Barack Taqiyya went to the United Nations. The Washington Post went bonkers although I can’t see why. The president got in all of the UN-loving garbage along with every global busybody talking point. There’s nothing new here:
Yet the WAPO’s editorial board found something to complain about. I suspect it is a con job trying to make their guy look like he loves America after all.
Much to my delight a few —— damned few —— of the president’s words sounded like the words of a president rather than the words of a dirty little moralist cum spiritual leader. Whatever action follows the speech remains to be seen. In the past the president’s domestic actions had nothing to do with his words.
The WAPO editorial board goes on to say:
No president should promote democracy at all. Not ever. American presidents should be promoting limited government and property Rights not fomenting revolutions for the benefit of democracy sharpshooters like the Muslim Brotherhood.
NOTE: Woodrow Wilson made the world safe for democracy. Rhetorical question: How’s that been working out? Serious question: What would the world be like today had Wilson made the world safe for America’s form of government before it morphed into a half-ass democracy.
Every other Right is meaningless without property Rights protected by limited government. Criminals love the Fifth Amendment, but who would honestly give a tinker’s damn about freedom of the press, religion, speech, and all of the rest when property Rights are gone? No one ever started a revolution for any of those First Amendment Rights. Show me one Communist revolution where the people ended up with freedom of the press, or religion, or speech.
The American Revolution was fought for independence. It is called the War for Independence. Rights came later and only became important in limiting the size of government. Should Americans turn to violent revolution it will be for independence from tyrannical government no different than the war colonial Americans fought.
America’s exceptionalism was born of limited government not democracy. Proof: Before 1913 America was the most admired and respected country the world had ever seen. Had property Rights been reserved for America’s ruling class —— as they were for ruling classes throughout history —— there never would have been American exceptionalism to cede to a Russian pistolero. If anything, democracy cedes American exceptionalism to Russia and the world. Notice that there were many democracies in the past but only one America. The president showed that he did NOT understand American exceptionalism when he said:
Nobody with an understanding of America’s singular form of government would put Americans in a category with foreign peoples. That is not a criticism of Brits or Greeks. Individuals the world over can be exceptional in their chosen fields. America’s Founding Fathers were exceptional as were many men and women throughout history. American exceptionalism encompassed an original form of government without crushing individuality as does every form of collectivism; Socialism, democracy, theocracies, dictatorships, and so on.
I do not know what game Barack Taqiyya is playing. The United Nations is the love of his life. Ditto the WAPO’s editorial board. So let’s look at what the WAPO is advocating in addition to democracy.
The president did not say he would abandon the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Since the editorial board was commenting on a speech delivered to the United Nations that is what the WAPO implies by mixing “. . . human rights and open markets . . .”.
Here’s the WAPO’s message. Open markets should fund human Rights. In other words legislate love on an international scale. All things considered, I’m fairly certain Barack Taqiyya is an honorary member of the WAPO’s editorial board.
More importantly, WAPO’s strategists must know they are defending coerced charity and funding UN charity hustlers no less than Barack Taqiyya & Company defends and funds them. Regardless of anything the president says not one American tax dollar will be taken away from the money UN charity hustlers receive annually.
Bottom line: The WAPO’s criticism of their guy in the White House does not ring true.
Yet the WAPO’s editorial board found something to complain about. I suspect it is a con job trying to make their guy look like he loves America after all.
Much to my delight a few —— damned few —— of the president’s words sounded like the words of a president rather than the words of a dirty little moralist cum spiritual leader. Whatever action follows the speech remains to be seen. In the past the president’s domestic actions had nothing to do with his words.
The WAPO editorial board goes on to say:
No president should promote democracy at all. Not ever. American presidents should be promoting limited government and property Rights not fomenting revolutions for the benefit of democracy sharpshooters like the Muslim Brotherhood.
NOTE: Woodrow Wilson made the world safe for democracy. Rhetorical question: How’s that been working out? Serious question: What would the world be like today had Wilson made the world safe for America’s form of government before it morphed into a half-ass democracy.
Every other Right is meaningless without property Rights protected by limited government. Criminals love the Fifth Amendment, but who would honestly give a tinker’s damn about freedom of the press, religion, speech, and all of the rest when property Rights are gone? No one ever started a revolution for any of those First Amendment Rights. Show me one Communist revolution where the people ended up with freedom of the press, or religion, or speech.
The American Revolution was fought for independence. It is called the War for Independence. Rights came later and only became important in limiting the size of government. Should Americans turn to violent revolution it will be for independence from tyrannical government no different than the war colonial Americans fought.
America’s exceptionalism was born of limited government not democracy. Proof: Before 1913 America was the most admired and respected country the world had ever seen. Had property Rights been reserved for America’s ruling class —— as they were for ruling classes throughout history —— there never would have been American exceptionalism to cede to a Russian pistolero. If anything, democracy cedes American exceptionalism to Russia and the world. Notice that there were many democracies in the past but only one America. The president showed that he did NOT understand American exceptionalism when he said:
Nobody with an understanding of America’s singular form of government would put Americans in a category with foreign peoples. That is not a criticism of Brits or Greeks. Individuals the world over can be exceptional in their chosen fields. America’s Founding Fathers were exceptional as were many men and women throughout history. American exceptionalism encompassed an original form of government without crushing individuality as does every form of collectivism; Socialism, democracy, theocracies, dictatorships, and so on.
I do not know what game Barack Taqiyya is playing. The United Nations is the love of his life. Ditto the WAPO’s editorial board. So let’s look at what the WAPO is advocating in addition to democracy.
The president did not say he would abandon the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Since the editorial board was commenting on a speech delivered to the United Nations that is what the WAPO implies by mixing “. . . human rights and open markets . . .”.
Here’s the WAPO’s message. Open markets should fund human Rights. In other words legislate love on an international scale. All things considered, I’m fairly certain Barack Taqiyya is an honorary member of the WAPO’s editorial board.
More importantly, WAPO’s strategists must know they are defending coerced charity and funding UN charity hustlers no less than Barack Taqiyya & Company defends and funds them. Regardless of anything the president says not one American tax dollar will be taken away from the money UN charity hustlers receive annually.
Bottom line: The WAPO’s criticism of their guy in the White House does not ring true.
Last edited:
