was written up as a straight news story by the Wall Street Journal.

The Washington Post, as is their wont, wrote the story from a racial identity perspective.

From the Journal, the identity of the slain guard waits until the fifth paragraph, where there is no mention of his race. The headline is a simple statement of the facts:

Gunman Kills Holocaust Museum Guard…Police identified the slain security guard as Stephen Tyrone Johns, 39 years old, from Temple Hills, Md.

In the entire article, there is no mention of Mr. Johns’ race or ethnicity. Which is exactly as it should be, since these had no relevance to his death. He was a security guard, and a visitor started shooting. It would not matter if Mr. Johns were white, brown, or any other color. He was a man in blue, meaning a protector of the museum and its visitors and staff.

From the Post, the teaser on their home page shows what they think is important:

Police: Suspect Is White Supremacist — Private security guard, an African American identified as Stephen Tyrone Johns, worked at museum for six years.

May The Johns family find peace, knowing that their loved one died a hero, and quite probably saved lives.

That he was African American means nothing, it neither subtracts nor adds to his heroism. Too bad the Post writers and editors don’t get that Mr. Johns was a member of the human race, first, and last.

This video shows the utter futility of the Obamatons march towards socialism.

It was obvious from the start that the “stimulus” would not work as advertised. It becomes more and more difficult to hide this, especially as the White House keeps claiming specific numbers of jobs “saved.” This is fun to listen to, because, in the face of 9.4% unemployment (up from the max of 8% that Obama had promised), and the certitude of millions of jobs lost, any estimate of jobs “saved” is pure fiction: there is no such statistic provided by anyone who knows anything.

As for ‘fessin’ up that the “stimulus” hasn’t worked, don’t hold your breath. Obama, God in his very person according to some, and probably to himself, will never admit to an error. In this, Obama is either very stupid, an affirmative action president and actually believes what his handlers tell him. Or, he is a too-clever by half con man and liar.

Almost 54,000 Allied soldiers, sailors, and airmen died during the Battle of Normandy. Without their bravery and sacrifice, we might all be speaking German and living under a cult of personality with no freedom. Those of us not taken away and killed outright.

There is a lesson, or should be, for today’s leaders. Especially for our president, who has spent his career dishonoring those who serve. Who has cast his lot with radical anti-Americans, all in furtherance of his own ambitions. The lesson? Never forget that wars are not prevented by words. Never forget that wars are not won with words.

Except these words that should be ever heeded: Si vis pacem, para bellum.

They being Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s long-time pastor-spiritual mentor-daddy figure, and the State of Israel? Why, it’s simple: both were thrown under the ObamaBus. Crunch crunch, as the wheels of the bus grind them into history and the nothingness of disassociation with The Great One.

Wright’s demise came during the primaries, when his continued anti-Semitic, anti-white, anti-American ravings became too public, too embarrassing. Israel’s demise in the ObamaVerse may have come earlier, but was made public in Obama’s pandering to the Muslim world this week. While Obama has made a fetish of “listening, not dictating” to the rest of the world, that does not apply to Israel: they’ve been dictated to, ordered to “stop” the “settlements” that Palestinians claim are on their land.

Worse, Obama applied moral equivalence to the Holocaust and the “displacement” of Arabs. And, pandering to the home crowd of Arabs, made a professorial argument that saw no difference between 60 years of rejection, war, and terror by the Arabs, and self-defense by the Israelis. As for the settlements, see Charles Krauthammer’s analysis.

One point not made by Dr. K is this question: why must there be no Jews living in Arab Palestine, when over 19% of Israel’s population is Arab? One may argue that the Israeli Arabs are second-class citizens, and that’s probably true in some aspects. But here’s another question: how many of those Israeli Arabs wish to move to Gaza or the West Bank?

The heart of the matter is this: the Arab-Israeli conflict is not one of competing truths. It is one of murderous, ethnic and religious rage on the part of the Arabs against Jews on the one side, and a Jewish state that, from day one, has been trying to live in peace. No free nation should pander to any myth that claims moral equivalence. No American president should pander to terrorists and their supporters.

Unfortunately, we have one such in Barack Hussein Obama.

Can you spell dhimmi, Barack? Our president continues his apology tour. This time, in Egypt, stroking his Muslim hosts and running for caliph. Hey, the guy is always running for something. He’s achieved the highest office America has to offer, why not go for caliph of the world-wide ummah?

In his speech, Obama said some things that did need to be said to the Muslim world. About women, especially. And good luck with that project in places like Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and any of the other hellholes where Islam holds sway.

Obama also, in good dhimmi fashion, quoted liberally from the Koran. All the lion-lies-down-with-the-lamb throwaway lines, written when Muhammed was in his salad days, before Muslims started to behead everyone who did not kneel before the Prophet. He also quoted from the Talmud and the Bible, lines about peace. Such lines are not hard to find, and, at least today, both Jews and Christians pretty much would be delighted to live their lives in peace. If only Muslims would let us.

But, as we know, it’s all our fault. Those pesky crusades, colonialism, Gitmo. We are soooo sorry. The worst aspect of The Great One’s speech? Inventing a new history, as exemplified by these suck-up words:

…throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.

I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President, John Adams, wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.” And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States.

“Religious tolerance,” eh. In what parallel universe? Not here in this world. And how, precisely, have “American Muslims” enriched the United States “since our founding?” A falafel cart in Philadelphia?

Look, I know there were probably a few Muslims in the Colonies when we rebelled. But I’ve not read one word, not one, about how any Muslims did anything to advance liberty. I did read lots of words as to how the Muslim pirates of North Africa killed and enslaved Americans at sea. Until we put them down with military force. I suppose you could say that Muslims did “enrich” us. They taught us a lesson that Obama has yet to learn: talk softly and carry a big stick.

Obama talks loudly, but it’s all about him: how his coming had changed everything. America is now a Muslim nation. Obama, though, carries no stick, big or little, and is clearly not going to back any of his pleading rhetoric with anything worse than a letter from the United Nations.

Two recent murders have received quite different reactions. The first, of the abortionist George Tiller by a pro-life zealot, has generated condemnations from virtually all pro-life groups. It has also generated its fair share of liberals blaming “Christianists” and equating pro-lifers to Muslim terrorists.

The second, the murder of an Army recruiter, by a Muslim terrorist, has generated virtually no outrage in the mainstream media. Sure, no one in the MSM is celebrating the killing (although that may not be true; I haven’t checked in with MSNBC or NPR), but surely it is worth the president’s time to denounce the killing. As he vehemently denounced the killing of the abortionist.

But no, the president was silent, even given a perfect opportunity on the occasion of his announcement of his choice for Secretary of the Army. Not. One. Word.

The disparity between how the MSM deals with so-called right-wing terrorists as against Muslim terrorists is detailed by The New Republic’s James Kirchik. It’s actually worse than Kirchik writes: all sorts of stupid “security” decisions are premised on not discriminating against young Muslim men, on the grounds that Timothy McVeigh was a white Christian.

We seem also to have a huge phobia about being accused of “Islamophobia.” Said accusations coming whenever anyone criticizes any Muslim or any aspect of Islam. Or are even so foolish as to notice the religion of virtually all terrorists.

Given that there have been a few so-called Christians who have committed acts of terror, the vast numbers of Muslim terrorists are excused, not mentioned further, or, at worst, accused of having “hijacked” Islam. Perhaps. The fact remains, however, that virtually all Christians condemn murder committed in the name of Jesus. Almost no Muslims condemn murder committed in the name of Islam. Of which there are many, many, many more.

In this, Muslims are aided and abetted by the cowards in the mainstream media. Joined by our Coward-in-Chief, who, as he just said, lives in America, “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.”