Saturday, May 17, 2008

History?? Who Cares About History?? Not Obama!

I just saw the following article from Real Clear Politics linked at I cannot BELIEVE no one has been talking about this in the MSM. I know, I know - what am I thinking?? They are SO in the tank for Obama, or McCain, thus pushing Obama, that there is no WAY they are actually going to report on something like this...Pathetic. Truly pathetic that our media has come to be so sloppy, so ineffectual, so removed from true journalism. And PATHETIC that a presidential candidate is allowed to get away with saying such tripe without ANY ramifications! And people really want THIS guy to be our president??? I worry about this country and its American Idol mentality - it has brought us this kind of unqualified candidate at the top (thanks in no small part to the DNC thwarting Clinton's momentum with FL and MI). Again, it is just pathetic. Maybe his fans ought to actually LISTEN to him once in a while??? Just a thought...

May 09, 2008
Obama Needs a History Lesson
By Jack Kelly

In his victory speech after the North Carolina primary, Sen. Barack Obama said something that is all the more remarkable for how little it has been remarked upon.

In defending his stated intent to meet with America's enemies without preconditions, Sen. Obama said: "I trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did."

That he made this statement, and that it passed without comment by the journalists covering his speech indicates either breathtaking ignorance of history on the part of both, or deceit.

I assume the Roosevelt to whom Sen. Obama referred is Franklin D. Roosevelt. Our enemies in World War II were Nazi Germany, headed by Adolf Hitler; fascist Italy, headed by Benito Mussolini, and militarist Japan, headed by Hideki Tojo. FDR talked directly with none of them before the outbreak of hostilities, and his policy once war began was unconditional surrender.

FDR died before victory was achieved, and was succeeded by Harry Truman. Truman did not modify the policy of unconditional surrender. He ended that war not with negotiation, but with the atomic bomb.

Harry Truman also was president when North Korea invaded South Korea in June, 1950. President Truman's response was not to call up North Korean dictator Kim Il Sung for a chat. It was to send troops.

Perhaps Sen. Obama is thinking of the meeting FDR and Churchill had with Soviet dictator Josef Stalin in Tehran in December, 1943, and the meetings Truman and Roosevelt had with Stalin at Yalta and Potsdam in February and July, 1945. But Stalin was then a U.S. ally, though one of whom we should have been more wary than FDR and Truman were. Few historians think the agreements reached at Yalta and Potsdam, which in effect consigned Eastern Europe to slavery, are diplomatic models we ought to follow. Even fewer Eastern Europeans think so.

When Stalin's designs became unmistakably clear, President Truman's response wasn't to seek a summit meeting. He sent military aid to Greece, ordered the Berlin airlift and the Marshall Plan, and sent troops to South Korea.

Sen. Obama is on both sounder and softer ground with regard to John F. Kennedy. The new president held a summit meeting with Soviet leader Nikita Khruschev in Vienna in June, 1961.

Elie Abel, who wrote a history of the Cuban missile crisis (The Missiles of October), said the crisis had its genesis in that summit.

"There is reason to believe that Khrushchev took Kennedy's measure in June 1961 and decided this was a young man who would shrink from hard decisions," Mr. Abel wrote. "There is no evidence to support the belief that Khrushchev ever questioned America's power. He questioned only the president's readiness to use it. As he once told Robert Frost, he came to believe that Americans are 'too liberal to fight.'"

That view was supported by New York Times columnist James Reston, who traveled to Vienna with President Kennedy: "Khrushchev had studied the events of the Bay of Pigs," Mr. Reston wrote. "He would have understood if Kennedy had left Castro alone or destroyed him, but when Kennedy was rash enough to strike at Cuba but not bold enough to finish the job, Khrushchev decided he was dealing with an inexperienced young leader who could be intimidated and blackmailed."

It's worth noting that Kennedy then was vastly more experienced than Sen. Obama is now. A combat veteran of World War II, Jack Kennedy served 14 years in Congress before becoming president. Sen. Obama has no military and little work experience, and has been in Congress for less than four years.

The closest historical analogue to Sen. Obama's expressed desire to meet with no preconditions with anti-American dictators such as Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the trip British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and French premier Eduoard Daladier took to Munich in September of 1938 to negotiate "peace in our time" with Adolf Hitler. That didn't work out so well.

History is an elective few liberals choose to take these days, noted a poster on the Web log "Hot Air." The lack of historical knowledge among journalists is merely appalling. But in a presidential candidate it's dangerous. As Sir Winston Churchill said:

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."


Mary Ellen said...

I think it's odd that Obama talks big about meeting with leaders from other countries, no matter who they are, but is afraid to meet with Hillary in a debate. Talk is cheap and Obama is full of cheap rhetoric.

I was listening in the car to Air American and they had some clowns on there, "Family Values with an Oy Vey", and they were talking about this. They had NO clue about who FDR was or what he did. It was like listening to a bunch of 6th graders. Actually, my grandson is going into 6th grade and he's smarter than they are. Then when a woman (who was obviously a Hillary supporter--smart and articulate) corrected them on their history, one of the guys said she was like a date he had once. The girl was arrogant and acted like she knew everything, which he said was typical of the feminist Hillary supporters.

Obama needs more than a history lesson, he needs a good kick in the ass.

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

I know - it really is remarkable. For some reason, Obama thinks it is going to be EASIER to debate McCain than Clinton. HAHAHAHA!!! Hillary pulled punches CONSTANTLY "for the good of the party" - McCain is not going to be similarly inclined, I know THAT for sure! It really is nuts that he keeps turning her down, and thus short-changing people in states like Oregon and NC. What a wimp.

And how incredibly SEXIST those guys were on Air America! I am SO SICK OF THAT CRAP!!! So, they are opposed to Hillary because she is SMART?!?!?! Holy CRAP! After the debacle that has been the Bush Presidency, don't we WANT someone who is really smart?!?!

I saw a comment yesterday that one hting this election has highlighted is that women are NEVER supposed to show up men, and even some feminists buy into that. Hillary's problem is that she shows up Barack by being more knowledgeable, having more command of the issues, and having actual policies SHE created. In other words, she is being a BAD girl! As the commenter went on to say, it is fine if women go off and are successful in certain fields - as long as they don't show up any men when they do it. I think that is spot on to what we are seeing with Clinton.

But what we are ALSO seeing is a huge backlash building. NARAL is certainly hearing an earul for their INSANE endorsement of Obama, but even more than that, more and more women are standing up to the blatant isogyny that is being so blithely tossed around.

Anyway - I have no doubt your grandson knows more abt our history than those bozos on the radio. Just like the young people who are quick to believe that there really ARE 57 states in the US - because Obamessiah said so!! It makes me despair for these young people and their clear lack of not just plain KNOWLEDGE, but analytical skills. Wow...

Well, other than that crap on the radio, I hope you are having a food day!!