Message #162878

[Harconen]

The office of Mir Hussein Mousavi, who was defeated (either legitimately or by fraud) by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the Iranian presidential elections, allegedly sends a letter to Obama criticizing him for referring to him and Ahmadinejad as “two of a kind.” The letter calls Obama’s remark “…a grave and deep insult, not just to Mr. Mousavi but especially against the judgment of the Iranian people, against our moral conviction and intelligence, especially those of the young generation that comprises a population of 31 million. It is a specially grave insult for those who are now fighting for democracy and freedom, and an unwarranted gift and even praise for (Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali) Khamenei, whose security forces are now killing peaceful Iranians in the streets of every major city in the country. Your statement misled the people of the world.” Obama also takes heat within the United States for his lack of support for the Iranian protestors. On the June 21 broadcast of ABC’s This Week, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) says, “The president of the United States is supposed to lead the free world, not follow it. He’s been timid and passive, more than I would like.” On the same program, Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CN) covers for Obama, saying, “He’s got a very delicate path to walk here. You don’t want to take ownership of this. The worst thing we could do at this moment for these reformers, these protesters, these courageous people in Tehran, is allow the government there to claim that this is a U.S.-led opposition, a U.S.-led demonstration.” (Dodd does not realize that the Iranian leaders will blame the United States regardless of whether it gives moral—or any other—support to the demonstrators.) On CNN’s State of the Union, Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) states, “If America stands for democracy and all of these demonstrations are going on… obviously they (the Iranian demonstrators) are going to ask, do we really care about our principles?” Also on CNN, Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) argues, “We should not politicize this issue here in the United States. The biggest threat down the road… is Iran’s nuclear program.” (Casey apparently does not realize that Obama has essentially already given Iran a green light to continue its nuclear program.) [3460, 3461]

 

With Obama merely saying he was “deeply troubled” by the situation in Iran and press secretary Robert Gibbs announcing, “This is a debate inside Iran for Iranians,” the leadership vacuum is filled by Great Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Unlike Obama, Brown is not afraid to “meddle,” and states, “We are with others, including the whole of the European Union unanimously today, in condemning the use of violence, in condemning media suppression. It is for Iran now to show the world that the elections have been fair… that the repression and the brutality that we have seen in these last few days is not something that is going to be repeated. We want Iran to be part of the international community and not to be isolated. But it is for Iran to prove… that they can respect these basic rights.” Senator John McCain (R-AZ) says of Obama’s tepid response to the unfolding events in Iran, “He should speak out that this is a corrupt, flawed sham of an election and that the Iranian people have been deprived of their rights.” Political commentators Dick Morris and Eileen McGann write, “The transparent appeasement of Iran’s government—and its obvious lack of reciprocation—make Obama look ridiculous. Long after the mullahs have suppressed what limited democracy they once allowed, Obama’s image problems will persist.” [3462, 3535]

 

Sherman Frederick, publisher of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, announces that he is switching from the Democrat Party to the Republican Party. In a June 21 editorial, Frederick writes, “Republicans offer our only hope in slowing the Obama ‘change’ juggernaut before the America of unbridled optimism and opportunity goes the way of the buffalo. I don't want my great-grandchildren growing up in cradle-to-grave government care, where only the privileged few may afford a car, or own a home, or get non-rationed health care.” He adds, “A fiscal conservative such as myself is treated by Obamaniacs like a ringing cell phone in church. ‘Shhhh!’ they say. The only debate among Democrats is how fast and how deeply to run up the national debt. Any Democrat who questions deficit spending or a limit to federal power is simply not invited to the party.” [3465]

 

According to Steen Advertising, Nancy Fletcher, CEO of the Outdoor Advertising Association of America, purportedly has been telling billboard companies (like Steen) not to accept the “Where’s the Birth certificate?” ads. The organization’s web site includes a statement from Fletcher, which reads in part, “For more than two centuries, the American republic has drawn strength from its Bill of Rights and the Constitution. The Founding Fathers put a premium on freedom as they wrote clear safeguards against an overbearing government. In particular, the First Amendment protects free speech and the Fifth Amendment protects property rights. Debate is honored and encouraged in a free society. Indeed, people have debated outdoor advertising regulation since the first postings, and debate will continue. As the world changes around us—in ways we perhaps cannot contemplate—we know Americans share deep respect for free expression and for private property.” (Apparently Fletcher’s words do not apply to anyone who dares to be critical of Obama.) Steen Advertising’s Candice Berju states, “We are not going through with the deal (to post a “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” billboard)… The OAAA has advised companies not to run this campaign.” When later questioned about Steen’s decision, Berju responded, “I’ve no comment on this. Sorry, I’m not answering anything.” After being asked to speak with her superior, she answered, “No, I can’t help you with that. I’m not commenting on anything. Have a good day.” The OAAA has almost one thousand member advertising companies, and has had no problems with “Yes, we can” billboards. [3466, 3467]