There a famous aphorism, attributed to many, including George Burns. It goes something like this:
Sincerity is the most important thing in the world. If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.
Tonight, Sunday, December 6, 2015, President Barack Obama made only his second address from the Oval Office. The first was done to announce that he killed Osama Bin Laden. On both occasions, Mr. Obama tried to fake sincerity and failed miserably. His supporters are already raving about the brilliance of the speech. Everyone else watched a corrupt liar, a man desperately trying to defend his fecklessness, and distract the nation from examining it in depth, the incompetence that has directly led to the rise of terrorism and attacks in America that will cost far more American lives on American soil.
This one was also all about him, because let’s face it, it’s Obama’s world. He graciously allows us to live in it, and we pathetic Americans continually disappoint him. How?
Why, with massive and unrelenting discrimination against innocent Muslims! That Mr. Obama didn’t point to a single incident of such discrimination is beside the point. Remember: we live in Obamaworld, where reality is what Mr. Obama says it is.
As I write this, the only available transcript of the brief speech has been released by the White House. It is not remotely accurate, so I’ll rely on my memory and notes.
While Mr. Obama seemed to accept that the San Bernardino attack was done by terrorists, he first directly implied it was an act of workplace violence, and then was careful to say there is no evidence that the killers were directed by overseas terrorists. He neglected to mention that the FBI has discovered that the killers were actually in direct contact with overseas terrorists, but apparently that doesn’t count.
Mr. Obama reiterated his assertion that Islam is not at all a violent ideology, and that any Muslims that embrace terror are practicing a “warped interpretation of Islam.” This would be news to anyone that has actually read the Koran, which mandates Jihad, and the murder of infidels, and also mandates the conquest of the world and the imposition of Sharia. It is peaceful Muslims that are not faithfully following Islam, which is why Jihadis feel completely comfortable–beside the fact that many of them are psychopaths–in killing peaceful Muslims.
Mr. Obama said, once again, that we’re safer than ever, because he has hardened our infrastructure, as in pursuing the terrorist’s finances, among similarly milquetoast measures. Didn’t Mr. Obama promise to give hundreds of billions to Iran, and aren’t they the foremost state sponsor of terror? Never mind. Oh yes, and Mr. Obama reminded us yet again that he killed Osama Bin Laden. He neglected to mention that he has ordered that our intelligence agencies to not so much as touch the millions of documents seized in Bin Laden’s lair, which if acted on, would tend to contradict Mr. Obama’s continual and false claims to have suppressed and contained terrorism.
He took credit for preventing 9-11-like attacks, but admitted that smaller attacks like San Bernardino are the new thing. Hey, it’s not his fault! For what may be the first time, he actually suggested that Ft. Hood was a terror attack, this from the man who, for years, called it “workplace violence,” and denied the dead and wounded the decorations and benefits due them.
Mr. Obama claimed he has boldly confronted the terror threat “every morning” during his daily intelligence briefing. “I know how real the threat is,” he solemnly intoned. He was working very hard on his “this is my serious, I-really-care-about-America” face.
Reality is quite different. In a June 2014 article, I noted that, according to Mr. Obama’s official schedule, published by the White House, on the rare days when Mr. Obama actually works, his day normally begins no earlier than 0930, contains 2-3 hour lunches, and ends around fourish. In a July 2014 article,
I noted that Mr. Obama rarely meets with intelligence officials, claiming instead to read the printed daily intelligence briefing at his leisure. I was as skeptical of this then as I am now. Not the idea that he won’t meet with intelligence officials. That’s certain. I doubt he bothers to regularly read the daily intelligence brief. If he did, he wouldn’t have to claim that everything he knows he learned by hearing about it in the media.
The speech was remarkable too for its complete lack of anything new. There were no new military policies, no new actions that would actually harm a single terrorist or destroy anything useful to them. As an example of more of the same, Mr. Obama boldly proclaimed that “we will destroy ISIL,” and we will do it by being “…strong and smart and resilient and relentless…” This, of course, reeks of the “smart diplomacy” that has done so much around the world. With the Iran deal, it promises to be the gift that keeps on giving.
Lest anyone accuse Mr. Obama of not having a plan, he provided several things that he will do:
(1) He’s going to “hunt down terrorist plotters,” and take out “ISIL’s infrastructure,” specifically mentioning their oil infrastructure.
Mr. Obama has been swearing to do this for some 16 months. To date, he has, upon occasion, lobbed an expensive drone-launched Hellfire missile at the occasional terrorist leader or functionary, sometimes killing them, often killing nearby presumed innocents. He mentioned that we have conducted thousands of air strikes, but only recently have we learned that from 75-80% of the planes dispatched on those strikes–which are actually pitifully few in number–have returned without releasing a single weapon because of the ridiculous rules of engagement Mr. Obama has imposed. We have also learned that in some 16 months, we have done virtually nothing to disrupt the money-making oil apparatus of ISIS because Mr. Obama has ordered our military not to do any environmental damage.
What is it Mr. Obama is going to do again?
(2) Mr. Obama assured the nation that he is going to continue to train Syrians to fight ISIL. Perhaps we can spend another 500 million to train four or five Syrians?
(3) Mr. Obama said we will continue to work with our friends and allies, and mentioned the “65 countries in an American-led coalition,” he has conjured up and apparently, led. Of course, he didn’t mention anything this “coalition” has accomplished because it doesn’t actually exist except as rhetoric, and hasn’t made so much as a rhetorical accomplishment.
(4) Most boldly, Mr. Obama said that he will use “American leadership” to boldly find a political solution to the Syrian war. Brilliant! Why hasn’t anyone thought of that before? Oh yes, Mr. Obama also assured America that Russia would be just delighted to help in this political solution. Perhaps Mr. Putin would be as “flexible” as Mr. Obama promised to be?
(5) He has ordered the State Department to “review” some facet of some visa program or other, which will presumably have something to do with something. I’m sure this review, like every other review Mr. Obama has publically claimed to have ordered, will accomplish exactly what every other review has accomplished: zip. Nada. Zilch. Bupkis. Squat.
Then Mr. Obama really got down to business, and unleashed positive measures that will have a wonderful effect on the war on terror, which he sort of, slightly mentioned in this speech: gun control.
Mr. Obama just can’t believe that people on the “no fly” list can buy guns, and wants to change that right away. He also wants to ban “high powered assault weapons.” To be fair, he didn’t mention the word “ban,” but how does one deny such “assault weapons”–which don’t actually exist–to terrorists, without banning them? Oh yes, he also wants some sort of stronger “screening,” but he was so vague on that as to make it possible to think he was arguing for stronger screen doors.
To be completely fair, Mr. Obama demanded that this be done by the vehicle of Congress immediately doing his will. This is a brilliant ploy, because he knows Congress won’t enact gun control measures that will have no affect whatever on terrorists or other criminals, and when Congress doesn’t, he’ll blame them for supporting terrorists. Average Americans call this “lying.”
Mandatory disclaimer: the AR-15 carbines used by the killers were not, in fact, “assault rifles,” and both fired a rifle cartridge of intermediate power. There was nothing “high powered” about them. There is no such thing as an “assault weapon,” which is an invention of anti-gun politicians and the media, and may be understood to be any gun they’re trying to ban and/or which looks scary and can be used to trick voters and other politicians.
Point of Information: Conservatives oppose giving the federal government power to deny citizens their Second Amendment rights for being on a terror watch list because there is no judicial oversight, no due process, and no mechanism for getting one’s name removed. Thousands of government functionaries can put anyone on a terror watch list for any reason or no reason. Former treasonous Senator Ted Kennedy was on this list, and had a hell of a time getting his name removed.
Following his long-standing technique of fighting terror by telling our deadliest enemies what he absolutely will never do to fight them, Mr. Obama said we would never engage in a “long and costly ground war in Iraq and Syria,” and also trotted out his threadbare argument that by actually fighting ISIS, we are helping them recruit, which they love.
This is brilliant logic. Terrorists want us to come to the Middle East and utterly obliterate them, because they’ll be able to recruit more terrorists to come and be utterly obliterated, so we dare not do that. Wait a minute: If we can’t fight anyone that is trying to kill us because that will make them mad and help them recruit, how do we ever stop them from trying to kill us?
This is apparently an example of the resilient and relentless smartness and strongness of which Mr. Obama spoke.
Mr. Obama also noted that this is “not a war against America and Islam,” and spent some time again demonstrating that despite being born and educated as a Muslim, despite saying that the Muslim call to prayer is the most beautiful sound in the world, despite saying that the future must not belong to those that insult the prophet of Islam, Barack Hussein Obama doesn’t know the first thing about Islam. Or he is choosing to lie about it.
Mr. Obama spent quite a bit of time telling Americans that they must reject discrimination, the point of which is that we are all evil racists and bigots just dying to discriminate against and harass innocent, non-violent Muslims, and we must all think and speak just like Mr. Obama or we betray “American values” and the terrorists win. Again, Mr. Obama neglected to provide a single example of this horrendous and ubiquitous discrimination, but he was probably only trying to save time to appeal to our better natures and American values.
Mr. Obama stirred the nation by observing that we will win because “we are on the right side of history.” This sounds very much like something Neville Chamberlain and other historic appeasers had to say, and will surely produce similar results, despite all the strongness and smartness Mr. Obama is demonstrating to our enemies. He also provided an aphorism that will probably be posted prominently on the wall of the Oval Office, for at least as long as Mr. Obama is president:
Freedom is more powerful than fear.
This is essentially comparing a political philosophy to an emotion, and is rather like saying:
Self-determination is more powerful than mild disdain,
or:
Enfranchisement is more powerful than giddy delight,
or my all-time favorite:
Do you like it better in the country or the summer?
Mr. Obama strongly and smartly assured a fearful nation that “America will prevail” as long as America thinks and speaks and acts like him.
Mr. Obama ended by asking God to bless the United States of America, which he is forever working to fundamentally transform, which is full of evil, anti-Muslim bigots and racists, which is overflowing with rapists which strangely do most of their raping on college campuses, and which needs God’s blessings, because it will certainly never have Mr. Obama’s.
I wonder why so many Americans don’t think Mr. Obama sincere when he says something like that?
All in all, a bizarre and feckless performance that certainly gave our enemies reason to smile, and Americans actual reason to fear our president, and our government.
Great article – as always. Forgive my OCD, but tsk tsk, the grammar police have caught you with your proverbial pants down, “have no AFFECT”? It might “AFFECT” something, but it will have an “EFFECT”. ;-)
Dear jiantingzhufu:
Oops! You’re quite right. It’s fixed. Thanks for the catch!
:-) Just the old English teacher in me. Really enjoy your blog. Keep up the good work!!
Certainly I agree with most of the points you make, Mr. McDaniel. Obama is indeed our first Utterly Stupid President. He is also a two-faced liar. But I recommend that you obtain either a recording or full transcript of his speech which was eminently ignorable.
Detail: Hours before the speech, Fox News ran a banner announcement saying that the Air Force had expended 20,000 bombs against terrorists in the Middle East and they now need congressional funding to re-supply. So that seems to be solid evidence that more than nothing has been done and will be done against the terrorists in that region. Although: it’s a mystery to me how the Air Force managed to drop 20,000 bombs without anyone reporting on it. The Air Force has also been claiming for years that smart bombs are so accurate that only a few are needed where before 10s of thousands were needed.
I fully agree on the no fly list thing. For gun rights activists, it should be emphasized that what is at stake is our ability to use deadly force against deadly force – IN PROPORTION which means whatever kind of gun is needed with whatever amount of ammunition is needed to resist / stop attackers. The only way to fight this is for Congress to mandate that anyone put on the list be notified and have the opportunity to appeal it. Due process is the critical element missing and such a procedure cannot survive under constitutional law because it’s a secret list and WILL BE used to deprive other rights besides the due process provision.
It also makes NO sense to have the no fly list secret. Notifying real terrorist operatives is NOT going to decrease safety and will act to neutralize such operatives because, if sustainable, it’s outing them to the public.
Pingback: The Obama Speech: Freedom and Fear | Rifleman III Journal
1. Again with the workplace violence bit? Okay, so instead of “going postal,” maybe we should start saying “going Islam.”
2. Enough with the red herring of gun control; how about immigration control?
Notice that Obama always says “ISIL,” not “ISIS.” He considers Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and “Palestine” to be the Levant, i.e., Israel does not have a right to exist.
Barbara Boxer said that California’s gun control laws work, and that the state’s crime rate has been declining for years. Obama says that the existing gun control laws are inadequate, so we need to enact more. Which is it?
(BTW, the US crime rate has been going down nation-wide for years, and it has gone down more in states with “shall issue” CCW policies.)
The media have said that the weapons used in San Bernardino were bought legally, but it now appears that it was an already-illegal straw purchase.
Maybe better screening and vetting would have prevented Tashfeen Malik from entering the US. But if you suggest “common sense, reasonable” screening of immigrants, you are a racist, Islamophobe, paranoid, blah blah blah blah.
Maybe better surveillance by law enforcement would have caught Syed Farook before the massacre. But Obama has, in effect, ordered the FBI and DHS not to spy on Muslims. Meanwhile, the IRS spies on Jewish charities.
Farook’s neighbor noticed suspicious activity, but was afraid to call the cops and report it, for fear of being labeled a racist and Islamophobe. It’s hard to blame him. Reichsfuhrer Loretta Lynch has said that her #1 priority is protecting Muslims from some hypothetical “backlash.” The neighbor probably would have been railroaded to federal prison for a hate crime. And if the SBPD or SB County Sheriff’s Department had investigated the terrorists, then the Justice Department would now be prosecuting them (the local cops) for civil rights violations. And the terrorists would be suing San Bernardino.
If you can’t point to a single incident to back up your claim, point to a “pattern”.