My favorite quote, from Daniel Patrick Moynihan regarding Jimmy Carter: "Unable to distinguish between our friends and our enemies, he has essentially adopted our enemies' view of the world."

I believe Obama's motives are even worse than Carter's, more anti-American, more leftist.

Given the repetition and similarity of these offenses to the rules of Civility between nations, there can be one of only two causes: hopeless ignorance - politically suicidal in the career of a statesman - of how one treats one's allies and one's enemies; or a purposeful pattern of behavior meant to alienate our allies, embolden our enemies, and generally ruin America's global standing.

Insanity is not likely, since the patterns of behavior have been too predictable and precise.

Let me start out by saying, I am not a hard-nosed war-monger. I do not see turbaned suicide bombers behind every tree and garbage can. Neither am I soft on terrorsts, I would gladly see everyone of them sent to meet their maker. I am, however, coming around to the point of view that BO's softening of the country's stance on terrorism, by calling terrorist acts "man-made disasters", by closing Gitmo, and by giving KJH a civil trial rather than a military one, is nothing less than giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and he should be impeached and tried for treason accordingly. The only down-side to that is, of course, Joe Biden becomes president. And after him comes Nancy Pelosi. We're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

After the administration's recently incubated insult to Israel I was not entirely surprised to hear of the Secretary of States misguided foray into the Falklands issue. I vividly recall the 1982 crisis , but had seen no media reports of Mrs Clinton's comments, until now.

Is this administration, (and I will speak broadly in order to avoid accusations of an ad hominem attack), simply ignorant of history, or are they so arrogant as to believe that history is of no consequence to them and that the President's powers of persuasion will simply usher in a new era of world understanding?

There does seem to be a unified approach in each of these international relationships. Mr Obama's favorite tactic appears to involve aligning with the antagonist and aggressor, and placing demands on the defensive party. Is this an attempt to curry favor with the bully in hopes of first earning trust, and then using his amazing powers of persuasion to temper the debate?

If it is it is a very dangerous strategy. As American economic influence is diminished and our military is shuffled from a well chosen battlefield in Iraq, into one that is proven to be difficult for outsiders, we will need our friends now more than ever. This President either does not value our Nation's historic friendships, or maybe he has his own friends. He clearly does not have the same intrinsic values, or shared american experience, as your everday American, regardless of race or social class. As good as he may be at speech-reading, he has a problem connecting with the American spirit, because his is somehow different.

Mr Obama is clearly not guided by the Judeo-Christian principles upon which the founders based our Constitution. He has stated as much, at the same time reminding us that the Constitution is an imperfect document. Ignorant or Arrogant? Either way, his actions on Intentional diplomacy have the look of appeasement, and are nothing short of dangerous for this country.

This is what happens when a mongrel is elected to the office of POTUS. No roots, no class, no sense of morals. A roamer with no allegiance or loyalty other than to himself. Peeing all over everything, tearing up everything decent and then moving on. I'm with Brian; BO should be tried for treason along with the rest of the leftist posse in congress.

What the esteemed Mr Krauthammer hints at, the commentary section here comes right out and states clearly: This is all part of this administration's calculated strategy to weaken America by means of a two-pronged assault upon our strength. 1) alienate and infuriate our allies at every turn by means of carefully contrived insults and outrages, thus creating uncertainty as to what foolishness America might do next. 2) embolden and empower our enemies by elevating them in status and power, granting them greater rights than we ourselves possess under our Constitution, subjugating this country to them both literally and metaphorically by means of gestures (such as unprecedented bowing to kings and emperors) and lunatic financing.

Not one of these "blunders" is accidental. We could believe that one or two or even several of these policies were caused by naivety, ignorance or miscalculation. But it is far beyond the plausible to suggest that such a long, unbroken streak of foolishness, invariably anti-American in result, could be anything but deliberate.

This President and his radical administration is strongly, rabidly anti-American. His every policy is designed to weaken the country, which to him and his advisors, is nothing more than justice. After all, they believe America is to blame for every bad thing in the world, so if America is weaker militarily, economically and politically, the rest of the world will be better off. Other countries could compete with us "fairly" for the first time. Obama and his Leftist administration see themselves as citizens of the world, and that's where their sympathies lie.

Dr. Timms, Thanks for this quote. I think it sums up Mr. Hussein:

"This President either does not value our Nation's historic friendships, or maybe he has his own friends. He clearly does not have the same intrinsic values, or shared american experience, as your everday American, regardless of race or social class. As good as he may be at speech-reading, he has a problem connecting with the American spirit, because his is somehow different."

This has been a "LINE" that has been promoted in the Universities in America for years. No, he has no American Spirit. He is an Internationalist. He is the culmination of the of the UN.

What worries me is this "LINE" runs throughout our society. Purposely, done through years of "indoctrination of our people". We have people who have "come to power" who do not care about American Sovereignty. Those "in power"(meaning Congress) will not jeopardize their "political positions" to stand for America, their Oath of Office, they "lightly" esteem, their minds seem to be that they will "cut one more deal" even though, we are far passed the days of "deals".

Thanks again, Dr. Timms, you and Michael SSEC are to be commended for your posts. I think they feed many hungry Patriots.

IN GOD WE TRUST.

For God & Country

Ruth Ann Wilson

He returned Churchill because Bush liked him, read him and saw the Islamist threat as being similar to Nazism. But the repatriation of the bust was unnecessary. He could have fed the story of its removal to make his point. His point was that he was opposed to what the West stands for. He sees through a Marxist lens: all interactions are zero-sum: no one wins a dollar but at the expense of another. I guess he doesn't know much about love which satisfies both partners and creates wealth (offspring) into the bargain. Marxism is anti-love and anti-growth. But my, they do love their reflections in the mirror. By the way, this explains Europe's disastrous falling birth-rate.

I've never seen a columnist more in need of a face lift than this yo yo.

Sam

Of which columnist do you speak Mr. Sam Wilson?