This is nice (please notice my sarcasm) as I see a headline about Barack Obama and French President Nicholas Sarkozy discussing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with a microphone accidentally still on.

After a G20 meeting the tuned-in microphone picks up the private conversation between Sarkozy and Obama where Sarkozy admits he ‘can’t stand’ the Israeli premier. Obama: You’re fed up with him? I have to deal with him every day!

Sarkozy reportedly also told Obama that he thinks the Israeli premier “is a liar.”

The conversation apparently began with Barack Obama criticizing Sarkozy for not having warned him that France would be voting in favor of the Palestinian membership bid in UNESCO despite Washington’s strong objection to the move. It’s nice to know where France really stands, cowards as usual.

The conversation then drifted to Netanyahu, at which time Sarkozy declared:

“I cannot stand him. He is a liar.”

 Obama replied: “You’re fed up with him, but I have to deal with him every day!”

The press heard this conversation but forget freedom of the press as journalists present at the event were requested to sign an agreement to keep mum on the embarrassing comments.  A member of the media confirmed Monday that “there were discussions between journalists and they agreed not to publish the comments due to the sensitivity of the issue.”

These politicians set up rules for journalists to protect their true feelings while pretending to side with one country or another or call someone an ally when they are not considered that in the bigger picture.

Sarkozy and Obama are nothing but liars and cowards. It’s now nice to have it on record how they feel about the Israeli Prime Minister who is the only one of the three that has respect for the United States.

I guess Sarkozy doesn’t recognize a liar when he’s talking with one.

In the post from yesterday (below) I suggested an amendment to the US Constitution for term-limits for elected officials to Congress. But personal agenda focused politicians are only part of the problem in Washington and the Obama administrations use of “Czars” or unelected regulatory heads to set rules and laws without going through the Constitutional requirement of a legislative body is now on a fast track.

Republicans have vowed to stop the practice of regulation without representation but new legislation is required to stop the regulation practice coming from those respective agencies. Congress and the White House have historically delegated entirely too much power to agencies of the federal government turning it into quasi-legislative body without any political backlash or accountability.

This is not a new trend but Barack Obama is exploiting this agency abuse like no other occupant of the White House before and will use “Czar” power to bypass Congress at every turn, especially with Republicans in control of the House.

The US Constitution vested Congress with the responsibility to create laws and regulations, not to make hazy suggestions about what really might be beneficial for that law to be. There’s a developing movement to force members of Congress to take responsibility for the laws and regulations they pass, and also to compel Administrations to become accountable for the laws they create by means of regulation.

The Wall Street Journal reports that:

“Major” regulations are defined as those with annual effect on the economy exceeding $100 million, and over the past quarter-century both Democratic and Republican Administrations have averaged between 30 and 40 such rules a year. The Obama Administration promulgated 59 major regulations in 2009 and 62 in 2010. Another 191 are in the works, many of them based on little more than a vague Congressional order.

Further, the Dodd-Frank regulatory law requires 243 new rules by 11 agencies over a dozen years. In just 10 months since ObamaCare passed, Health and Human Services run by Leftist Kathleen Sebelius engineered new rules imposing a ceiling on insurance industry profits and price controls on private premiums.

At the EPA they are abusing the clean-air laws of the 1970s by raising carbon energy prices as a cap-and-tax surrogate.

And how about controlling the internet? Last month, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) imposed “net neutrality” despite a federal court ruling that the action was outside its purview.

Congress needs to rein in the regulatory agencies and stop the abuse of bypassing the Constitution by the Executive Branch. Some in Congress seem to understand this concept but it’s taking real Conservatives to push the topic into the light of day.

A possible promising idea is a bill that would require Congress to approve major regulations and this concept has been included in the House GOP’s campaign “pledge,” and is codified in the regulations from the Executive In Need of Scrutiny (Reins) Act, sponsored by Kentucky’s Geoff Davis in the House and South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint.

The Reins Act wold require an up-or-down vote (no Senate filibuster) on $100 million-plus economic regulations, which would only take effect if Congress passed a joint resolution and any President signed it. In effect, this would restore the Constitutional vision the Founding Father’s had for the United States.

The House of Representatives hold the “power of the purse” and the new GOP majority has promised it will not fund regulations that have not passed through legislative bodies.

The Congressional Review Act of 1996 provides a legislative fast-track for disapproving a regulatory measure. That bill involves both political branches as prescribed in Article I of the Constitution. But the Reins act is superior because it requires the active participation of Congress, rather than merely objecting to this or that.

It’s time to make government accountable to the people and provide the required representative government called for in the Constitution.  It’s time unelected bureaucracies are stopped from determining the fate of entire industries and dictating individual behavior. The Reins Act provides the method of requiring Congress and regulations to become accountable to the people that elect them into office and should be passed into law with our “New Rules for Congress.”

Time to “Rein” in government. Indeed!

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

It’s time now, after many months of watching the Obama disaster before our eyes, to define what looks like “The Obama Doctrine”, his ideological belief system now put into practice.

First off, Barack Obama frequently downplays American Sovereignty. We have:

1. New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) with Russia;
2. the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities;
3. the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT);
4. the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOST);
5. the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW);
6. the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS).

On the surface these treaties with an international flair may seem quite admirable on the surface but digging deeper into Obama purpose always reveals more. These treaties leak into American domestic affairs and not on the positive side.

Recently submitting its “Report of the United States of America” to the UN Human Rights Council (HRC), whose dubious members include Cuba, Russia and Saudi Arabia, not necessarily stalwarts of human rights discipline.

In the report the Obama administration attacks Arizona immigration law which attempts to provide law enforcement where the Federal government is failing. This is not a human rights issue but the administration woefully portrays the Arizona law as an infringement on human rights. In the end, this attack upon Arizona is an attack upon American Sovereignty. Certainly, enforcing immigration law and border security upholds the US Constitution and is not violating anyone’s human rights.

Donald Rumsfeld used the term “light footprint” when the US invaded Iraq to liberate its people. Barack Obama wishes to reduce American power to “Soft-Power” to demonstrate to the world that American exceptionalism is nothing and we are all equals on God’s green earth. Upon taking office in 2009 Obama said “[if] countries like Iran are willing to unclench their fist, they will find an extended hand from us.”

However, French President Nicholas Sarkozy has a different view of the world:

“We live in the real world, not a virtual one… President Obama himself has said that he dreams of a world without nuclear weapons. Before our very eyes, two countries are doing exactly the opposite at this very moment… I support America’s ‘extended hand.’ But what have these proposals for dialogue produced for the international community? Nothing but more enriched uranium and more centrifuges.“

Some like the Taliban, al-Qaeda and Iranian tyrant Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cannot be persuaded to lay down their arms under a doctrine of soft power and they prove that each day.

Further, Barack Obama wishes to Restrain American power by reducing its nuclear armaments. Sadly for Obama he states:

“Whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower.“

Obama actions speak louder than words. Funding has been cut for the F-22 fighter jet and the administration is now looking into terminating the development of the next generation Navy Cruiser with missile defense capabilities.

A strong and vibrant US Military is not only about fighting wars. Setting a perception to the world about American military power provides what Ronald Reagan emphasized – Peace through strength. American security is most reliably assured by having military forces that are fully trained, equipped and ready to deter or defeat the nation’s adversaries. If the world has a perception of American weakness it becomes a destabilizing force across the globe.

How can we forget Obama’s Apology Tour and his Top Ten apologies to the world?

10. Apology for Guantanamo in Washington: “There is also no question that Guantanamo set back the moral authority that is America’s strongest currency in the world. … Rather than keeping us safer, the prison at Guantanamo has weakened American national security. It is a rallying cry for our enemies.”

9. Apology for the Mistakes of the CIA: “So don’t be discouraged by what’s happened in the last few weeks. Don’t be discouraged that we have to acknowledge potentially we’ve made some mistakes.”

8. Apology for U.S. Policy toward the Americas: “Too often, the United States has not pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors. We have been too easily distracted by other priorities, and have failed to see that our own progress is tied directly to progress throughout the Americas.”

7. Apology before the Turkish Parliament: “The United States is still working through some of our own darker periods in our history. … Our country still struggles with the legacies of slavery and segregation, the past treatment of Native Americans.”

6. Apology for Guantanamo in France: “I don’t believe that there is a contradiction between our security and our values. And when you start sacrificing your values, when you lose yourself, then over the long term that will make you less secure.”

5. Apology for the War on Terror: “Unfortunately, faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions. … In other words, we went off course.”

4. Apology at the G-20 Summit of World Leaders: “I would like to think that with my election and the early decisions that we’ve made, that you’re starting to see some restoration of America’s standing in the world.”

3. Apology to the Summit of the Americas: “While the United States has done much to promote peace and prosperity in the hemisphere, we have at times been disengaged, and at times we sought to dictate our terms. … So I’m here to launch a new chapter of engagement that will be sustained throughout my administration. The United States will be willing to acknowledge past errors where those errors have been made.”

2. Apology to the Muslim World: “We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect.”

1. Apology to France and Europe: “Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”

Obama has only been able to portray the United States as weak. Jimmy Carter apologized to the world for America’s “excessive fear” of Communism. After Carter spoke the Soviet Union embarked on the invasion of Afghanistan and Iran took American’s hostage.

Woodrow Wilson demonstrated America as weak by proposing an “ethical” foreign policy and a “concert of nations.” America didn’t fend off World War I with Wilson’s weak America stance and we actually took on an isolationist policy during the 1920s and 30s which ultimately led to World War II. We waited to get bombed at Pearl Harbor before entering the war.

Other US Presidents held a different vision for America:

• George Washington’s first State of the Union address reminder that: “To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.”
• The Monroe Doctrine ideal that America is committed to the principles on which republican self-government is based.
• Truman’s Doctrine of support for peoples threatened with Communist aggression.
• Reagan Doctrine’s “peace through strength” strategy of revitalizing the US military while promoting economic growth at home and increasing support for oppressed people around the world.

American exceptionalism shows an indispensable nation in the defense of liberty around the world. The Obama Doctrine demonstrates the opposite – nations will look elsewhere for help and our adversaries will see the United States as weak and powerless. The Obama Doctrine creates a more dangerous world by emboldening our enemies. Indeed!

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

The Department of Homeland Security is systematically reviewing thousands of pending immigration cases and moving to dismiss those filed against suspected illegal immigrants who have no serious criminal records, according to several sources familiar with the efforts.

Isn’t breaking and entering a serious crime?

Culling the immigration court system dockets of noncriminals started in earnest in Houston about a month ago and has stunned local immigration attorneys, who have reported coming to court anticipating clients’ deportations only to learn that the government was dismissing their cases.

Richard Rocha, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman, said Tuesday that the review is part of the agency’s broader, nationwide strategy to prioritize the deportations of illegal immigrants who pose a threat to national security and public safety.

So if you break the law, aren’t a US citizen you get “prioritized.” What happened to rule of law?

Critics assailed the plan as another sign that the Obama administration is trying to create a kind of backdoor “amnesty” program.

“They’ve made clear that they have no interest in enforcing immigration laws against people who are not convicted criminals,” said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates for strict controls.

“This situation is just another side effect of President Obama’s failure to deliver on his campaign promise to make immigration reform a priority in his first year,” said U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. “Until he does, state and local authorities are left with no choice but to pick up the slack for prosecuting and detaining criminal aliens.”

But Senator Cornyn, Barack Obama is applying his own brand of immigration reform. Obama, like the illegal aliens, have no regard for rule of law or the United States Constitution. Indeed!

Source: Houston Chronicle

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

]]> http://www.liberallyconservative.com/i-thought-illegal-aliens-were-illegal/feed/ 0 http://www.liberallyconservative.com/mosque-at-ground-zero-kosovo-orthodox-churches/ http://www.liberallyconservative.com/mosque-at-ground-zero-kosovo-orthodox-churches/#comments Sun, 22 Aug 2010 15:37:28 +0000 Don Anastas http://www.liberallyconservative.com/?p=4545

Serbians were bombed by the Clinton administration in an “antiseptic” war lobbing rockets to destroy a country because of ethnic cleansing of Muslims. I certainly don’t support ethnic cleansing but examining what has occurred in Kosovo, which was taken over by Albanian Muslims with few Serbs left is significant and not something discussed in the press.

While Muslims wish to build a 14-15 story Mosque at or near Ground Zero in New York City, already having a Mosque within a few blocks of that site and at least 100 known Mosques in the city, the left would like to discuss freedom of religion and tolerance. So lets talk about freedom of religion and tolerance, in Kosovo.

Kosovo has changed hands and been in territorial dispute for hundreds of years. However, many Orthodox Serbian churches were built in the territory known as Kosovo. What is happening to those churches and monasteries now?

Over 150 churches and monasteries in Kosovo, Serbia have been destroyed or seriously damaged over the last 6-7 years. Now authorities project to turn the hull of one sanctuary into a nightclub. The Church of Christ the Savior in Pristina has been turned into public toilet.

Thousands of Islamics committed the sacrilege. Three thousands soldiers of the Bundeswehr Germany Army stood by in Prizzen and did nothing to stop the carnage. They did not shield a single sanctuary from destruction. It was, however, their obligation to ward off the fanatics. They did nothing of the sort.

Not one political leader has spoken in defense of the Christians. Not one has castigated the Allah-crazed Islamics. Not one has accepted responsibility for this Muslim murdering madness.

Mosques, in the meantime, are being constructed all over Kosovo. Allah be praised. The Koran be honored. Mohammed be crowned.

Vice President Joe Biden paid a visit to Kosovo in 2009, considered an independent state by many, leaving a deep split in the Serbian church. The diocese overseeing Kosovo, which the church considers the cradle of Serbian Orthodoxy, issued a strong statement condemning the visit.

“The U.S. vice president is visiting Kosovo as an independent state, to confirm forceful secession of Serbia’s territory and its hand over to Albanian terrorist who were not punished for numerous crimes against Serbian people, Serbian property and Serbian cultural and religious heritage,” the diocese said in a statement. “Does Joseph Biden want to confirm with his gesture that Decani is an American base in Kosovo, the same as Camp Bondsteel?”

“The Decani monastery unfortunately has become known for its acts against Serbia’s interests, becoming in a sense a base for anti-Serbian acting in Kosovo as confirmed by this visit.”

Joe Biden once called to “put Serbs in concentration camps”, should mind his own business and stay out of Serbian affairs.

The ancient churches and monasteries of the Serbians have been destroyed for the last decade. MakNews.com reports in 2009:

On November 17, 2002 UNMIK police reported that the Serbian Orthodox Church, St. Basil the Miracle Worker of Ostrog (Sveti Vasilije Ostrovski) in Ljubovo village between Istok and Banja near Pec, had been totally destroyed with explosives, with only the front façade still intact. In Djurakovac, 30 miles west of Pristina, a second Serbian Orthodox Church was bombed/mined and heavily damaged, the Church of All Serbian Saints. The interior of the church was gutted following three explosions. This brought the number of Orthodox Churches destroyed or damaged since NATO and the UN occupied Kosovo to 112. This has been an unprecedented act of genocide. The planned and systematic destruction of the Christian history of Kosovo-Metohija under US/NATO/EU sponsorship. Churches that had survived for over 500 years under Ottoman Turkish rule were reduced to rubble under the protection of 30,000 NATO troops.

On December 2, 2002, 46 tombstones at the Orthodox cemetery in Kosovo Polje and Decani were destroyed following celebrations of Albanian Flag Day held on November 28 near the Visoki Decani Monastery. The KFOR troops did nothing to protect the cemetery. The Orthodox cemetery is one hundred meters from the Italian checkpoint and the KFOR base. The Serbian Orthodox Church representative stated that “the cemetery is now completely desolate with not a single grave intact.” These acts of vandalism and wanton destruction “threaten to erase any trace of Serbian presence in the region.”

This is the tip of the Muslim genocide against Serbians and Christian churches and it’s nearly impossible to find reporting from the mainstream media.

We are asked to invoke the US Constitution and freedom of religion so a Mosque can be built war Islamofascists attacked America. We are asked to allow Sharia law to stand with the laws of the United States. We are asked to be tolerant yet Mosques are all over New York City. This isn’t about tolerance, it’s about sticking a thumb in the eye of free religion other than Islam.

Where is the Muslim tolerance around the world? Where are churches and synagogues in the Middle East? Where is the world standing up for Serbians and there religious heritage? It doesn’t exist!

The video below shows the Serbian monastery called Manastir Devic, built up in 1434 (XV century). Albanian terrorists have started their first attacks burning and destroying this monastery since 1949. Finally, after pull out of the Serbian army and arrival of NATO and UN to make peace in Kosovo and Metohija, this monastery has been completely destroyed, 17 March 2004.

Unfortunately, this monastery shares its destiny with over 274 Serbian churches and monasteries that have been destroyed by Albanians since 1988.

Why are Albanians still supported by America, Britain, Germany and most of EU counties to take Kosovo from Serbia (even though by every single international law Kosovo is and has been Serbian for centuries.

Is this what American politicians so proudly call democracy?

Say NO to Muslim Intolerance, Indeed!

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

Israel, once again, defends itself and the International condemnation was swift. Imagine that!

Early Monday morning in the international waters of the Mediterranean Sea, helicopters lowered Israeli Commandos onto a Turkish-flagged ferry carrying 600 passengers determined to break Israel’s blockade of Gaza. Israeli naval commandos boarded a flotilla of ships headed for the Gaza Strip Monday, killing several passengers in the process.

Max Boot of the Council on Foreign Relations writes, the flotilla—which falsely billed itself as a “humanitarian” mission—was organized by a radical Turkish group with close ties to Hamas, the terrorist group that illegally seized power in Gaza in 2007. Since then, both Israel and Egypt have imposed a partial blockade on the Strip, mainly to prevent Hamas from arming itself with the kinds of weapons it used to spark a war with Israel in December 2008. Food, medicine and electricity continue to flow to Gaza.

The flotilla was organized by the Turkish group Insani Yardim Vakfi (Humanitarian Relief Foundation), which bills itself as a philanthropic organization. But both the Danish Institute for International Studies and the Israeli Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center have documented copious links between Insani Yardim Vakfi and the global jihadist terrorist movements including al Qaeda. One of Insani Yardom Vakfi’s activists, Izza Shahin, was arrested by Israeli forces in the West Bank recently and expelled on charges of transferring tens of thousands of dollars to Hamas-controlled “charities.”

Other members of the flotilla came from such organizations as the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Al Jazeera quoted one woman aboard the flotilla saying “Right now we face one of two happy endings: either Martyrdom or reaching Gaza.”

Within hours of the flotilla incident the International Atomic Energy Agency released a report claiming that Iran now has enough nuclear fuel, with further enrichment, to make two nuclear weapons. These two stories are not unrelated. And they ought to serve as a signal to the Obama administration that it is time to change its approach to the region.

Barack Hussein Obama, the impotent Messiah residing somewhere in the White House when not flying around on Air Force One has performed its magic by isolating Israel from the United States and the world.

On Friday, Obama ordered Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to present Benjamin Netanyahu with a four-part ultimatum.

1. Israel must cancel the approval of the housing units in Ramat Shlomo.
2. Israel must prohibit all construction for Jews in Jerusalem neighborhoods built since 1967.
3. Israel must make a gesture to the Palestinians to show them we want peace. The US suggests releasing hundreds of Palestinian terrorists from Israeli prisons.
4. Israel must agree to negotiate all substantive issues, including the partition of Jerusalem (including the Jewish neighborhoods constructed since 1967 that are now home to more than a half million Israelis) and the immigration of millions of hostile foreign Arabs to Israel under the rubric of the so-called “right of return,” in the course of indirect, Obama administration-mediated negotiations with the Palestinians. To date, Israel has maintained that substantive discussions can only be conducted in direct negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian officials.

If Israel does not accept all four US demands, then the Obama administration will boycott Mr. Netanyahu and his senior ministers. In the first instance, this means that if Mr. Netanyahu comes to Washington next week for the AIPAC conference, no senior administration official will meet with him.

Heritage writes:

But when the United States distances itself from Israel, as the Obama administration has done, it makes confrontation and conflict in the region more likely, not less. When enemies see Israel as alone and isolated, they become more, not less, aggressive. When Israel feels alone and isolated, it feels compelled to be more aggressive – to act in its own defense.

The Obama administration actually enabled Iran with its engagement strategy last year, which culminated in last month’s nuclear deal between Iran, Turkey and Brazil – a deal that was based off of  Obama’s own proposed deal with Iran.

In order to secure new UN sanctions on Iran, the Obama administration agreed to allow the Russians to sell the Iranians S-300 anti-aircraft missiles – the very weapon system that Iran would use against an Israeli air strike.

Incompetency or by design? I believe the Obama administration is pro-Palestinian and doesn’t mind strengthening America’s enemies while placing Israel in a no win situation where it must defend itself and become further isolated by the international community. The two-fold strategy, in my opinion, is Obama’s hate America, hate Israel platform. Indeed!

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

Journalist Claire Berlinski writing in the Spring issue of the City Journal:

In the world’s collective consciousness, the word “Nazi” is synonymous with evil. It is widely understood that the Nazis’ ideology—nationalism, anti-Semitism, the autarkic ethnic state, the Führer principle—led directly to the furnaces of Auschwitz. It is not nearly as well understood that Communism led just as inexorably, everywhere on the globe where it was applied, to starvation, torture, and slave-labor camps. Nor is it widely acknowledged that Communism was responsible for the deaths of some 150 million human beings during the twentieth century. The world remains inexplicably indifferent and uncurious about the deadliest ideology in history.

For evidence of this indifference, consider the unread Soviet archives. Pavel Stroilov, a Russian exile in London, has on his computer 50,000 unpublished, untranslated, top-secret Kremlin documents, mostly dating from the close of the Cold War. He stole them in 2003 and fled Russia. Within living memory, they would have been worth millions to the CIA; they surely tell a story about Communism and its collapse that the world needs to know. Yet he can’t get anyone to house them in a reputable library, publish them, or fund their translation. In fact, he can’t get anyone to take much interest in them at all. . . .

Stroilov claims that his documents “tell a completely new story about the end of the Cold War. The ‘commonly accepted’ version of history of that period consists of myths almost entirely. These documents are capable of ruining each of those myths.” Is this so? I couldn’t say. I don’t read Russian. Of Stroilov’s documents, I have seen only the few that have been translated into English. Certainly, they shouldn’t be taken at face value; they were, after all, written by Communists. But the possibility that Stroilov is right should surely compel keen curiosity.

For instance, the documents cast Gorbachev in a far darker light than the one in which he is generally regarded. In one document, he laughs with the Politburo about the USSR’s downing of Korean Airlines flight 007 in 1983—a crime that was not only monstrous but brought the world very near to nuclear Armageddon. These minutes from a Politburo meeting on October 4, 1989, are similarly disturbing:

Lukyanov reports that the real number of casualties on Tiananmen Square was 3,000.

Gorbachev: We must be realists. They, like us, have to defend themselves. Three thousands . . . So what?

Claire Berlinski, a contributing editor of City Journal, is an American journalist who lives in Istanbul. She is the author of There Is No Alternative: Why Margaret Thatcher Matters.

Michael Walsh at Big Journalism writes : Be sure to read the whole thing, then look around ask yourself: does anybody give a damn? Or did the bad guys win after all?

I ask, is history repeating or is Communism only a continuing process? Wake up America.

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free. ~President Ronald Reagan~

Indeed!

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

Indeed!

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

Leaders from 46 nations, the most gathered together since the United Nations was formed in San Francisco in 1945, will meet over the next two days in Washington, DC. The stated goal of the Obama administration-hosted summit is laudable: keeping nuclear weapons out of terrorist hands.

Barack Obama released a Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and just days after he signed a New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. Many of the White House’s allies pointed out last week, President Ronald Reagan wanted a world without nuclear weapons, and he also signed an arms treaty with the Soviet Union. President Obama’s policy goals are just like President Reagan’s. So why is anyone criticizing the White House’s nuclear strategy?

Ronald Reagan knew that to eliminate the need for large nuclear arsenals, you must first start to eliminate the dependence — both ours and others’ — on massive nuclear attack as the guarantor of security. That is why Reagan’s first priority was to build up United States conventional forces and introduce missile defense. That allowed his negotiators to approach arms control agreements from a position of strength not weakness.

Obama has done the exact opposite of Mr. Reagan. He has cut US national defense, including acquisition of the F-22, removed missile defense installations in Eastern Europe, and cut missile defense development programs. Obama’s NPR weakens America’s deterrence credibility by broadcasting our intention not to respond in kind if we are hit by weapons of mass destruction. Obama’s New START agreement clearly links our missile defense shield with Russian missile reduction, and limits our own conventional weapons capabilities as well.

From Heritage Foundation:

New START plays right into the Kremlin’s needs by constraining our advantage in conventional (non-nuclear) “strategic” weapons, including missile defense, in order to accentuate the power of their nuclear arsenal.

Meanwhile, the current Iranian regime views their nuclear program as essential to their domestic survival, so the increasingly worthless sanctions the Obama administration is trying to get out of the United Nations Security Council will do nothing to slow the Iranian bomb either.

And Obama’s call for eliminating nuclear weapons even provides North Korea with some political cover for maintaining its stockpile. In September 2009, Pyongyang declared that “denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula [will be] in the context of a global effort to build a world free of nuclear weapons.” North Korea now ties its denuclearization to worldwide U.S. disarmament.

Ronald Reagan’s vision for “rendering nuclear weapons obsolete” began with first ensuring robust defenses, and then reducing the nuclear stockpile appropriately. Obama has decided to take a “reduce first, beef up defense later” approach.

Peace through strength won the cold war, reducing defenses opens the door for your enemies to take the offensive leaving America defenseless. Indeed!

BLIZZARD 2010!!