Tag Archives: GW Bush

Biden the Bedazzler

In liberal circles, it’s believed that conservatives are intellectually challenged and the left are just, well they’re just smarter, better informed and more perceptive about everything.  Ask a liberal and they’ll tell you that high levels of gray matter, or lack thereof, is what determines political persuasion.  Progressives are of the opinion that the mentally unsophisticated lean right and those blessed with an abundance of gray matter are naturally predisposed toward the left.

Even the uneducated, inarticulate and uninformed believe identifying with liberalism secures an automatic position at the top of the IQ charts, a pair of horn-rimmed glasses, and a complimentary subscription to the New York Times.

Think about it – the liberal press is full of geniuses.  To name a few: Progressive radio talk show host Stephanie Miller, CBS News star and journalist extraordinaire Katie Couric, disgruntled Catholic altar boy Bill Maher, can’t-get- the-facts-straight Rachel Maddow, former MSNBC anchormaniac Keith Olbermann and ex-Joffrey Ballet Company dancer Ron Reagan.

The left side of  “The View” couch touts superior intellect, as does much of the leftist Hollywood elite crowd, which includes learned minds like Cher, Michael Moore, Rosie O’Donnell, Sean Penn, Oliver Stone and of course Intertel wannabes like the warm and cuddly Janeane Garofalo.

This group which, by the way, is quite extensive, have forged lucrative careers pointing out the poverty of brainpower evidenced in individuals such as Sarah Palin and George W. Bush as well as the entire American electorate.

This is also true in politics. Based on an impressive ability to deceive the masses with charm and rhetoric, Rhodes Scholar Bill Clinton is extolled as America’s bony-fingered genius.  Bill’s brighter half, Hillary, the supposed “smartest woman in the world,” was able to detect an obscure “vast right wing conspiracy” on mental power alone.

Then of course you have Barack Obama.  Barack is so intellectually gifted that Columbia University couldn’t find a grade high enough to award the man. Instead, throughout his college career institutions of higher learning chose to forgo subjecting him to their inferior grading systems, which must explain the missing transcripts.

When discussing liberal intellect, Vice President “Three letter word…J-O-B-S” Joseph Robinette Biden should not be excluded from the conversation.

Unfortunately for liberals, when Joe speaks, besides geniality, brutal honesty, average aptitude and inability to consistently articulate coherent thoughts, what is exposed is a liberal tendency to accept in some people what is fodder for the mockery of others.

When it comes to Joe, it’s a “big f______ deal” to hand the man a microphone or, for that matter, to allow a microphone within 500 feet of his lips if they’re moving. Biden has proven to be the world’s most candid politician, which explains why liberals keep Biden around; in comparison to their blathering, Joe helps twisted truth appear intelligent.

Void of measured consideration, Joe is famous for exposing the innermost recesses of his own thought processes. Take for example the Vice President sharing insights on Obama’s $900 billion stimulus with members of the House Democratic Caucus.  It was there that Biden blurted out, “If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, there’s still a 30% chance we’re going to get it wrong.”  Oops!

Even with practice, Biden’s ability to think before speaking appears to be getting worse, not better.  Prior to the historic 2008 election, Joe was so worked up on the campaign trail that he referred to Obama as “Barack America.”   The Vice President even exhorted paralyzed US Senator Chuck Graham to “stand and let … people see you.”

With Biden, authentic gusto oftentimes overrides prudence, like when a pumped up Biden disregarded confidentiality and, without further explanation, blurted out that he, Michelle, and Barack had all been tested for HIV/AIDS. Maybe if liberals want to maintain credibility it would be best if people like Stephanie Miller refrained from calling Sarah Palin an “idiot.”

The left laughed it off when Biden beseeched St. Patty’s Day blessings on the deceased mother of a world leader who was still very much alive. They chuckled when at one event Joe gave a shout-out to state senators who weren’t even in attendance, and when he confused automotive company Ener1 with disgraced energy corporation Enron.

More recently, while representing the United States in a diplomatic capacity (have mercy dear Lord), during a visit to Moscow Biden pulled a Bush in Australia.  Mr. Biden “mangled the name of Russia’s most famous prisoner Mikhail Khodorkovsky.”  The result: a stammering Biden once again pardoned for what brought Bush relentless humiliation.

Advocating for human rights on behalf of business entrepreneur/democracy-loving political prisoner Khodorkovsky, Joe “barked” out: “Over the past few months our administration has spoken out against allegations of misconduct in the trial of… of, uh… the, um… excuse me… Khodor… Kovinsky.”

After receiving “more giggles than rounds of applause,” Joe was clever enough to muster “a self-deprecating joke,” which “instantly endeared” him to the audience.  Once again, with nary a peep from the left, Biden was given a liberal pass for an understandable slip-up that, if he were a conservative, would have been mocked with gusto.

Wasn’t G.W. Bush’s lack of intelligence alleged because of his tendency toward improper pronunciation? Yet, based on party affiliation, Joe is not and never will be held to the same stringent garbling standards as George.  The left have set the pronunciation/intelligence bar so high that every time the Vice President opens his mouth to speak the unintended consequence is that both his handicap and liberal hypocrisy are simultaneously exposed.

The Vice President is viewed by double standard-bearing liberals as nothing more than an adorable gaffe machine.  The brainy New York Times even called Joe Biden “experienced, serious and smart,” proving once again that when measured against the standards set forth by liberal self-appointed whiz kids, Joe Biden is a genius.

Obama lifts Bush joke to use at West Point commencement – American Thinker – May 25, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker Blog

Obama has done a lot of astonishing things.  In fact everyday is more shocking than the day prior.  However, bootlegging jokes takes outrageous to a whole new level.  Comparing Obama’s remarks at the 2010 West Point graduation with G. W. Bush’s commencement address in 2002 reveals Barry may have lifted a gag line from George.

To be fair, Barack can’t be held fully responsible, after all Obama is the first full-fledged teleprompter President adept only at reading words from a digitized screen like a mind-numbed robot.  However, unless the tradition to “excuse minor conduct offenses” at a West Point commencement also includes a specific funny punch line, Barack Obama knowingly or unknowingly plagiarized George W. Bush.

In 2002 George W. was warmly received at West Point as the commencement keynote speaker.  The former president, who has a naturally relaxed sense of humor, said the following:

West Point is guided by tradition, and in honor of the “Golden Children of the Corps,” (applause) I will observe one of the traditions you cherish most. As the Commander-in-Chief, I hereby grant amnesty to all cadets who are on restriction for minor conduct offenses. (Applause.) Those of you in the end zone might have cheered a little early. (Laughter.)

Because, you see, I’m going to let General Lennox define exactly what “minor” means. (Laughter.)

Based on two rounds of applause and two laughter responses, in four sentences, George’s statements and tag line genuinely amused the cadets. When President Bush spoke, the West Point graduates response did not appear to be a demonstration of just “Duty, Honor and Country.”  The former president’s leadership love and respect for the cadets, both then and now, was indisputably appreciated the US military.

However, Barack Hussein Obama received quite a different response.  Love-to-Lord-Over Barack’s original statement included an awkward reminder to United States cadets, lest they forget, that as Commander-in-Chief, “there are some areas where [his] power is absolute.”  After which, the global community organizer attempted to do stand up comedy and it appears he did so by stealing a gag from George W. Bush’s 2002 address.

Donning a slapstick stance, Obama said the following,

To the United States Corps of Cadets, and most of all, the Class of 2010 – it is an honor to serve as your Commander-in-Chief. Under our constitutional system, my power as President is wisely limited. But there are some areas where my power is absolute. And so, as your Commander-in-Chief, I hereby absolve all cadets who are on restriction for minor conduct offenses.

That’s a lot of cheering.  So I’ll leave the definition of  “minor” to those who know better.

Due to lack of cheering, Obama supposedly skipped over, “That’s a lot of cheering,” but left Bush’s joke about leaving “the definition of ‘minor’ to those who know better.” Obama’s remark was reportedly met with a tepid response.

Obama usually gleans laughs from liberals by mocking GW, not by lifting comedic verbiage from Bush commencement addresses.  Barack’s comments revealed two very important things.  First, Obama has no idea where the words on the teleprompter come from.

And second, there is no need for pilfering, President Obama is more than able to come up with jokes on his own. For example Barry said, “Under our constitutional system, my power as President is wisely limited.”

Now if Obama really expects graduating cadets, or any living-breathing creature on the planet to believe he believes the Constitution was wise in limiting presidential power, then Barry did out perform George W. Bush, at least in the jest department, by delivering the most hilarious joke in decades.

Obama is Kicking the Dog – American Thinker – May 20, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker

Barack Obama has taken up the fine art of “kicking the dog,” which is a narcissistic practice where a person in authority passes blame along to the lowest level, where, for lack of a fall guy, the dog ends up getting kicked. Obama claims that the buck stops with him, yet the president habitually avoids blame by pointing the finger of accusation at animate people and inanimate objects, which translates into presidential “dog-kicking.”

Obama has proven to be a master blamer and finger-pointer. In fact, Obama takes finger-pointing to a whole new level. The president even finger-points at and blames people for finger-pointing and blaming. Dog-kicker Barack obviously considers blaming others an executive privilege and exclusive right.

Recently, while addressing the explosion and subsequent oil spill in the Gulf, a temperamental Obama did some public canine-kicking in the Rose Garden. The president “harshly criticized BP and other companies for falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else.”

A “visibly angry” Obama chastised big oil for passing the buck, saying, “I did not appreciate what I considered to be a ridiculous spectacle during the congressional hearings into the matter.”

Potentially in a position to ultimately bear some responsibility for the Deepwater Horizon tragedy, slickster Obama greased the censure wheel to ensure his own seamless slippage through an oily situation, and he did so by kicking a dog or two.

Often guilty of defying prior commitments with contradicting actions, Barack Obama began by holding British Petroleum to their pledge to “pay for the response effort.” The president vowed to personally “hold them to their obligation.”
Suddenly bailout Barack is a stickler for obligatory liability?

Pointing a long and growing-ever-longer finger toward the camera, void of even a hint of self-awareness, Obama chided BP, Transocean, and Halliburton executives, saying, “I will not tolerate more finger-pointing or irresponsibility.”

So does the Obama “I don’t have to count my time because I’m the president” exemption also extend to finger-pointing and passing the buck?

Mr. Obama said he was “not going to rest or be satisfied until the leak was stopped at the source … contained and cleaned up.” But rest assured: If the leak is not “stopped,” “contained,” or “cleaned up,” it won’t be Barry’s fault.

The president assigned blame and did so by masterfully identifying himself with the victims.  Barack said, “I saw firsthand the anger and frustration felt by our neighbors in the Gulf, and let me tell you, it is an anger and frustration that I share as president.”

Obama even used the “blame Bush” maneuver to excuse himself from culpability. Barry said, “For a decade or more, there’s been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. … That cannot and will not happen anymore.”

For added fortification, Obama hauled out the Gipper, and by doing so exercised the skill of what can only be described as the highest form of manipulative obfuscation. Obama blasphemed Reagan’s words and used them as a missile against Bush, B.P., and Big Oil by borrowing and misappropriating the old phrase, “we will trust, but we will verify.”

A more apropos Reagan quote would have been, “How can a president not be an actor?”

Still pointing the bony finger of blame, Obama said that Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar recognized the need for reform prior to the spill, but he “often-times has been slammed by the industry, suggesting that somehow these necessary reforms would impede economic growth.”

It’s incomprehensible that the President of the United States would try to exempt himself from responsibility by suggesting that the Obama administration was prepared for a spill “from day one” but was hindered from effecting a viable solution by the oil industry. This is the same man who continually blames G.W. Bush for everything and anything, including natural disasters.

Mr. Obama said no one could reach the leak, which is five thousand feet below the surface of the ocean. Precisely, if the ocean didn’t insist on being so deep, then there wouldn’t be so much “uncertainty,” and plugging the stubborn geyser wouldn’t pose an ongoing quandary for Obama.

Hitting on a few more points, the president shared the government’s use of “every available resource” to address the oil spill. Except, of course, resources unavailable because someone somewhere is preventing their use.

According to the ever-vigilant Mr. Obama, “Over one million feet of barrier boom have been deployed to hold the oil back. Hundreds of thousands of gallons of dispersant helped to break up the oil.” Unfortunately, Obama did sacrifice an opportunity to shift blame onto the slippery, hard-to-contain nature of petroleum for a crisis that otherwise would be well under his firm control.

Obama added, “13,000 people and the National Guard had been deployed to help protect the shoreline and wildlife.” Surely Barry would have greater success if “sea turtles, birds such as sea gulls and pelicans, dolphins, manatees, and Gulf sturgeon” would collaborate with federal efforts by avoiding the oil slick, as well as by steering clear of the water’s edge.

As the Rose Garden remarks concluded, the president reiterated support for offshore drilling, because unlike George W. Bush, British Petroleum and most other living, breathing human beings, the blameless Barack, even in the face of uncontrollable plumes of crude oil, “never tires, never falters and never fails.”

Concluding the Rose Garden scolding, Obama did personally accept one key responsibility, saying, “it’s absolutely essential … we put in place every necessary safeguard and protection so that a tragedy like this oil spill does not happen again.”

Better think long and hard about that one, Mr. President, because in an imperfect world, having precautions in place could pose a problem the next time the need arises to point a finger, pass the blame, or kick a dog.

Cartoon provided by Sooper Mexican

Barack Obama and Corpse Man – American Thinker February 9, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker

Coming from a woman who speaks fluent Brooklynese and pronounces the word “coffee,” “cawfee” – I try to avoid pointing out enunciation oddities in others.  Sounding a lot like a congested Fran Drescher, early on as a Granddawta I learned from Grandma Emma how to  “berl erl” before frying eggplant. Largely forgiving of “tawking” mispronunciations, my wide berth excludes only “birfdays,”  “youse” and “nuffin.”

Growing up in Brooklyn, George W. Bush’s creative elocution of the word nu-cu-lar, never fazed me.  I, as well as most normal Americans, knew what Bush meant and in spite of stumbling and oftentimes mumbling G.W. has proven more adept at expressing core beliefs than dazzling articulator and high-wire word performer Barack Obama.

George Bush always seemed uninterested in Madison Avenue impressions emphasizing instead message over public persona. I chuckled when Bush said, “I’ll be long gone before some smart person ever figures out what happened inside this Oval Office.” Bush never defended obvious linguistic deficits or shortcomings when giving a speech and ignored a mocking press who defined the ex-president’s affliction as proof of Bush’s idiocy.

Truth is reading from a script does not indicate brilliance. John Fund speaking about Bush was of the insightful opinion that, “the inarticulate can often be shrewd and the fluent can often be fatuous.”  Take actor Brad Pitt for instance, when reading from a script Pitt can convince viewers he is Jesse James.  However, off script starting with deserting Jennifer Aniston for promiscuous Angelina Jolie, Pitt proves time and again the boy’s filaments don’t light up the Brad bulb to its fullest potential.

If Bush chooses to drink “Shakesbeers” instead of Budweiser, so be it.  Bush viewing his personal library as “epileptic” puts the former president in a better position to explain “eclectic” health care issues, in a clearer more succinct way, than Obama has thus far. Barack, the president who never stops conveying complicated health care reform concepts, admitted after all those thousands upon thousands of words,  “Somehow I’m not breaking through.”

When Bush said, “I am the decider, and I decide what is best,” every one knew what he meant. After 52 addresses or statements on health reform a befuddled Obama remains unfamiliar with the contents embedded within a bill he incessantly promotes.  In a fleeting moment of modesty, Obama admitted even he doesn’t understand what the heck he is talking about—which is quite a mouthful coming from Dr. Barry House.

Most Americans know Bush never put on airs. George Bush’s enemies would be hard pressed to disagree that the ex-president is anything but sincere, authentic and genuine. Obama differs greatly from Bush.  The President exudes an imperious hauteur, priding himself on purported superior intelligence and above all unprecedented communicative fluency.  Waving to the audience from a high wire word perch, Obama emanates self-confidence and cool control and, unlike Bush, is given a pass by the media when losing rhetorical balance on the public stage.

Falling off the trapeze in shiny purple circus tights no only causes injury but can make a person look foolish, which is what Obama did last week when calling Navy corpsmen–corpse-men.  Like Sacha Pavlata on a high wire, Obama, master of “ostentatiously exotic” Pock-i-stahn pronunciation, peppered multiple mispronunciations of “corpsmen” with Creole words like “Etazini.” President Obama was so busy showboating French based Haitian Creole he called Navy Corpsman Brossard, both Christian and Christopher in the same sentence.

Maybe it’s me, but juxtaposing familiarity with Creole while appearing clueless about how to pronounce corpsmen [kôr’mÉ™n], made Obama look more idiotic than Bush ever could because Bush lacks the unbridled hubris Obama exhibits continually.

George Bush, the affable ex-president, remains endearing and humble—lacking any trace of self-affected pretentiousness. Too bad for Barack whose pompous pronunciation standards have brought attention to the Commander-in-Chief’s inability to pronounce words that truly matter like those identifying United States military personnel. Unlike G.W. Bush, Barack Obama the Flying Wallenda of public speaking may be able to dazzle with foreign phrases, but after wowing the crowd at the National Prayer Breakfast the star of the show fell off the linguistic trapeze.

So as world citizen, Barack Obama continues to astonish only himself by pronouncing Pack-is-tann–Pock-i-stahn, a gerl from Brooklyn remains unimpressed.  Why?  Because, while Obamer “wawks-the-wawk,” he stumbles badly when it comes to “tawking-the-tawk.”  Obama’s Creole “corpse-men” gaffe reveals a lot about the Creole-in-Chief’s priorities.  The President’s spoken oversight far overshadows the most bizarre mispronunciation issues uttered by native “New Yawkers,” or any outrageous verbal blunder spoken by the genuinely “misunderestimated,” George W. Bush.

The measure of a man – American Thinker Blog Post – January 17, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker Blog

During the Henry Gates Officer Crowley racial controversy there was a telling picture of Crowley assisting a disabled Henry Gates as both walked a few paces behind the ever haughty and imperious Barack Obama.   As Obama was strutting before the cameras championing racial equality, the Officer, who had been portrayed as a racist by Gates, relinquished pride and exhibited compassion for his accuser.  If what Michelle Obama professes is the truth and “actions speak louder than words,” the picture of Crowley compassionately aiding and guiding Gates down the Rose Garden steps said a mouthful. Officer Crowley’s empathy, as compared to Barack Obama’s self-obsessed concern, was evident without a word.

Yesterday, America witnessed a similar display of humbleness.  George W. Bush, criticized, mocked, humiliated, blamed and dishonored by both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, put the needs of the Haitian people before personal feelings and pride.

One of the many thousands of things Obama demeaned G.W. Bush for was his handling of Katrina.   Sharply criticizing the ex-President Obama vowed, “We must ensure that the failures of the past are never repeated.”  Then Obama has the unmitigated audacity to call the supposed failed hurricane president in to assist in the relief effort to Haiti, a disaster of mass Biblical proportion.  If Obama believed G.W. Bush was such a failure during Katrina, why enlist a bumbler in the Haitian effort? Or was Obama in need of an inclusive photo op before Tuesday’s special election in Massachusetts?

Not only did Bush respond to Obama’s invitation to assist the Haitian people, the former President  “heaped burning coals upon Obama’s head” by respectfully commending the standing President for a “swift and timely response to the disaster.” Quite the opposite from the fiery darts Obama has been lobbing for years in Bush’s direction.

For political expediency Obama continues to diminish G.W. Bush in the minds of the American people.  In response, the ex-President reciprocated by building up Barack Obama’s wounded reputation before the nation.  George W. Bush behaved like Officer Crowley; only this time Bush assisted a political cripple who may talk a good talk, but if you watch closely has trouble walking without a crutch.

In the Rose Garden lofty rhetoric came from Barack Obama before heading off to Massachusetts to campaign for Martha Coakley, while action was displayed on the part of George Bush.  To even stand there in the company of unrelenting accusers means that Bush possesses the strength of character to put aside demeaning accusations and refuse to dwell on personal feelings in order to address the needs of a devastated nation.

Speaking about America’s commitment to rebuild the Gulf Region three years after the hurricane, Obama did not squander an opportunity bolster himself by demeaning Bush.  Professing faith in skills and abilities far above the Bush administration’s failures Obama said, “The American people are watching. They need this plan to work. They expect to see the money that they’ve earned they’ve worked so hard to earn – spent in its intended purposes without waste, without inefficiency, without fraud,” which is pretty much what Obama says about everything.

In the meantime, with humility and grace G.W. Bush’s compassion and concern for the dignity of the dead and the dire circumstances of the living surpass the awkwardness of having to appear in the Rose Garden next to someone whose main concern is self.  George W. Bush, like the modest Officer Crowley, seems more than willing to walk in the shadow of hubris if it means helping Haiti.  Yesterday, George W. Bush illustrated to the people Barack claims are closely watching—the grace and character of a deferential man of integrity.

The G.Q.uestion?


Katie Couric was so interested in Sarah Palin’s reading material that, in an effort to make her look foolish, the biased media news anchor implied Palin either didn’t or couldn’t read.  The left used the former Alaskan Governor’s irritated response to foster the premise that Sarah was nothing more than a dumb, gun toting, wild-eyed born again Christian whose reading material was limited to the back panel of a Lucky Charms cereal box.  Liberals are convinced that Sarah is dumb, if not dumber than G. W. Bush, whose reading material, or supposed lack there of, the left was also obsessed with.

All along, the implication and insinuation of the elite media has been that Conservatives, as a group, are intellectually challenged and lack both reading skills and cerebral pursuit.


On the other hand, Barack Obama is consistently portrayed as abundantly brainy and brilliant, quite unlike how the left depicts both Bush and Palin. Yet, perception of Obama’s intelligence is not based on his school records or even IQ because data that should be available to the public, to date,  remains a mystery. Nevertheless, a studious Barry recently carried reading material under his arm, lo and behold, his scholarly choice was none other than the December fantasy edition of GQ crowning Obama, for second year in a row, “Leader of the Year.”

Based on how he governs, the President obviously is a huge fan of The Little Engine that Could.   The events of the past year make it apparent that Obama spends most of his intellectual pursuit off time perusing page after page of stories and articles with fairy tale plots, which explains his affectionate attraction for GQ.  So, if reading material determines intelligence, maybe in the future Obama should pick publications that include facts, rather than pure fiction.

In lieu of having the opportunity to review documentation exposing Obama’s level of intelligence and based on the media’s own standard that what a person reads is the measure of superior or inferior brainpower, does Obama reading GQ’s year end edition effect the left’s opinion of the President’s intelligence level?  One thing for sure, Obama’s great intellect belies his lack of judgment and reticence by his repeated acceptance of unearned accolades.

Lest we forget, the “Leader of the Year” ran up the nation’s deficit, administrates over double-digit unemployment, proclaims a failed stimulus successful, and is attempting to socialize, by way of health care, 1/6th of the entire US economy.  He accepted a Nobel Peace prize he didn’t deserve and has dawdled for months about sending reinforcements to American troops in Afghanistan.   The GQ title should have been “Clueless of the Year,” with a picture of Barry and Alicia Silverstone.  A President so overtly enamored with himself may choose to read quarterly publications that laud his great accomplishments, but together with Conde Nast, Obama remains oblivious to the truth about what a poor, inexperienced, naïve, shoddy leader he really is.

Obama could use a one year anniversary intellectual challenge administered by official reading material inquisitor; Katie Couric who is just about due to schedule her next fawning dialogue with the President. Pressing the “reading material” point during the Genius-in-Chief’s interview, maybe Katie will set aside bias and shock the global journalistic nervous system by demonstrating the same level of intense consternation, confrontational concern and lack of civility she exhibited when interviewing Sarah Palin.  But I wouldn’t bet on it!

On behalf of all Americans, Katie Couric can find out why, in a time of war and economic hardship, a man of such exceptional and incomparable mental aptitude would be caught reading Gentlemen’s Quarterly with a picture of himself on the cover, or is his choice of reading material another indication of just how slow on the uptake Barack Obama actually is?

The First “We All Hate America” Debate


In a “…season of new beginnings” the hope and change President Barack Obama has expressed he “…would like to speak clearly to Iran’s leader.” The Iranian dictator has responded by saying he would welcome a debate with the president if it was held in an unbiased, anti-Semitic venue like the United Nations. As a concerned resident of the global community it is unlikely Barack Obama would decline such a gracious opportunity to interact face-to-face with the maligned despot.

The Iranian leader is preparing the debate arena by drawing a chalk line across the floor. In hopes of wooing Obama to the conversation Mahmoud is industriously removing stones and rocks by rejecting “Western proposals for Iran to ‘freeze’ its nuclear work in return for no new sanctions.” In addition, Mr. Mahmoud is warming up the dais by delineating additional margins for his opponent by the friendly dispatch of warships to, “…international waters and the Gulf of Aden…indicative of his country’s high military capability in confronting any foreign threat on the country’s shore.”

Hopeful that Barack Obama will agree to the contest, Mahmoud is also preparing the pre-debate fallow ground by bald-facedly precluding their discussion by saying, “…the dispute over his country’s nuclear program is ‘over’.” Obama will likely agree to Mahmoud’s qualifications or he would be setting preconditions of his own after vowing to the global community to have none. If Barry favors bantering with the Iranian dictator, which would be a photo opportunity not to be squandered, submissively steering clear of nuclear issues and a surrendering all preconditions would make Obama the precondition dupe.

In an attempt to justify his positions, Ahmadenijad appears anxious to engage the novice American president in direct dialogue about things he has been openly discussing worldwide since January 20th, which is “the origin of the global problems.” Mahmoud is probably more than willing to review with Barack his unending punch list of apologies and address US culpability as the origin of most global woes, a subject the US president is adept at reiterating every chance he gets. For Ahmadenijad a debate with Obama could evolve into a convivial love-fest replete with duplications of Obama’s derogatory American sentiments.

Debate is supposed to be verbal interaction between people with opposing viewpoints who argue to make their position known in an attempt to convince their opponent to convert to their way of thinking. This would not be the case if Obama agrees to an Ahmadenijad repartee. For a mediocre debater like Barack Obama, debating Ahmadenijad would merely be an opportunity to win a contest, or at least score a respectable draw by sparring with a challenger who shares analogous opinions on  his own anti-American views.

Obama agreeing to debate could benefit both he and Mahmoud, furthering both their agendas. They could enlist CNN Palestinian sympathizer Christine Amanpour to frame all the pertinent questions. 60 Minutes, interviewer Mike Wallace could set the tone by allowing Ahmadenijad the time to confront Obama on how the United States has been disengaged and sought to dictate their terms to the rest of the world. Obama, who is of same opinion as the Iranian dictator, can then recap exactly what he expressed at the Summit of the Americas in Port of Spain Trinidad.

Ahmadenijad can then proceed to tell Obama that the United States is an, Israel loving nation at war with Islam and accuse America of breaking trust with the Eastern Hemisphere. Barack can concur by saying, “It is true that the trust that binds the United States with places where the Muslim faith has been practiced has been strained because of past administrations?” He can then guarantee that, “We are not at war with Muslims, especially not Iran,” which will surely warrant break time for kisses on both Obama’s cheeks and a big Persian hug from his new found comrade.

Addressing the global economic crisis Ahmadenijad can verbally indict the, “Leaders of the Western bloc … for trying to extend their own crisis to the rest of the globe to portray it as global.” Again, Obama can come along side his Iranian fellow world citizen and agree, “It is true that the economic crisis that the world is experiencing started in the US?” Before the first buzzer goes off Barack Obama can fit in taking responsibility, apologizing and coinciding with Iran’s tyrant that he is in fact correct emphasizing he too is relieved that the United States’ has lost high standing in the world. Obama’s full accord should result in Ahmadenijad breaking out in a full unbridled bandari dance.

After he calms down Mahmoud can then express gratitude to Obama for wresting banks out of the hands of the Zionist bankers who are largely responsible for the world’s financial woes. Then Mahmoud can thank the UN for sponsoring the debate acknowledging with pride their long history of rightly felt anti-Jewish bias and condemnation of Israel in much the style and manner of Barack Obama’s long time mentor and pastor Reverend Jeremiah Wright . Barack can express to the panel that even Reverend Wright would agree that notwithstanding His Jewishness, “…had He been alive today, Jesus Christ would be on the side of Iran, not the West.”

Impartial journalist Christine Amanpour can then address Bush’s “war mongering” approach to the Middle East and the former president’s past mistakes in the same manner Obama has expressed the world over. Mahmoud can offer unfettered praise to Obama for exposing Bush for the failure he was. Ms. Amanpour can touch on Bush’s counterterrorism policies and refer to them as torture and then both Ahmadenijad and Obama can in unison give Bush a duo thumbs down reaching between podiums for a customary fist bump.

Obama can remind his rival that even his newest compadre Hugo Chavez felt George W. Bush was responsible for the world’s economic crisis and desired to see the ex-President put on trial. Mahmoud will likely suggest to Obama that Bush be tried for his economic foibles at the same time the administration prosecutes him for war crimes and torture…Obama might be apt to applaud Mahmoud for such an obviously efficient proposal.

Mahmoud can again stress discussions are “Over” concerning Iranian nuclear proliferation aspirations and thank Mr. Obama for his submissive attitude on the subject. If Obama ruffles a tad, Mahmoud can tamp down his reaction by rearticulating how, “Regardless of what Mr. Obama says, even he has admitted that ‘All too often the United States starts by dictating…and they don’t always know all the factors that are involved.’ Obama has even said, America needs to listen more…even the president of the Great Satan admits mistakes and lack of perfection. So why Iran should be forced to comply with their wishes?” When Obama is slated to reply he can again be of the same mind as the Iranian despot saying, “You have an excellent point there my brother.”

Three quarters of the way through the debate, it should be evident that every quarrel Ahmadenijad has against the United States has been one that Obama has commiserated with. Even Christine Amanpour might be forced to ask the obvious question, is this any way to run a debate?

Addressing the high level of agreement between the two world leaders Obama, speaking on his own behalf can then express to the CNN reporter, a beaming Ahmadenijad and a slack jawed Mike Wallace. “I’ve always been someone who’s brought people of different views together by trying to reach a higher level of candor and honesty and understanding. Moreover, that has worked well for me…always addressing our own imperfections. I want to understand my Iranian brother’s hurts, pains and feelings.” Mahmoud will obviously be so thrilled with Obama’s response he will likely embrace the president and squeeze him to the point of bear hug embarrassment.

Obama may be forced to push the Iranian leader off and point him back to his stead. After regaining his composure Ahmadenijad can then turn to Barack Obama and thank him for never stringently opposing his nuclear ambitions. And, in an effort to finally end the Middle East crisis, for understanding Iran’s jihad justified desire to wipe Israel off the map. He can express appreciation for Obama by admitting that even though the Persian culture might be a little different he is relieved he can exercise candor and honesty without the risk of the American president instituting new sanctions, threatening military action or going beyond stating, “Let me be perfectly clear…this is unacceptable.” Ahmadenjad can convey overwhelming gratitude that Obama’s supercilious rhetoric is never followed-up by action!

Obama can then conclude by telling Ahmadenijad that exposing America’s deficiencies has worked well in bringing people of different views together. It won him an election! It has become the hallmark of his inexperienced, anti-American, leftist agenda presidency, gaining him new likeminded colleagues all around the nuclear obsessed world.

Wrapping up Obama can acknowledge that without a word of decent he accomplished the impossible his first successful debate tie with both parties in complete concurrence.

%d bloggers like this: