A Bitch-Slap for Barack

President Obama has said Congress made a “mistake” by overriding his veto and pushing through a bill that allows legal action against Saudi Arabia over the 9/11 attacks.

the BBC reports.  Not until the 16th paragraph does the article say:

The Senate voted 97-1 and the House of Representatives 348-77, meaning the bill becomes law.

Do you think the BBC would have buried this in the last quarter of the article if Bush was on the receiving end of a slap-down like this?  If it were anyone other than Obama, he or she would be taking a step back and reflecting on whether his wielding of the veto was wise in the face of such overwhelming, cross-party opposition in both houses.

And this is what I’ve always disliked about Obama: he thinks he’s assumed an African-style presidency whereby he can do what he likes because he’s President, and everyone else should fall into line and not question the brilliance of his leadership.  On assuming office Obama didn’t seem to know how the US government is structured and what the President’s role is within it, and at no point during his two terms has he shown he is even interested in finding out.  He has set a precedent of the POTUS wielding far greater influence and authority than the Founding Fathers ever intended based on his supposedly inherent wisdom and indisputable good intentions.  Ask yourself whether this is a good thing now that we’re going to have either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump in the White House for the next four years.

And this:

Mr Obama told CNN on Wednesday: “It’s a dangerous precedent and it’s an example of why sometimes you have to do what’s hard.

“And, frankly, I wish Congress here had done what’s hard.

He really said that?   A president who has ducked countless tough decisions in order to maintain his popularity among his admirers, including foreigners who have anything but America’s best interests in mind.  Was the rejection of Phase 4 of the Keystone XL pipeline in order to appease the environmentalists a case of Obama doing “what’s hard?”  Or sticking to his principles over Syria once he’d made his “red line” remark?  Self-awareness is not his strong suit, is it?

Mr Obama suggested that his colleagues’ voting patterns were influenced by political concerns.

Politicians voting on political matters are influenced by political concerns.  I guess this is why people think he is the cleverest President ever.


A Short Analysis of a Saudi’s Blog

Via the Religious Policeman, I came across this posting by a Saudi lady complaining of her treatment by her male oppressors:

Due to the dickless dicks who have been granted power to control MY GOD DAMN LIFE, I will not be able to blog or even check my fucking email! Fuck this country and every GOD DAMN SAUDI who has allowed for this BS to go on!

She is understandably upset, and the Religious Policeman likens her to the suffragettes:

If every Saudi woman were like her, the streets would be buzzing with women driving to each others’ houses, shops, schools and of course the places where they work, wearing bright clothing and sporting bare faces with makeup.

Me, I’m not so sure.  Let’s have a look through the blog of the lady in question.

First we have her singing the praises of George Galloway and his performance on Capitol Hill:

No doubt about it.. This was definitly a victory 4 the british parliamentary system!!!

If she means that the British parliamentary system allows MPs the freedom of speech to say whatever they please, then she has a point.  But somehow I doubt this is the point she is making.  I rather feel that she is simply gloating over what she sees as brave underdog Galloway taking on the might of the US and coming off best.  I wonder if the lady in question actually realises that Galloway has a lengthy track record of supporting Arabic dictators who restrict the rights of women and imprison or execute those who dare to speak their minds, and that free speech in the USA is vastly superior to that of almost every other country on the planet, and these rights are rigorously upheld by the very people who Galloway was lambasting.

Her contempt for the USA is further revealed in this post, along with a telling sentence or two on the religion of peace:

Yes, America might be the only super power at the moment, but HELLO two billion Muslims will not hesitate to open a can of whoop arse for our America “liberators”! And let me just say this, I will DEFINITLY be one of them. The current conversion rate among the 3 leading religions is 3:1 for ISLAM. So PUHHH-LEASE you think you can take us on?!?

Oh really?? Well Washington can kiss my bedouin arse! I cannot believe the nerve of this guy and his freakin gov! They go off invading other peoples homes, lying about it and stealing their livelihoods (OIL!), and when it’s obvious they’ve made such a muck of it all, who do they blame?! SAUDI! SHOCK, HORROR?! I THINK NOT!

America needs to take its head out of its filthy arse and stop this chaos! You can’t go around invading peoples homes, supporting despots and appartheid in “Israel” and expect the world to be all hunky-dory!

Am so freakin PI$$ED with this B*****D!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WALLAH AL3A6’EEEM if there’s even an incling of somethin like that happening, there will definitly be some cleansing done, Sep 11 style!!!

Yes, I can see the similarities with Emily Pankhurst already.

We also learn from our Saudi lady, who is complaining of having her rights infringed, that:

The Reprinting of the Danish cartoons shows that the West are just as idiotic as those so-called Muslims targeting Christians in Beirut.

Erm, no.  They are demonstrating that freedom of expression is a fundamental and universal right which cannot be curtailed by religious zealots, something which I thought she was demanding for herself.  I also note that she twice stated her opposition to the toppling of the Taliban on her blog, although I would hazard a guess that much of the female population of Afghanistan would not share this view.

Finally, on her sidebar we have a link to the Electronic Intifada (link omitted) which is currently supporting normalisation of relations with those well-known defenders of womens’ rights Hamas, plus the usual plethora of links to sites denouncing Israel, whose women enjoy equal rights with men in stark contrast to their counterparts in the Arab world.

I find the situation rather ironic.  Here we have a lady who is justificably angry at her appalling treatment as a second class citizen under Islamic law, yet at the same time is supporting George Galloway, continually denouncing the USA and issuing it with dark warnings of violent Islamic uprisings, equating Western freedom of speech with sectarian murder, and indirectly supporting Hamas in its violent struggle against Israel.

I have to disagree with the Religious Policeman, and conclude that the reason things are as they are in Saudi is because too many people are like her: demanding rights and freedoms for herself whilst denying others the same, and embarking down a path of blaming the West for ills whose roots lie squarely at home.