Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Obama's signature campaign slogan, Yes We Can, has been replicated by the Iranian president in a promotional video

April 28, 2009
Categories: Barack Obama

'Yes We Can,' Farsi edition

From the Guardian:

Obama's signature campaign slogan, Yes We Can, has been replicated by the Iranian president in a promotional video issued for Iran's presidential poll on 12 June, when Ahmadinejad is seeking reelection.

The video features a cover picture of Ahmadinejad wearing his trademark white jacket and pointing to the Farsi phrase Ma Mitavanim (We Can) on a blackboard. The film is aimed at students and capitalises on his former status as a university lecturer.

If anybody knows where the video is, send it my way.

UPDATE: The Guardian's Robert Tait points me to stills from the film.

UPDATE: Or was it the other way around? Christian Rocca reminds me that Ahmadinejad's slogan on his 2005 campaign was, "It's doable -- and we can do it!"

UPDATE: No, wait, Obama had it in 2004.

Which is to say that some cliches are universal.

Obama’s liberal arrogance will be his undoing

The most remarkable, or certainly the least remarked on, aspect of Barack Obama's first 100 days has been the infectious arrogance of his presidency.

There's no denying that this is liberalism's greatest opportunity for wish fulfillment since at least 1964. But to listen to Democrats, the only check on their ambition is the limits of their imaginations.

"The world has changed," Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York proclaimed on MSNBC. "The old Reagan philosophy that served them well politically from 1980 to about 2004 and 2006 is over. But the hard right, which still believes ... [in] traditional values kind of arguments and strong foreign policy, all that is over."

Right. "Family values" and a "strong foreign policy" belong next to the "free silver" movement in the lexicon of dead political causes.

No doubt Schumer was employing the kind of simplified shorthand one uses when everyone in the room already agrees with you. He can be forgiven for mistaking an MSNBC studio for such a milieu, but it seemed not to dawn on him that anybody watching might see it differently.

When George W. Bush was in office, we heard constantly about the poisonous nature of American polarization. For example, Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg came out with a book arguing that "our nation's political landscape is now divided more deeply and more evenly than perhaps ever before." One can charitably say this was abject nonsense. Evenly divided? Maybe. But more deeply? Feh.

During the Civil War, the political landscape was so deeply divided that 600,000 Americans died. During the 1930s, labor strife and revolutionary ardor threatened the stability of the republic. In the 1960s, political assassinations, riots and bombings punctuated our political discourse.

It says something about the relationship of liberals to political power that they can overlook domestic dissent when they're at the wheel. When the GOP is in office, America is seen as hopelessly divided because dissent is the highest form of patriotism. When Democrats are in charge, the Frank Riches suddenly declare the culture war over and dismiss dissent as the scary work of the sort of cranks Obama's Department of Homeland Security needs to monitor.

If liberals thought so fondly of social peace and consensus, they would look more favorably on the 1920s and 1950s. Instead, their political idylls are the tumultuous '30s and '60s, when liberalism, if not necessarily liberals, rode high in the saddle.

Sure, America was divided under Bush. And it's still divided under Obama (just look at the recent Minnesota Senate race and the New York congressional special election). According to the polls, America is a bit less divided under Obama than it was at the end of Bush's 100 days. But not as much less as you would expect, given Obama's victory margin and the rally-around-the-president effect of the financial crisis (not to mention the disarray of the GOP).

Meanwhile, circulation for the conservative National Review (where I work) is soaring. More people watch Fox News (where I am a contributor) in prime time than watch CNN and MSNBC combined. The "tea parties" may not have been as big as your typical union-organized "spontaneous" demonstration, but they were far more significant than any protests this early in Bush's tenure.

And yet, according to Democrats and liberal pundits, America is enjoying unprecedented unity, and conservatives are going the way of the dodo.

Obama has surely helped set the tone for the unfolding riot of liberal hubris. In his effort to reprise the sort of expansion of liberal power we saw in the '30s and '60s, Obama has -- without a whiff of self-doubt -- committed America to $6.5 trillion in extra debt, $65 billion for each one of his first 100 days, and that's based on an impossibly rosy forecast of the economy. No wonder congressional Democrats clamor to take over corporations, tax the air we breathe and set wages for everybody.

On social issues such as abortion and embryonic stem cell research, Obama has proved to be, if anything, more of a left-wing culture warrior than Bush was a right-wing one. All the while, Obama transmogrifies his principled opponents into straw-man ideologues while preening about his own humble pragmatism. For him, bipartisanship is defined as shutting up and getting in line.

I'm not arguing that conservatives are poised to make some miraculous comeback. They're not. But American politics didn't come to an end with Obama's election, and nothing in politics breeds corrective antibodies more quickly than overreaching arrogance. And by that measure, Obama's first 100 days have been a huge down payment on the inevitable correction to come.

Fred Thompson: Obama Gets An 'F' on First 100 Days

Former Senator, TV star and presidential candidate Fred Thompson gives President Barack Obama a failing grade for his performance in his first 100 days in office.

In an exclusive Newsmax interview, the Tennessee Republican declared: “In the most important areas that affect our country, that is our economy and national security, I’d give him an F in both categories."

See Video: Fred Thompson slams Obama's first 100 Days - Click Here Now|

“Domestically he is leading us down the road to economic disaster . . . We’re going to be facing trillion-dollar deficits every year for as far as the eye can see. We cannot sustain that. He’s taken a tough situation and made it a whole lot worse.”

Thompson also told Newsmax that because of Obama administration’s policies that “cater” to the left wing, the dollar will ultimately be endangered, Americans will face runaway inflation and the dilution of their savings, and a minority of Americans will be left to shoulder the tax burden for a majority who pay no taxes.

On the national security front, Obama “has given signs of weakness in his resolve to defend our country,” Thompson said.

“He takes lectures from foreign dictators. He does things that harm our national security, that harm our CIA, that will divide our country as we’ve never been divided before.”

Summing up, Thompson said: “That’s a very bad record, and unfortunately we’re just seeing the beginning of it.

See Video: Fred Thompson slams Obama's first 100 Days - Click Here Now|

© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Obama’s 100 Days

First Lady Michelle Obama steps out in Lanvin sneakers and they're only $540! Read more: "First Lady Michelle Obama steps out in Lanvin sneakers $540

Michelle Obama has taken casual to a haute new level.


Michelle Obama and Jill Biden (center) at a Feeding America event. The First Lady could feed quite a few people with what she paid for thesneakers she's wearing. Morigi/Getty

Michelle Obama and Jill Biden (center) at a Feeding America event. The First Lady could feed quite a few people with what she paid for thesneakers she's wearing.

The kicks, made by high-end French fashion label Lanvin, cost $540. Ernst/Reuters

The kicks, made by high-end French fashion label Lanvin, cost $540.


While volunteering Wednesday at a D.C. food bank, the First Lady sported her usual J.Crew cardigan, a pair of utilitarian capri pants and, on her feet, a sneaky splurge: trainers that go for $540.

That's right: These sneakers - suede, with grosgrain ribbon laces and metallic pink toe caps - are made by French design house Lanvin, one of fashion's hottest labels. They come in denim and satin versions, and have been a brisk seller all spring.

They're out of stock at posh Meatpacking District boutique Jeffrey, and Barneys New York boasts a limited selection of the sneaks, which are a cult favorite among fashionistas.

It's likely Michelle got hers through Ikram, the Chicago retailer that often outfits her.

"They're shoes," the First Lady's reps sniffed when curious reporters inquired about the fancy footwear.

Michelle has stepped out in Lanvin before while getting down to business. A week ago, she shoveled dirt at a tree planting while wearing the line's chiffon tank.

Dresses and strappy pumps cost upward of $1,500, while tops go for $400 to $1,000.

Other celebrity fans of Lanvin's costly kicks include Ellen DeGeneres and Kanye West, who has blogged about his faves.

As the family's primary dog walker, Michelle clearly requires comfortable footwear.

"I got up at 5:15 in the morning to walk my puppy," she joked Thursday. "That's how my day starts. Even though the kids are supposed to do a lot of the work, I'm still up at 5:15 a.m. taking my dog out."

She'll be trodding on New York's sidewalks Tuesday for the first time as First Lady. Michelle will meet with staff at the U.S. mission to the United Nations. Later, she headlines Time magazine's "100 most influential people" gala.

Did president approve buzzing New York?

Air Force officer: 'It shows a kind of arrogance'

Posted: April 30, 2009
12:30 am Eastern

By Andrea Shea King
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

An Air Force officer who served in the Clinton White House and for two years carried the "nuclear football" briefcase of codes says it's almost certain that the "highest levels" of the Obama administration knew about and approved this week's stunt in which Air Force One buzzed New York City.

Retired Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson served in Clinton's White House from 1996 to 1998 and was responsible for the president's "emergency satchel," the black bag of nuclear codes that accompanies the president at all times.

He wrote "Reckless Disregard" and "Dereliction of Duty" after his retirement from the military.

During an interview on "The Andrea Shea King Show" last night, he said, "I can't imagine that anyone who works in the Air Force thought that was a good idea. I have worked in the White House and having worked for the Military Office, with the guys at Andrews Air Force Base and the ground crews, that (decision) had to come down from on high."

Among the procedures with which he became familiar during his work with Clinton were those involving the preparation of the president's 747 jet for flight.

"It defies my belief that the White House staff did not know they were launching the 747 to go up and do this. So it had to come down from the White House. It wouldn't have been done on behalf of the folks at Andrews (Air Force Base). It would have been done at the direction of the White House," he said.

Patterson said the low-flying escapade over Manhattan clearly was not an oversight.

"The White House Military Office director is the Obama appointee – Caldera in this particular situation. So, he got the notification, he got the direction from somebody – I'm guessing Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff would probably be the person behind this."

Does that mean the president also knew?

"I'm guessing he probably did. Did Emanuel know about it? I guarantee you he did. It did not come from the Andrews folks. It came from on high," Patterson said.

He said the stunt reveals the judgment level in the Obama White House.

"I think that it shows you… quite clearly the lack of knowledge, the lack of focus or the understanding the Obama White House has toward the military, much like my former boss President Bill Clinton. I think it also shows a kind of arrogance to using toys – I'm sure that would be a phrase President Obama might use, his 'toys' – to get photo op shots around New York City and not recall or remember what happened on 9/11 and the fact that it might have caused some alarm. And I think really, it shows again a hundred days, a hundred mistakes with the Obama administration."

Patterson explained the process that would have had to take place to get the jumbo jet in the air.

"The White House Military Office would have called the presidential pilot office at Andrews and said, 'We want to get this airplane airborne. We want to get some photo ops over New York City. We want to get some photos with the statue of Liberty in the background or the Empire State Building or whatever, and we'll have a couple of aircraft with it taking pictures of the airplane with the background of New York City. And that’s what happened," he said.

Though Patterson believes the responsibility for the flights estimated to cost more than $300,000 resides at the highest levels, Military Office Director Louis Caldera has accepted the responsibility. In a statement released Wednesday, Caldera said:

"Last week, I approved a mission over New York. I take responsibility for that decision. While federal authorities took the proper steps to notify state and local authorities in New York and New Jersey, it's clear that the mission created confusion and disruption. I apologize and take responsibility for any distress that flight caused."

But Patterson isn't buying it.

"No doubt Caldera is taking the hit for this… that's kind of how the Obama administration works, much like the Clinton administration – they have to push this down to the lowest level that it'll actually stick. So they had to push this down to 'Who can we cut loose?' And I guarantee you he’ll be fired within the next week or two. This façade of an investigation and a review of what happened will end up on his desktop and he'll be fired. … But it probably wasn't his fault. It probably came from above, and he was the person, the lackey, executing the orders to do this. He called Andrews and the Andrews Wing Commander got involved and the president's pilot squadron got involved and so this thing happened. So he'll probably be the guy that's the scapegoat."

Patterson currently flies for a carrier on a route crossing the nation.

"I fly an airplane out of Los Angeles into New York City all the time. I fly a large airplane. In NYC airspace at any point in time, especially during the day during normal waking hours to fly over the city like at that low level, it's almost impossible to coordinate with the FAA. So there was a lot of coordination done on this, a lot of advance legwork and groundwork done on this."

"It boggles my mind because when I fly into New York City, we have to stay on this straight and narrow path that you cannot deviate virtually by feet, and here's a 747 that's got the approval to fly all over the city at low level and again, scare the people of New York. It just defies description," he said.

"I can't imagine as a pilot, and an Air Force officer and a former Clinton administration official, I can't imagine who thought that was a good idea!"

It's just the latest evidence of mistaken judgment, he said.

"The releasing of the CIA interrogation stuff, which is a farce; the fact that he flies to Iowa on Earth Day in a 747 to talk about saving and preserving our resources and fuel; the fact that he launches an empty airplane to New York City for a photo op; this is exactly out of the playbook of President Bill Clinton in my time at the White House. It's remarkably and scarily similar," Patterson said.

"I think that they are – much like the Clinton administration – incredibly ignorant and devoid of reality when it comes to this country. They didn't even think about the impact this might have, because they don't understand that the war on terror is a real war on terror. They've changed the verbiage. They've changed the terms," he said.

"The fact that they would fly a large airplane over a city that was attacked on 9/11 and the response of the people of New York was obviously 180 from what the Obama people thought. They just assumed there'd be no reaction because they don't feel there's a threat out there? They don't understand that this country is still at war with terrorists and with the people who want to change our way of life. Instead, we're shaking hands with Hugo Chavez; we're shaking hands and brushing up with Hamas and Iran. We're doing all these things that the Bush administration never would have even considered imaginable. So I think it shows not only arrogance, but more importantly, more troublingly to me, it shows that they're just out of touch.

"I find it incredible with our current economic situation that we're flying 747s empty anywhere in the country, much less for a photo op. And again, they're so wantonly careless about this," he said.


Dennis Miller discusses Obama’s mockery of tea Parties