Category Archives: Back to the USSR…

Putin Carterizes Obama, Totally


“Carterization” has a specific meaning in American politics. In 1980, Ronald Reagan delivered an August speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Chicago, just as he was starting his campaign to unseat Jimmy Carter, trapped then in the Iranian hostage crisis.

“The response from the administration in Washington” to foreign threats, said Reagan, “has been one of weakness, inconsistency, vacillation and bluff.”

“Our allies are losing confidence in us, and our adversaries no longer respect us,” he said. Our partners “are confused by the lack of a coherent, principled policy from the Carter administration.”

Sound familiar?

Sounds about right…

U.S. Foreign Policy Like Running ‘Experiments on Rats’: Putin

Russian President Vladimir Putin broke his silence on the Ukraine crisis Tuesday and accused the U.S. of interfering in world affairs as if it were conducting experiments on lab rats.

“I think they sit there across the pond in the U.S., sometimes it seems … like they’re in a lab and they’re running all sorts of experiments on the rats without understanding consequences of what they’re doing,” Putin told reporters. “Why would they do that? Nobody can explain it.”

You and me, both, Vlad…

If happy little bluebirds fly….

President Obama’s foreign policy is based on fantasy

The truth hurts, doesn’t it, Washington Post…

President Obama has led a foreign policy based more on how he thinks the world should operate than on reality. It was a world in whichthe tide of war is receding” and the United States could, without much risk, radically reduce the size of its armed forces. Other leaders, in this vision, would behave rationally and in the interest of their people and the world. Invasions, brute force, great-power games and shifting alliances — these were things of the past. Secretary of State John F. Kerry displayed this mindset on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday when he said, of Russia’s invasion of neighboring Ukraine, “It’s a 19th century act in the 21st century.”

That’s a nice thought, and we all know what he means. A country’s standing is no longer measured in throw-weight or battalions. The world is too interconnected to break into blocs. A small country that plugs into cyberspace can deliver more prosperity to its people (think Singapore or Estonia) than a giant with natural resources and standing armies.

Unfortunately, Russian President Vladimir Putin has not received the memo on 21st-century behavior. Neither has China’s president, Xi Jinping, who is engaging in gunboat diplomacy against Japan and the weaker nations of Southeast Asia. Syrian president Bashar al-Assad is waging a very 20th-century war against his own people, sending helicopters to drop exploding barrels full of screws, nails and other shrapnel onto apartment buildings where families cower in basements. These men will not be deterred by the disapproval of their peers, the weight of world opinion or even disinvestment by Silicon Valley companies. They are concerned primarily with maintaining their holds on power.

Yeah, flaccid just about covers it…

Obama ‘could not have issued a more flaccid statement’ on Russian invasion

“The Ukrainians — and I think everybody — are shocked by the weakness of Obama’s statements,” Krauthammer began. “I find it rather staggering . . . What he’s saying is we’re not going to really do anything, and we’re telling the world.”

Jonah Goldberg said that Obama’s reluctance to take a hard line against Putin’s actions in Ukraine unsurprising. “When you listen to Barack Obama talk about this stuff, you get the sense that he as no — I’m sure he knows these things, but you get no sense that he very much cares . . . all of his foreign policy has been through the prism of domestic politics.”

Krauthammer agreed, claiming the international community is now unlikely to strongly condemn Russian aggression. “The world always waits for the signal,” he explained. “You could not have issued a more flaccid statement than what Obama did. Why did he issue it at all? He should’ve just stayed at the White House and gone off and had his happy hour with the Democrats.”

Revealed: The forgotten treaty which could drag the US and UK into WAR with Russia if Putin’s troops intervene in Ukraine

Putin currently has 150,000 troops on Ukraine’s borders and it is reported some have crossed into the country

A treaty signed in 1994 by the US and Britain could pull both countries into a war to protect Ukraine if President Putin’s troops cross into the country.

Bill Clinton, John Major, Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma – the then-rulers of the USA, UK, Russia and Ukraine – agreed to the The Budapest Memorandum as part of the denuclearization of former Soviet republics after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Technically it means that if Russia has invaded Ukraine then it would be difficult for the US and Britain to avoid going to war.

The revelation comes as reports suggest the Kremlin was moving up to 2,000 troops across the Black Sea from Novorossiysk to their fleet base at Sevastopol.

20/20 Hindsight…

Palin Mocked in 2008 for Warning Putin May Invade Ukraine if Obama Elected

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin warned that if Senator Barack Obama were elected president, his “indecision” and “moral equivalence” may encourage Russia’s Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine.

Palin said then:

After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.

For those comments, she was mocked by the high-brow Foreign Policy magazine and its editor Blake Hounshell, who now is one of the editors of Politico magazine.

In light of recent events in Ukraine and concerns that Russia is getting its troops ready to cross the border into the neighboring nation, nobody seems to be laughing at or dismissing those comments now.

Mitt was right…

Sadly, they were still under the lure of the second-coming of Obama…

Let us count the ways:

1. Romney warned at the first presidential debate that Obamacare would be fully installed and cause many to lose their health insurance plans should Obama be re-elected.

2. Romney was also ridiculed by the Obama campaign in 2012 for declaring Russia the nation’s “No. 1 geopolitical foe,” with Obama quipping that the Cold War’s been over for more than 20 years.

3.On the campaign trail, Romney criticized Obama’s inability to work members of Congress and vowed that would continue. He cautioned that the debt ceiling debate would come up again, and a threat of government shutdown and default would loom. Indeed, those predictions all were thrown into sharp relief when a budget impasse was reached, in large part due to fierce fighting over Obamacare, and the government partially shut down Oct. 1.


Selectman could use refresher on Constitution


“We’re from the government and we’re here to inspect your guns!”

In America, it sounds crazy. Here in Massachusetts, it’s just another day in liberal paradise.

Last week, Swampscott Selectman Barry Greenfield proposed the idea of mandatory home inspections for the town’s 600 licensed gun owners. He mentioned the Newtown massacre. He mentioned children’s safety.

There is no record, however, of Selectman Greenfield mentioning the Constitution.

Massachusetts law requires gun owners to store their firearms safely. Greenfield is frustrated with the inability of local cops to push their way into local homes and have a look around without all that “probable cause” and “search warrant” nonsense.

“We need the ability to enforce the state law,” the selectman said, adding that he’s discussed the matter with Swampscott Police Chief Ron Madigan.

If this incredibly bad goose-stepping attack on gun ownership sounds familiar, it should. The state of Washington considered it earlier this year. Then some lawyer heard a rumor about some “Second Amendment thingy” and it went away.

By the way, nobody should be surprised that this attempt to intimidate gun owners is happening in Swampscott, aka “Marblehead Without The Beemers.” It’s a town notorious for treating citizens like servants to be ordered around. Remember the school ordering every parent to attend a program on drug abuse and threatening to punish their kids if they didn’t show up?

- See more at:

And so America’s skewed democracy lurches on toward its next crisis


Because America is powerful, the world has to take notice of these self-inflicted crises. But because it has become so predictably dysfunctional and routinely reckless, they are difficult to take seriously or, at times, even fathom. To the rest of the world and much of America, this is yet another dangerous folly. The fact that the nation did not default should come as cold comfort. The fact that we are even talking about it defaulting is a problem.

This particular flirtation with fate was driven by a visceral opposition to the moderate provision of something most western nations take for granted: healthcare. The reforms they opposed had been been passed by the very body of which they are a member and had been been approved by the US supreme court, the guardian of the very constitution they claimed to be defending. For this, they started a fight they never had the numbers to win and carried on waging it long after it was clear they had lost.

“We’re not going to be disrespected,” insisted Republican Indiana Congressman Marlin Stutzman, last week. “We have to get something out of this. And I don’t know what that even is.”

Nor did anyone else. That’s why the Republicans went down to humiliating defeat. As South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham admitted:

We took some bread crumbs and left an entire meal on the table. This has been a really bad two weeks for the Republican party.


Liberals just hate it when someone uses their own arguments against them.

Putin Exposes the Secrets of American Liberalism

There is an unspoken sub-text at play here: what President Putin said in his column is pretty much what American liberals and leftists have been saying about the United States since the 1960s. From the standpoint of American liberals, there is nothing the least bit new or controversial in anything Mr. Putin wrote in his column. He is merely hoisting President Obama and his liberal friends by their own ideological petard.

Where have we heard Mr. Putin’s principles before? They are in fact basic articles of faith among American liberals who have been saying for decades that the U.S. should not use military force without United Nations authorization, we should not intervene in civil wars abroad, and the idea of American exceptionalism is a myth used to cover up crimes against women and minorities at home and the poor and oppressed abroad.

Barack Obama at one time or another has expressed support for all three of Mr. Putin’s principles. During the 2008 presidential campaign, he said that the intervention in Iraq was illegal because it was not authorized by the United Nations. In 2009, when asked about American exceptionalism, President Obama said, “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.” In other words, we are all exceptional alike, just as Mr. Putin said.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 541 other followers

%d bloggers like this: