I Think I’m Gonna Be Sick

First off, I want to wish all the moms out there a very happy Mother’s Day. If you want to keep it happy, I’d advise you not watch the following video clip of females in Obama’s travelling press corps swooning over and oogling a jeans-clad Barack Obama on a plane:

Is it just me or early on in the video did he perform a model-like twirl around one time for no apparent reason?

Look, I’ll be the first one to say that he looks good in jeans. But then again, I’m not a member of the mainstream media, a group of people who are supposed to be reporting on the presidential race objectively. I personally find the whole incident appalling and believe it should be added to the mountains of evidence regarding the MSM’s dereliction of duty (the Chi Tribune’s John Kass writes more about that here) when it comes to fairly covering the candidacy of Barack Obama.

Michelle Malkin says the video made her throw up a little bit in her mouth. It’s come pretty close to making me want to skip out on eating Mother’s Day lunch.

Related: Several bloggers have caught the the Obama campaign and the NYT trying to rewrite history as it relates to his promise last summer that he would be willing to meet unconditionally with some of the world’s most notorious despots, including Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Columnist Jacky Kelly ripped Obama over this in a column a few days ago about The Chosen One’s repeating this promise on the campaign trail – most recently at his victory speech in North Carolina:

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.

[…]

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.”

‘Nuff said.

Cross-posted from the Sister Toldjah blog.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!