June 19, 2013 | 3 comments
June 19, 2013 | 16 comments
June 18, 2013 | 8 comments
June 18, 2013 | 2 comments
June 15, 2013 | 9 comments
Like Tabin, I too have written that President Obama could not “sit on the sidelines and let members of his Cabinet do the talking.” Well, President Obama has talked about Iran and I will say that his remarks at today’s White House Press Conference are an improvement over declaring he didn’t want to be seen as “meddling” in Iran’s affairs. But as I have also noted President Obama made three statements concerning Egypt in a period of fifteen days.
So will this be all President Obama has to say about Iran? Or will he continue to speak out if matters should escalate as they did in Egypt? And if matters do escalate will he call for free and fair elections which result in a government guided by democratic principles which responds to the aspirations of the Iranian people?
The bottom line is that while Obama questioned the legitimacy of Egypt’s authoritarian regime he hasn’t questioned the legitimacy of Iran’s totalitarian regime. And until Obama does question the legitimacy of the Mullahs and Ahmadinejad’s rule the jury will be out on Obama from where the Iranian people stand. Either Obama stands with Iran’s people or he stands with Iran’s regime. He cannot stand behind both. Obama must take sides and I am not completely confident he will take the right one.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?