GOP leaders should follow the Palin Doctrine-Let Allah sort out Syria's Islamic civil war

The following piece was written by David Horowitz in RedState.com . I find it extremely interesting how he is arguing in favor of Sarah Palin’s position of not getting mixed up in the Syrian civil war.   

The below is a pull quote from Horowitz that boils down what the U.S. is actually doing if it gets involved in Syria. 

“Most mainstream conservatives are not Ron Paul libertarians who don’t support any war on terror. Quite the contrary, we support a robust intervention to repel Islamic terrorism when it threatens our interests. But in the case of Libya, Syria, and Egypt, we are actually intervening on behalf of our enemies.”

Fox Newsreports as bankrupt as elected Republican leadership is in Washington vis-à-vis domestic policy, they are completely clueless as it relates to foreign policy.  

While America continues to become an economic and moral wasteland under this regime, Obama is attempting to spend American treasure helping one nefarious side of an Islamic civil war in Syria – one which involves Iran-allied supporters of Hezbollah (Assad regime) vs. predominantly Al Qaeda affiliated rebels.

Astoundingly, most GOP leaders are either siding with Obama or are totally insouciant to this reckless fomenting of an Islamic insurrection. Instead of fighting ObamaCare, they are allowing Obama to distract from the upheaval at home by focusing on this inane escapade in Syria.

Most media figures discuss the current foreign policy debate in broad platitudes pitting so-called neo-conservatives vs. libertarians, hawks vs. doves, or interventionists vs. isolationists.  But these labels are non-sequiturs to the reality of the current debate.  

Most mainstream conservatives are not Ron Paul libertarians who don’t support any war on terror. Quite the contrary, we support a robust intervention to repel Islamic terrorism when it threatens our interests. But in the case of Libya, Syria, and Egypt, we are actually intervening on behalf of our enemies.

Granted, Syria is more complicated than the other two examples.  Bashar Assad is a sworn enemy of the United States, the closest ally of Iran, and a prolific exporter of terror.  

In a perfect world, it would be great to overthrow him and stick it to Iran (and their Russian allies).  But the reality is that the strongest elements of the insurgency are saturated with Al Qaeda affiliated extremists, backed by Pan-Islamist Turkish President Recep Erdogen, much like the insurgencies in other countries. 

Why place American money and weapons in the hands of people who will be just as adversarial to our interests as the current regime? This is not a matter of opposing intervention for the sake of isolationism; it is a matter of not supporting intervention that is either superfluous or deleterious to our national interests. 

A “hawkish” stance towards Assad is a dovish stance towards Al Qaeda. As Sarah Palin noted, in a battle with Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah on one side and Al-Qaeda and Turkey on the other, let Allah sort it out.

This should be a slam dunk opportunity for GOP leaders to oppose a wrongheaded and unpopular intervention, while shifting the focus back to the ObamaCare civil war at home.  

More here

Why are we helping Al Qaeda by bombing Syria?  That question is not being asked and I sure would like to hear answer.

Read More

Extreme Leftist site Salon.com cries “No, Chris Lane is not Trayvon Martin” and offers revisionist history

One of the favorite tactics of the Left is to explain away history with their own warped version of events.  Instead of Christopher Columbus being remembered as a great explorer and discoverer of the Americas, to Leftist he’s a social criminal responsible for the rape, pillaging, and murder of millions of Native Americans. 

Get my drift?

So when Salon, one of the most radically progressive sites on the ‘net has anything to say on a given topic, one has to dissect what they say through the “revisionist” prism.  

Salon On Trayvon Martin

And it’s equally striking, yet also not particularly surprising, that Fox and Limbaugh and the rest really don’t seem to comprehend why the Trayvon Martin case became a thing.

It’s not that difficult to understand so we’ll spell it out: It was not only that a light-skinned Zimmerman killed an unarmed black teenager — but also that police didn’t do anything about it. The killing was horribly tragic, as is Lane’s senseless murder, but if Zimmerman had actually been arrested for the shooting, the sad reality is that far fewer Americans would know his name. But that’s not what happened. Instead, police let Zimmerman go under Florida’s “stand your ground” law. It smacked of institutional, state-sponsored racial favoritism of the worst kind.

So Salon makes a poor analogy that what sets Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman apart from the Chris Davis case was that Zimmerman was never arrested for killing Martin. 

So Salon conveniently left out the fact that the New York Times referred to George Zimmerman as a “white Hispanic” immediately injecting an element of race into the story.  

Salon left out the fact that NBC intentionally edited a 911 call by George Zimmerman erasing a crucial question by 911 dispatcher, “Is he white, black or Hispanic?”   Zimmerman answered, “He looks black!”  This immediately gives the impression that Zimmerman is a racist. 

Salon left out the fact that the DOJ funded the mass protest led by Al Sharpton and others following the template set by the NY Times and NBC that George Zimmerman acted in a racially motivated fashion and all of it was manufactured by the power of the press and the civil rights industrial complex.

The corrupt media made it about race from day one.  Salon is disingenuously misleading their readers with only a partial version of events and present in them as the whole.     

Salon On Chris Lane

Lane’s murder is an entirely different matter. It’s disgusting, but the police did their job. They arrested three suspects, and vowed to try to throw the book at them. That’s how it’s supposed to go. Murder is sadly quotidian in a gun-soaked America, and this is, sadly, another, if particularly senseless, one.

Salon willfully ignored the fact that if this case involved whites shooting a black jogger in the back Al Sharpton would’ve been on the redeye to Oklahoma calling his cohorts on his cell discussing logistics for a march the next afternoon.  The media would immediately talk about it as a hate crime and how whites are shooting blacks in the street like dogs.  We’ve seen the movie before. 

For every time Salon, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson gin up racial strife where it doesn’t belong, whites will wait and see the reaction when the shoes are on the other racial foot and take notice.   Hello Chris Lane!

Read More

Does Bradley “Chelsea” Manning have an obsession with Chelsea Clinton?

In one day Pvt. Bradley Manning becomes the second most  famous Chelsea in America.  So I wonder.  Of all the names he could’ve chosen he settled on Chelsea.  Usually when these kinds of people decide to flip their personal scripts, they pick a derivation of their given name.  Bradley could easily turn into Brenda, Hadley or whatever.  But Bradley went with Chelsea, not even close. 

What’s up with that?

Read More