Is Obama Intentionally Turning America Into a Worldwide Joke?
March 24, 2011BEGIN TRANSCRIPTRUSH:
I have a good friend in New York City, who likes to listen to public radio up there. And he was astounded by what he heard on public radio this morning. Virtually every caller was criticizing Obama as though he were Bush. We are occupying Libya. We are establishing a base in Libya for US action. We are in there for oil. All of these criticisms from the audience of this far left public radio station in New York ripping into Obama and throughout the country. The American kook left and some of the mainstream left, it's a thin line there between the kook left and the mainstream left, pretty much all have the same reaction. They drank the Kool-Aid. They're the ones who thought that this was all messianic. They believed Obama when he said he was gonna close Gitmo; we're gonna get out of Iraq; we're gonna get out of the world; we're gonna punish ourselves; we're gonna apologize to the world for being the rotgut nation of the world. They are the ones who are surprised. They are the ones in a state of shock.
You and I -- this is what troubles us -- have known all along that we're dealing with a man-child here who has literally no qualifications, no experience, no track record, and according to the Donald Trump now, no birth certificate. Trump was on The View yesterday. Trump is performing a valuable service here. He is attempting to help Obama out of a jam. You can't say that Trump is a kook right wing birther. Trump realizes the problem that Obama faces here with credibility. He's giving him a chance here to establish some credibility and to produce the birth certificate. Whoopi Goldberg and Barbara Walters were appalled and aghast at this yesterday with their mouths open, which is not unusual, that Trump would go down this road. But while we sit here, we laugh at the kinetic military action, regime change, no regime change, while we laugh at people in the media doing their best to prop up what they know is a mistake.
Face it, folks, we're being governed by a giant mistake, one of the biggest mistakes that's ever been made in an election in this country. We are in the midst of it. They know it, too, but their interests are covering it up, papering it over, and trying to offer advice via their questions, solutions via their interviews and their media exposure and so forth. Trump's not the kind of guy to comb over difficulties. If he's gonna bring this up about this birth certificate, you know that it's serious. You know, Trump's not a fly-by-night kind of guy. So we sit here and laugh, but this is tragic. It's tragic and it's dangerous because genuine illegitimacy and incompetence and lack of qualification is on parade each and every day, and this being locked out of the Oval Office, while hilarious, is one of the most accurate metaphors for where we are with this regime and where it is. How do you not know the president's coming in? That was the excuse they gave. The White House didn't know he was coming. What, was he still at the Mayan ruins with the family? What do you mean you didn't know?BREAK TRANSCRIPTRUSH:
There's a word out there. We're gonna talk about "kinetic military action." There's a word out there, a bizarre word called "obamulate." You can look it up. It's a verb. It means "to walk about, to warned hither and dither." Look it up. It's o-b-a-m-u-l-a-t-e, obamulate. It is what's happening out there. "President Barack Obama's intervention in Libya's civil war has not only failed to win the approval of a majority of the American people, according to a Gallup poll conducted Monday, it also earned the lowest public approval rating of any U.S. military operation polled by Gallup over the past four decades. "In fact, it was the only U.S. military intervention polled by Gallup that received less than majority approval from Americans.
"'The 47% of Americans approving of the action against Libya is lower than what Gallup has found when asking about approval of other U.S. military campaigns in the past four decades,' said Gallup's analysis of the poll. That compares to the 90 percent approval rating Americans gave President George W. Bush's October 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, the 83 percent approval they gave President George H.W. Bush's January 1993 bombing of military targets in Iraq, the 76 percent approval they gave President George W. Bush's March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the 71 percent approval they gave President Ronald Reagan's March 1996 bombing of Libya, and the 66 percent approval they gave President Bill Clinton's August 1998 missile strikes on Sudan and Afghanistan," where he bombed some Tylenol factories.
"Before Obama's intervention in Libya, the least popular U.S. military intervention polled by Gallup in recent decades was President Clinton's 1999 intervention in the Balkan conflict over Kosovo. In a survey conducted April 30 to May 2, 1999, only 51 percent of Americans approved of that military action." Obama, 47% of Americans approve of Libya, lower than what Gallup has found in the past four decades. Now, to be fair, Gallup called it "military action" in their questions. They did not poll the American people on "kinetic military action," and we think it's only fair to point out that stipulation.
We don't know if the results would have been different had Gallup asked if the American people favor the "kinetic military action" in Libya or not, but you have to wonder. He's not made the case. Obama has not made the case for this. He doesn't even seem to care whether the American people support this. We all know (or a large number of us suspect) that the chaos, the plundering, the decline of this country is purposeful, that there is a strategic reason for it. We think we know what it is. We think we know that Obama has been raised by people who didn't like the country (and he doesn't like the country) as it was founded, and views this as an opportunity to get even with this country.
A lot of us believe this. That does not mean that he's also not incompetent at the same time. This is incompetence on parade. It is a joke. This is an international joke, and if there were a media that did its job, everyone in this country would be aware of just what a joke this regime is perceived to be, particularly as it relates to this action that this regime has taken. (interruption) Snerdley, I'm not lying to you. "Obamulate" is in the Oxford English dictionary. You think I make it up here? Look, I can understand you and think I'd make up the word "obamulate." I didn't. I would love to be able to tell you I did. I'd love to be able to tell you it's not the dictionary, I made it up, but it means "to warned hither and dither aimlessly through life," blah, blah, blah.
I didn't make it up. Obamulate. O-b-a-m-u-l-a-t-e. Maybe Bill O'Reilly will make it his word for the night. Well, unless he doesn't want to be perceived as being critical of the president. As I said earlier, Obama's not gonna give back his Nobel Peace Prize. Tuesday in El Salvador, the CNN Espanol correspondent Juan Carlos Lopez interviewed Obama. Juan Carlos Lopez said, "Do you see a contradiction when a Nobel Peace Prize winner authorizes the use of force on the eighth anniversary of the beginning of the Iraq war, a war that you opposed? There are some already calling for you to give the award back."OBAMA:
I am accustomed to this contradiction, of being both a commander-in-chief but also somebody who aspires to peace. The situation here is entirely focused on making sure that the Libyan people can live out their own aspirations. You know, we're not invading the country. We are not acting alone. We have a limited task, a focused task, and we've saved lives as a consequence. And, y-y-you know, I, uhh, think the American people don't see any contradiction in somebody who cares about peace also wanting to make sure that people aren't butchered because of, uhhh, dictator who wants to cling to power.RUSH:
Uh, Iran, Mr. President? North Korea, Mr. President? Syria, Mr. President? Darfur, Mr. President? Here we have a story (this is from Reuters): "Syrian forces killed six people on Wednesday in an attack on protesters in a mosque complex in the southern city of Deraa, and later opened fire on hundreds of youths marching in solidarity, witnesses said. At least four youths were killed when the security forces intercepted them at the northern entrance of Deraa, witnesses said. Their bodies were seen at a clinic in the city. There were unconfirmed reports that dozens more bodies were taken to Tafas hospital outside the city," of Diarrhea.
Why aren't we in Syria? This story's not getting much play, obviously, but why aren't we going into Syria? We have a dictator there butchering people in the city of Diarrhea, or however it's pronounced. That's what it looked like to me when I first read it. I'm not in the mood to get into phonetic pronunciations today folks. We got all kinds of contradictions coming out of the regime. Certainly Obama has accepted the "dream" from his father that the US is a colonial, imperialist country. So Obama has to go out of his way to look like he's doing the things that colonial imperialist countries do, and he's doing it in an incompetent way.
Could there be a strategery here in looking incompetent? Could there be a reason behind appearing to be unqualified? Here is the leader of the United States of America making this country look like a joke. The leader of this country is making himself look like an incompetent boob, but maybe he's willing to do that in order to make the country look like that as well. Who can say? All I know is I don't like speculating about things like that. Here's Obama on the exit strategy. This is Tuesday in El Salvador on Univision TV during an interview with correspondent. This is what Obama said about the war against Libya.OBAMA:
The exit strategy will be executed this week in the sense that we will be pulling back from our much-more-active efforts to shape the environment. We'll still be in a support role. Ehh, we'll still be providing uhh, jamming and -- and -- and, uhhh, intelligence and, uhhh, other assets that are unique to us.RUSH:
Jamming and intelligence and other assets unique to us? This is the guy who's taken every opportunity he can to rip and destroy the intelligence gathering operations of this country, and now he calls them unique, along with our jamming ability? You've got to be kidding. "The exit strategy will be executed this week in the sense that we're gonna be pulling back from our much-more-active [kinetic military] efforts to shape the environment"? Last night on The Last Word on PMSNBC, the guest is Huffing and Puffington Post senior political editor Howard Fineman. We assume that Howard is being paid some at the Huff Po or not. They had a discussion on Obama's performance on Libya and Howard Fineman said this...FINEMAN:
Yes, there's the humanitarian mission, but he's gotta put this in the larger context because what the American people expect of Barack Obama -- what he was elected for -- was a sense of coherence and vision and diligence and intellectual coherence. That we haven't quite seen.RUSH:
Do you ever stop to think, Mr. Fineman...? Sseriously, you know I love you. Seriously, do you ever stop to think he never had any? I wonder if people who look at Obama now and say, "Where is this guy that we knew? Where is this guy we all loved? Where is this guy?" I wonder if they ever stopped to think, "You know, maybe this guy never was what we thought he was. Maybe this guy never was what we TOLD people he was." Coherence? Vision? Diligence? Intellectual coherence? Fine and dandy if there's evidence of it, but you need far more evidence than just being able to read a teleprompter.
So I think we have a guy here that a lot of people, they just project it: "Here's what we want a president to be, particularly coming off that stupid idiot cowboy George W. Bush, who embarrassed us every time he opened his mouth." Well, David Brooks looks at Obama sitting across from him, sees a sharp crease in his pants, and has an orgasm and says, "A-ha! This guy is gonna be president. A good one, too. Just based on that." Scary, scary stuff, but these people are serious. What they told us about Obama, what they thought about Obama, what they wanted us to believe. What are we to believe? Is this just raging incompetence, or is this purposeful humiliation and embarrassment of the United States of America?
What is it?BREAK TRANSCRIPTRUSH:
Have you heard anybody in the regime officially define the Obama doctrine? Anybody heard it? Has anybody heard the Obama doctrine? Well, I haven't. However, Andrea Mitchell, NBC News, Washington, has the Obama doctrine. Andrea Mitchell explained it last night on PMSNBC with Chris Matthews. During a discussion about the war against Libya, Chris Matthews said, "Is there a doctrine here?" My leg's not tingling, Andrea, and I want my leg to tingle. It hasn't tingled in a while. "Tell me, is there an Obama doctrine, is there a vision thing going on here?"MITCHELL:
It's emerging. Basically what he says is when you have a catastrophe that you can avert, and the benefits outweigh the costs, and you have international or multilateral support, go for it. You cannot stand idly by. That's what I would call the Obama doctrine.
Well. Why didn't we think of this? So simple. You have a catastrophe that you can avert, benefits outweigh the costs. International, multilateral support, go for it. You can't stand idly by. You go for kinetic military action. That's the doctrine. You go for it. You cannot stand idly by. That's what I call the Obama doctrine. Left to the media to explain and define. Well, is the catastrophe of a nuclear Iran avertable? Can we avert that, Andrea? What's the cost-benefit analysis of preventing a nuclear Iran? You know what, I would much rather hear Sarah Palin define the Obama doctrine. And I'll betcha Sarah Palin would do a much better job of analyzing the Obama doctrine than Andrea Mitchell, NBC News, Washington, 'cause basically it's WTF, the Obama doctrine.