Tim Tebow’s girlfriend bikini

Time for a little Rule 5 action.

The moral ambiguity of the Obama Administration

And the left in general. Allowing a madman who has repeatedly threatened to wipe Israel off the map is the moral equivalent to Israel giving up conquered lands in the false hope that the Palestinians and the other camel jockeys and ragheads will then let Israel live in peace. 

And let me be the first to say it: Obama will not succeed in keeping the Iranians from obtaining nuclear weapons. And they are close. That would take a “preemptive strike” and we all know what liberals and squishy moderates think about “preemptive strikes.” They would rather wait until Iran obtains nukes, and uses them, before doing a damn thing about it. And once Iran obtains nuclear weapons, the same liberals (and squishy moderates) won’t do a damn thing to stop them from doing anything with them. That would be too costly. Too many lives would be lost. Nope, we are stuck with  having Iranian mad men–men who believe it is Allah’s will that they obtain nukes and use them to wipe Israel off the map–obtain weapons of mass destruction.  Can you say Armageddon? Oh, well, at least we will have “peace in our time” under Mr. Obama. Won’t we, Mr. Neville Chamberlayne?

I hope Obama’s kidneys fail!

Ha ha. Isn’t that funny? I hope the Moslem terrorists drop a dirty bomb on Obama’s constituents back in his old legislative district! Haha haaahaaa hooo hooo! Isn’t that a good one? Is that too much? I saw you laughing on the inside!  I hope all the idiots who voted for this under-qualified America-hating socialist pig develop kidney stones and gout and skin cancer! Ha ha ha! Ho ho ho! I’m a funny guy! Maybe they should invite me to the next White  House Correspondence dinner after a Republican wins back the White House in 2012.

Obama the Simpleton will cause war

Rahm “the ballerina” Emanuel said that the efforts to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons hinged on peace talks with the Palestinians – Jerusalem Post, May 4.  The problem is that neither Palestine nor Iran wants peace with Israel.  And his juvenile stance therefore gives Iran, and to a lesser extent Palestine, a veto over any efforts to stop Iran from getting nukes.  Solving the “Palestine problem”–which has existed for decades–would be nice.  Preventing Iran from obtaining nukes is crucial. Hundreds of lives, maybe thousands, hang in the balance in the indefinite future because of the “Palestinian problem.” But millions of lives hang in the balance of the Iranian nuke problem.

As  Alan Dershowitz points out, Israel offered the Palestinians peace and a separate state back in 2000-20001:

“Israel in 2000-2001 offered the Palestinians a state in the entire Gaza Strip and more than 95% of the West Bank, with its capital in Jerusalem and a $35 billion compensation package for the refugees. Yassir Arafat rejected the offer and instead began the second intifada in which nearly 5,000 people were killed….”

Dershowitz goes on, in an excellant article which I heartily recommend, to point out that Obama has it exactly backwards: the Palestinian problem can better be solved after the threat of annilation of Israel by Iran is eliminated. Obama has in effect pushed Israel into a corner.  It says that America will not prevent Iran from getting nukes until an unsolvable problem is solved. In other words, it will allow Iran to obtain nukes. And that is something that the Israel people can not accept. Iran has repeatedly threatened to wipe Israel off the map. So now, pushed into a corner, Obama’s position is making it more likely that Israel will solve the problem militarily, on its own.  Rahm Emanuel’s idiotic words, spoken with the blessing of Obama, will have the same effect on Israel that Ambassador April Glaspie’s words had on Saddam Hussein’s decision to invade Kuwait. They will cause war.