To Burn or Not to Burn: That Is NOT the Question

September 10, 2010 | Comments (0)

We have no idea if the newly notorious pastor in Florida is going to burn the Koran on Saturday. He apparently hasn’t decided, but no matter. Having successfully reaped his 15 minutes of fame, and now apparently inspiring others to burn, as well, when tomorrow dawns, the situation has escalated into an international firestorm. Yet the actual burning is not at all the issue.

I personally find book burning abhorrent, whether the tinder be the Bible, the Koran, Mein Kampf, Harry Potter or Huckleberry Finn. I frankly regard this pastor’s showboating as either a publicity stunt or a death wish (perhaps both), evident in his announcing his intent long before 9/11 to ensure maximum media attention. But my country has taught me that it is within the rights of all Americans to burn a book or a flag, to behave stupidly and recklessly, or to speak out against our government — rights foreign to most other countries, particularly those currently criticizing our handling of our own internal issues, such as illegal immigration and the building of a mosque at Ground Zero.

What disgusts me most about this incident is not that a man of the cloth would protest Islam by burning its book, but rather the strident response of, among others, our own media outlets, elected officials, and President to the man’s threats to do so.

I think back to moments in our history — to the celebrated desecration of the Virgin Mary and the Star of David, to modern-day Nazis marching through a town occupied by Holocaust survivors, to a crucifix submerged in a glass of urine heralded as fine art, to the former President routinely burned in effigy — and I wonder, where were the protests from all those exalted authorities and institutions then? Where were the calls for restraint? We all know the answer to that one.

Which brings us to the fundamental difference between these documented incidents in our recent past, and the current threat of a torched Koran. Fear. That’s the difference. The authorities and institutions squawking in unison to stop Saturday’s burning don’t fear the Christians, the Jews or we the people. They know that those so inclined to desecrate and disgrace the symbols of these faiths, and of America herself, can do so freely and graphically without threat of repercussion. But these same authorities and institutions are terrified to the bone of those who follow Islam. Their resulting reactions, their policies, their censorship and their scoldings, are fueled by that fear.

This chronic hypocrisy is in turn fueling the palpable rage brewing in America right now: a rage at the tyranny spewing from our nation’s capitol, a rage at politically correct appeasement of those who wish to destroy us (whether or not a Koran is burned), a rage at punishing policies and taxes that cripple our childrens’ futures. This rage now boils over at a most symbolic moment in our nation’s history – the anniversary of a day we the people will not forget, despite the left’s attempt to rewrite history. It’s going to be a rocky ride.

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)

Newsweek Scolds Us for Overreacting to 9/11

September 8, 2010 | Comments (2)

After circling the drain of financial ruin for several years, thanks to the changing face of print journalism and an unseemly allegiance to leftwing extremism, Newsweek magazine sold last month for a buck to a benevolent billionaire. Inspired by the promise of second chances and new beginnings, Newsweek is now apparently back on track, ready to return to its glory days, when subscribers actually paid to receive its pages in their homes.

To demonstrate its born-again connection to 21st century America, a Newsweek columnist, on the eve of the ninth anniversary of 9/11, has commented in the magazine that:

“September 11 was a shock to the American psyche and the American system. As a result, we overreacted.”

Anyone with a soul was indeed shocked on that day, when more than 3,000 Americans were lost in a swift and well-orchestrated attack on our home by Islamic terrorists. Most of us know precisely what we were doing the instant we heard how we had been so violently blindsided on that terrible September morning, and we remember everything we did and thought every moment following it for weeks thereafter.

How silly of us to take it so hard, Newsweek scolds us now. How ridiculous for us to overreact so. Just look at the lack of similar attacks since that day, continues the columnist, conveniently ignoring America’s “overreaction” as the reason for that.

Time will tell if this brilliant insight will bring the magazine back into the black financially. I have my theory on this, of course.  In the meantime, I’m content to ignore the Newsweek scolding and to continue “overreacting” whenever possible, whenever necessary. I hope you’ll join me.

Betsy Siino | Comments (2)

Journalist Hacks Sink to a New Low with the First Lady’s Vacation

August 20, 2010 | Comments (1)

Back in the day when the Clintons were in office, friends and I (those who had put the Clintons in office included), would joke about the deal this couple must have cut with the devil. As the scandals kept piling on at breakneck speed – and as Teflon Bill and his wife continually deflected whatever came their way – we could only imagine the monarch of the underworld scrambling around trying to figure out just how the he** he was going to make this one go away. He must have concluded pretty early on that he really wasn’t getting his money’s worth with this one.

For some reason, the lapdog media’s response to Her Royal Highness Michelle’s recent five-star sojourn to Europe has reminded me of those halcyon days that had Beezlebub scrambling to cover for the Clintons. With few, admittedly big-gun exceptions, they have desperately tried to paint this picture in a positive light. And they have ended up looking like even bigger fools for it.

Since the moment of the big announcement that HRH Michelle would be traveling to Spain with a massive, budget-busting entourage, destined to tolerate only the finest Spain could offer, the royal couple’s loyal media hacks have regaled those few who would listen with fanciful Camelotesque tales of how this woman has taken Europe by storm, while simultaneously inspiring the peasants back home. But despite the valiant spin, the lapdogs know full well that those peasants back home (the core of their ever-dwindling audiences) aren’t buying this pathetic story arc. Indeed Michelle’s opulence, coupled with the failing economy and job losses on the homefront, are the classic definition of “disconnect.”

The Clintonesque last straw occurred when one media outlet grasped in a last gasp for a message that would resonate. This particular media outlet (never mind the name, as they are all interchangeable) sputtered that Michelle Obama is only now beginning to approach the extravagance of….and it’s embarrassing for me even to write the name….Laura Bush.

Laura Bush?!

Did I hear that correctly? Yes, I did. Laura Bush. Nancy Reagan has been out of the spotlight for too long for such comparisons, they wouldn’t dare utter the name Barbara Bush, and Hillary…well, she’s one of them and has that pact in place, so the only option is Laura Bush, one of the gentlest, most gracious and elegant First Ladies ever to occupy the White House (gosh, I miss her). Say what you wish about George W., and indeed many have, using such terms as “assassinate,” “Nazi” and “idiot.” But Laura? Extravagance? Even the lapdogs couldn’t sink so low, could they?

Obviously they did, and in making this ridiculous, bogus connection, they reveal the shameful level of pathetic desperation to which they have sunk. Must be tougher than ever to look themselves in the mirror at night. How can they can face their non-journalist friends? How they can face their children? Struggle as they must to remain true to their loyalty to the First Family, they are learning, as certain presumed masters of the underworld must have in the nineties, how dangerous – and embarrassing – it is to pledge your allegiance to parties who make an artform of thumbing their collective noses in your face.

Betsy Siino | Comments (1)

Waiting for Left-Wing Apologies to General Petraeus

June 25, 2010 | Comments (2)

Well, two days have passed since Commander-in-Chief Obama dismissed General Stanley McChrystal and handed control of the Afghanistan theater of the war on terror over to General David Petraeus. Two days, and I have yet to hear an apology from Obama or Hillary or any of their kindred left-wing spirits in Congress, who just months ago referred to General Petraeus as a failure as Commander of the war in Iraq, and joined forces with those who would refer to him gleefully and oh-so-cleverly as General “Betray-us.”

While I am waiting for this apology (and not holding my breath), I imagine what I presume the scene  might have been two days ago in the editorial offices of Rolling Stone. I imagine the staffers, editors and writers gathered around an office television, hanging on the every golden word of their beloved Obama. As soon as they hear that magical announcement — ding, dong, McChrystal is gone – deafening cheers, joyous high-fives and leaps into the air erupt in response, all-out celebration for the death blow they have so successfully dealt the U.S. military.

But then, one in their midst, his eyes and ears still directed toward the tube, calls for them to cease and desist in their revelry. Face ashen and drawn, he calls their attention back to their beloved O. They watch in silence. In shock. They can’t believe what they are hearing. David what? The Betrayer in Afghanistan? No! The celebration has ended as suddenly as it began. And this time, whether they and their fearless leader in the White House care to acknowledge it or not, their nemesis, the U.S. military, won’t be so easily taken down.

In fact, at this very moment rumors are flying that General Petraeus agreed to take over in Afghaniston only on condition that he can alter the notorious rules of engagement that have severely curtailed our warriors’ abilities to carry out their missions and to protect themselves on the ground. I’m sure these rumors have not escaped those Rolling Stone staffers, who, should the rumors prove to be true, fear they won’t have another cause for celebration any time soon.

Betsy Siino | Comments (2)

General McChrystal’s Dismissal and a Failing President’s Panic

June 23, 2010 | Comments (4)
So General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of our U.S. troops in Afghanistan, is summoned to the White House to explain comments critical of the Obama administration in Rolling Stone Magazine. The military hit piece insinuates that the General and his inner circle are not all that pleased with Obama and his minions (even though he, the General, allegedly voted for Obama). General McChrystal is summarily dismissed by Commander-in-Chief Obama, a man unworthy even to lick the combat boots of this American hero, who for decades has upheld his Constitutional oath to protect this nation from all enemies, both foreign and domestic.

And I say, thank you, General McChrystal. Perhaps by your own design, you find yourself playing a key role in this flagging President’s pathetic effort to suggest he is a leader in a time when his incompetence is being showcased in circus-like clarity to America and the world. Perhaps you and your staff were insubordinate in even considering (for whatever reason) speaking with Rolling Stone, but you are no fool, Sir, and I am confident you knew exactly what you were doing.

For months I have ranted that our military cannot possibly respect this man they are forced to regard as their Commander-in-Chief. Perhaps this recent event, then, is a message, a sign sent to us from our troops, reassuring us that despite their mandated courtesy, the military at large does not in any way respect or trust this radical left-wing administration and the man at their helm.

We have seen glimmers of this, particularly in the less-than-boisterous response our military tends to offer the President when he enters a room. This occurred most recently, when the light applause that greeted Obama for his West Point commencement address forced him to delete a reference to overwhelming cheers from his telepromptered speech. It’s downright laughable to imagine that this anti-war, anti-military “community organizer,” who surrounds himself only with like-minded sixties throwbacks (“wimps,” their critics in Rolling Stone called them) would somehow believe that the greatest military force in the world would follow them blindly in their efforts to bring our great nation to her knees.

Nevertheless, Obama today justified his dismissal of a man so blatantly his superior in a phony, hawkish speech, insisting, without any shred of authenticity, that he values debate among his team and that he reveres the greatness of America and her military. If he says it, he figures once again, we will believe.  And, once again, he is wrong. In fact, early response to his latest phony speech indicates that far too many Americans for Obama’s comfort are once again viewing him, his words and his actions as wrong, ineffectual and dangerous.

 Obama has told us, as well, that General David Petraeus will be taking the reins in Afghanistan. In his phony-hawk speech Obama sang General Petraeus’ praises, apparently hoping we’ll forget those halcyon days when he counted himself among the tyrants in our government who referred to this American hero as General “Betrayus” and treated him with abject disrespect when he testified before Congress about our troops’ success in Iraq. But we won’t forget, Mr. Obama. Ever. And you can bet that despite whatever you discussed today, General Petraeus hasn’t forgotten either.

The bottom line here is that this is simply another wrench thrown into Obama’s ongoing troubles that seem to be spiraling out of control by the day. And, as with all the pathetic, face-saving, panic-driven decisions he makes, he will soon be reminded yet again that there are consequences to his unique blend of thuggery and ineptitude.

Though Barack Obama attempted to appear strong and decisive to the masses today (his expression revealing another truth), his decision unleashed a man of true leadership and heroism who can squish him like a bug, both literally and with his now-liberated freedom of speech. The General has street cred among us “regular Americans” that the current occupant of the White House will never have. Despite General McChrystal’s alleged vote for Obama – which, frankly, I find the most shocking element of this entire story – I have a feeling the General  will do much in the months ahead to make amends for a vote that helped to sentence our nation to Obama’s twisted dominion.

In the meantime, as we await the fallout of General McChrystal’s dismissal and a failing President’s panic, my prayers remain with our troops in Afghanistan. Once again they find themselves pawns in an insidious game of wonton D.C. decisions that place political aspirations and posturing above their safety, their security, and their dedication to protecting our United States. May God be with them. May God be with us all.

Betsy Siino | Comments (4)

Obama Tries to Be Manly and the Left Goes Gaga

June 11, 2010 | Comments (0)

Following the advice of his handlers, pollsters and a bunch of celebrities, Barack Obama tried to get tough this week and “show his anger” with the oil-spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico by dropping the A-word. Apparently the belatedly scripted shot of him walking along an oil-spattered beach in his spindly designer suit, his dress shirt rolled up at the sleeves, concern emanating from his furrowed brow, just wasn’t enough to suggest that he is powerful and competent.

But once he dropped that A-word, making it clear he would be finding whom to blame (rather than finding solutions), his minions in the lapdog media went wild, cooing that their President had not only exploded in emotion, but had also given the masses a quintessential show of masculinity. To be fair, they really aren’t all that familiar with masculinity, so I suppose they can be forgiven for so blatantly misidentifying it here, yet it’s sad to think that Chris Matthews’ leg is probably still tingling.

Of course, those of us who do admire true masculinity, and still consider real men to be valuable assets to our culture, found Obama’s attempt to show some belated manly behavior in response to this devastating tragedy inappropriate, completely lacking in leadership, and downright embarrassing. We the people would have preferred to see him jump on the disaster at its onset; acknowledge its potential impact; and pass up a few tee-times, fundraisers, teleprompted speeches, and rock concerts in the White House. Oh, and for the record, Mr. President, a real man, a genuine American leader, would have told the aging Beatle that it was not the time, nor certainly the place, to bash the man who occupied the Oval Office before you did. Now that would have made my leg tingle.

When not tingling over their President’s show of manliness, the lapdogs are similarly celebrating the masculinity of Joe McGinniss, the so-called journalist who has courageously moved in next door to Sarah Palin to spy on her and her family and gather dirt. Again: What can you expect from a gaggle of clowns who have only the likes of Keith Olbermann, our tingly friend Chris, and David Letterman (to name only a few) as their masculine role models?

Unfortunately, it’s a lost cause even to imagine the left ever figuring out that stalking, cursing, blaming, avoiding, evading and hand-wringing do not a real man make. Nor are they components of a leader, particularly an American leader. And a leader, man or woman, is what we Americans need right now. We need a fearless American at the helm of our nation who genuinely loves, respects and cherishes this country and her laws. These are qualities that cannot be faked. We know them when we see them, and we look forward to the day when we will see them in the White House, in the halls of Washington, and in the State Houses and City Halls of this great nation once more. We pray that day will come soon.

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)

Obama Belittles the Murder of Daniel Pearl

May 19, 2010 | Comments (4)

Just when you think Barack Obama can’t be more lacking in conscience, emotion, blood and heart, he gets out there and outdoes himself again.

I offer this most recent example, given to us earlier this week when Obama signed the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act, remarking that:

“Obviously the loss of Daniel Pearl was one of those moments that captured the world’s imagination because it reminded us of how valuable a free press is…blah, blah, blah…sends a strong message… State Department is paying attention…blah, blah, blah….how other governments are operating… blah, blah, blah….”

I’m sorry, never mind all the typical Obama rhetoric that simply reveals once more how disconnected this President is from the real America, real people, and his own refusal to recognize evil for what it is and give it a name. No, this droid of a President had me at “captured the world’s imagination.”

For the record, Mr. President, movies “capture the imagination.” Books “capture the imagination.” The horrific murder of a man at the hand of Islamic terrorists – terrorists you won’t name as such but whom you will protect with the precious rights of an American citizen….that is an act of war, Mr. President, an act of terror, and a desecration of life and dignity. Nothing inspiring or imaginative about it, and disgraceful and disgusting is the man who would view it so.

Barack Obama’s imagination was apparently captured on February 1, 2002, when the rest of us watched in horror as Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was beheaded by masked terrorists in Pakistan.  Revealing to all the world the raw nature of evil, they tortured him, and they murdered him. On camera. Not because he was a journalist, but because he was an American. And a Jewish American at that.

Now Obama tells us that this atrocity was not what we all perceived it to be. It was not in fact yet another testament to the evil driving those who seek to destroy us and our children. No, he tells us in his customary cold, robotic manner, that it was a tribute to a free press.

Meanwhile, the colleagues in that free press that Daniel Pearl left behind continue to ignore the void within their beloved President, who would regard the violent death of one of their own as an imagination-capturing event. This should be their wake-up call, the signal that perhaps it’s time for them to open their eyes and acknowledge the shattering lack of humanity at the root of this and so many other Obama comments like it. I won’t count on this happening, of course. I trust these so-called journalists will continue to find it more comfortable to fill their cozy niches within this administration’s army of “useful idiots.” Indeed their President is relying on them to do just that.

Betsy Siino | Comments (4)

Taking Us for Fools Yet Again in the Wake of a Would-Be Attack

May 8, 2010 | Comments (1)

Update (May 10):  Attorney General, Eric Holder, perhaps realizing that the American people weren’t buying the party line, has acknowledged that previous claims about the would-be Times Square bomber acting alone, reacting to his inability to reach the American Dream, yada, yada, yada, were apparently off base.  The United States, he now says, has ”developed evidence that shows the Pakistani Taliban was behind the attack.” No surprise there, Eric. Maybe next time you’ll listen to us.

Original Post (May 8):  Lots of polls – scientific and otherwise — making the rounds almost hourly these days. Let’s conduct our own completely unscientific poll here, and measure what might be labeled the most humorous aspects of Faisal Shahzad’s attempted bombing of Times Square on May 1st, and the administration’s and their lapdog media’s response to that would-be attack.

*  Lapdog media hacks presuming the alleged perpetrator, before and after he was identified and apprehended, to be an obvious member of the Tea Party. See how violent those right-wingers are? (They fell short of calling him a teabagger.)

*  The lapdogs’ anguish upon learning that the alleged perpetrator was a Muslim named Shahzad rather than a Christian named Billy Bob, Jeff, Bubba or Sarah Palin.

*  Shahzad painted as a disgruntled family man, just trying to make ends meet and facing mortgage foreclosure in the unfair, cutthroat, racist world that is America.

*  Shahzad proclaimed an obvious amateur (thus no real threat), who had no idea what he was doing, despite his knowledge of explosives, his possession of explosives, and his knowledge of airline/airport operations and vehicular identification practices.

*  Media and administration alike proclaiming the White House victorious in stopping this attack — at the same time claiming there was no threat because of the alleged perpetrator’s amateur status.

*  Shahzad’s being granted American citizenship one year ago, despite his many trips back and forth to Pakistan and documented meetings with known suspicious individuals.

*  Shahzad’s ability to board a plane for the Middle East without that pesky “no-fly list” from which he was removed a year ago to stop him, despite his many trips back and forth to Pakistan and documented meetings with known suspicious individuals.

*  White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs’ now-familiar stuttering and stammering, finally resorting to that now-familiar standby: “Blame Fox News. It’s their fault.”

*  Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s now-familiar channeling of the deer in the headlights as she is once again asked to explain this administration’s actions (or lack thereof) and the safety of our America.

*  Shahzad hated George Bush, so what do you expect?

*  He acted alone.

Hmm. Come to think of it, none of these are funny. We the people end up the losers once more, our country at risk, our families in danger. No, not funny at all.

Betsy Siino | Comments (1)

What a Difference a Day Makes

April 18, 2010 | Comments (1)

The song says: “What a difference a day makes.” Since January of 2009 we have experienced a constant barrage of events each and every day that have kept us worrying and fretting over the well-being and the very existence of our country. Indeed those of us who love this nation, and have no desire to see it “transformed,” have known no peace since then. The days I have been hobbled during this site’s re-tooling have been no exception. The highlights:

  • The President of Poland, his wife, the leader of the Polish military and virtually all of Poland’s top officials were killed when the plane carrying them to a memorial in Russia crashed in that nation’s countryside. Poland has been one of America’s staunchest allies, and the prayers of countless Americans have been sent their way. In an unfortunate PR move, Barack Obama, unable to attend the President’s funeral because of the volcano in Iceland, went golfing instead.
  •  Tax Day, April 15th, was commemorated by thousands of Americans who participated in peaceful Tea Party demonstrations throughout the nation to protest “taxation without representation.” Their actions were met, as expected, by lapdog media types and democrat politicians with derision and ridicule that only served to reveal once more how frightened they are of the Tea Party movement. More than one pundit commented that it’s never good for politicians and those seeking ratings to attack the American people.
  •  Joining his media and political minions, Barack Obama, displaying the heights of elitist arrogance, commented that he was “amused” by the Tea Party Americans who took to the streets on Tax Day. Regarding, as he does, we the people as a source of peasant entertainment, here’s hoping Obama won’t be so “amused” come November.
  • We witnessed the de-fanging of America, when Barack Obama not only signed a nuclear disarmament treaty with Russia (displaying once again his naïve ignorance and useful idiocy), but also let it be known to all the world that they are free to attack America and her people without fear of retribution.
  •  When Sarah Palin expressed her disgust with Obama’s signing of the disarmament treaty, disgust shared by the vast majority of Americans, Obama responded arrogantly that “last I checked, Sarah Palin’s not much of an expert on nuclear issues.” The lapdog media representative interviewing Obama at the time, in a predictable effort to protect a President whose education has been severely limited, chose not to ask Obama to outline his own expertise in this (or any) area.
  • Obama puzzled proud Americans – including, no doubt, those who serve in our armed forces – when he said, “…whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military super power.”
  • Barbara Crabb, a U.S. District Judge in Wisconsin, ruled that the National Day of Prayer, established in 1952, is unconstitutional.
  • Democrats in the California legislature killed a resolution that would have honored the 100th birthday of the Boy Scouts of America and scouting in California. The celebration has proceeded anyway, without the blessing of California democrats.

 Sadly, this is only a drop in the bucket. But it’s enough for now. It serves to remind us that with every day presenting unwanted “differences,” we the people, amusing as we may be to certain individuals, cannot give up the fight. How it frightens our opposition to know that we have no intention of doing so.

Betsy Siino | Comments (1)

Cavuto Calls Him on It

March 20, 2010 | Comments (0)

Plenty of us have been plenty stressed this week, and it doesn’t help when you can’t look away from the minute-by-minute run-up to the calamity that may await our nation tomorrow when traitors in Congress vote “yes” for a government takeover of our nation. But I did find one bright spot yesterday afternoon when I was watching Neil Cavuto on Fox Business.

Mr. Cavuto was interviewing some wimpy New York democratic Congressman. I don’t know which one – take your pick, doesn’t matter. Nervous and jittery, unsuccessfully adopting as best he could the unfamiliar countenance of a rugged individual, this so-called “representative” announced to Neil’s viewing audience that after much thought and contemplation, he had decided to vote “yes” on the health-care atrocity (my word, not his).

In response, Mr. Cavuto, his signature sardonic smirk in place, said in effect — and I paraphrase here — that with all due respect, Congressman, you were already a “yes” on Nancy Pelosi’s list. We already knew you would vote yes, so we don’t consider your vote a change from a “no” to a “yes.” In other words: Everyone already knows you are nothing but a pawn in Nancy’s pocket, Congressman, so please don’t insult us, or embarrass yourself, by pretending to man-up.

The Congressman’s pasty face went even pastier. He really had nothing more to say, so he didn’t say anything. Caught in his own insipid trap, his silence acknowledged loud and clear that Neil’s laser was spot on.

With these so-called representatives of democracy toppling by the minute into the laps of Pelosi and Obama, trashing their constituents and their own careers for the sake of their dear leader and his plan to transform America, I thank Neil Cavuto for refusing to play nice.

And to these Congressional dems, I say: I’m so tired of your phony posturing and your idiotic pretenses of pinciple and character. We all know you’ll fall right into line in the end, all according to script. Just go out there and tell us that you will be voting “yes” because you have sold your souls, you have been threatened, you’re weak, you’re scared, you’re afraid of being drummed out of the cocktail parties and private clubs by naked thugs in the shower, you’ve never even read the Constitution and/or you don’t understand its big words, and you’ve been promised a ride on Air Force One.

Just tell us what we already know: You are perfectly content to follow the most corrupt administration in our history down its road of destruction. 

Bottom line: You are making a choice. You are doing what is easy, rather than what is right (and setting a fine example for your children). As I have said in these posts before, in the words of Aaron Tipton, “whatever you do today, you’ll have to sleep with tonight.” Here’s one American who will be wishing you plenty of sleepless nights ahead.

Betsy Siino | Comments (0)