In the wake of what many are now considering to be one of this administration’s many “Watergate” moments, the Obama Administration spent $70,000 to apologize to the Muslim world via TV commercials aired in Pakistan which detailed the administration’s disdain for the video that allegedly sparked the outrages in the Middle East, specifically the one that killed our ambassador. So, agree or disagree with the video- are we now to understand that our government will spend tens of thousands of dollars apologizing for our Constitutional right to free speech? I guess so. The point of that last statement wasn’t the stand up for nor disavow the video; rather, I’m simply trying to point out that this man (right or wrong) has the freedom to express his opinion of Islam as he pleases, without fear that he will be used as a scapegoat the next time the President’s and his Administration mess up.
Back to the point. By the same token, should we not expect a similar apology campaign in response to this expression of religious antipathy:
Click here to see a crucifix submerged in urine on display as a “work of art” in New York City.
Click here to see how Hillary Clinton attended a play vulgarly mocking Mormons and instead of expressing her dismay at this disrespect, she stood up and cheered.
And of course, no religious hypocrisy tour of this Administration would be complete without hearkening back to President Obama’s comment about people who “cling to guns and religion.”
Imagine my surprise when I hear nothing but crickets coming from the White House. I feel like resurrecting The U.S. of A Double Standard again. And again. And again. I can’t seem to drive home enough the idea that this is one of the most hypocritical, double-standard-laden times in which this nation has ever found itself.
Boys and girls, WHY would this video, the affects of which have largely been purported by an administration that has brought it out of the shadows and onto the national stage, incite an apology from the highest office in the nation (and frankly, the world) and yet the aforementioned and countless other affronts to other faiths are met with silence? (incidentally, there’s been a “Fatwa” or death warrant issued for this guy. Way to protect your citizens, Mr. President)
Let me focus once more as I did a few days ago on the fact that by the media’s own admission, this video was in complete obscurity. That is, until the President decided to use it as the reasoning behind the attack. Let’s consider for a moment the contact that the average person in a place like Egypt or Libya has with the West. Certain aspects of MAINSTREAM Western culture are not commonplace in the internet and entertainment world in the Middle East. . . let alone an obscure video created and posted on YouTube by the most freelancing of freelancers. Really? Really?
Interestingly, this fits well into the theme I previously discussed in my review of “2016: Obama’s America.” Look through the lens of anti-colonialism and a disdain for the West, and suddenly the Administration’s preference as to who gets an apology signed, sealed and delivered from the President’s desk, and who does not, makes sense. Consider (in relation to the aforementioned examples):
A crucifix is representative of the Christian and Catholic faith. Through the lens of the anti-colonial mindset, Catholicism (and by default, Christianity) is associated with the “majority,” and the “majority” with the “oppressors.” As to the mockery of the LDS faith, it is either placed in the same category as Christianity, or as an offshoot of the same. Obama’s comment about clinging to “guns and religion” paints a picture of Americans as intolerant, whisky-chugging, gun toting, Bible-banging old white men. . . and I don’t think I have to go into much detail into how that fits into the scheme of things.
If anyone else can better explain this gargantuan double-standard, be my guest. I’ll be waiting with baited breath.
In other news, now we learn that the diary of the dead Ambassador seems to contain smoking gun evidence that the Ambassador knew (and by default so did the Obama Administration ) that an attack was imminent. Incidentally, I find it somewhat amusing that the State Department is bashing CNN for using the journal (found at the scene of the attack) as a source. . . yet I’d love to ask our dear State Department WHAT WAS IT STILL DOING THERE for CNN to find? Oh State Department, me thinks thou dost protest too much. And hath painted thine self into a corner. That journal should have been out of there the MINUTE we went in after the attack. THE MINUTE. That said, CNN- shame on you for the shameless exploitation of a personal journal that the now-dead ambassador’s family begged you not to use. Nice going.
As long as the cat is out of the bag, we might as well talk about how the journal reveals that the ambassador expressed a fear that he and his fellow Americans would not make it out of Libya alive. How sad it is that he was right, and how scary it is that the Administration not only KNEW (and has now spent over a week lying about it) about it, but did NOTHING to stop it. Yet our press continues to focus on distractions (such as Romney’s absolutely valid post-attack comments), and we end up having to rely on UNIVISION for hard-hitting interviews. Gees. I never thought I’d see the day that self-proclaimed left-winger Jorge Ramos would be the only non-Fox journalist to try and get the President to own up to the chaos in Libya. As Rush likes to call it, it was most decidedly a “random act of journalism.”
I like how Hannity put it last week (and I paraphrase): “This administration is either 1. completely inept, 2. stupid, or 3. lying.” And, as with Hannity, I’m going with 1 & 3. Raise your hand if you’d like to be a diplomat under the “protection” of this administration.