My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad

April 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30    

« Citizen Kane is dead: Journalists are the latest class of starving artist | Main | Hillary, you go, girl! She tells China to stop human rights abuses »

February 24, 2009



He also didn't mention the troops he was deploying for Afghanistan. Nor did he mention that his administration has maintained every Bush era policy re: detainees, Guantanamo, etc. His whole raison d'etre (to use a word from one of our 'allies' who Obama could not persuade to send addition troops to fight the taliban) is the idea that the two Bush terms were disasters, rather than historic advances for freedom around the world (which they were).


Any idea what the
"twilight struggle for freedom" that led to the highways, the moon landing and technology explosion was??

The Cold War? Civil Rights?

I am clueless.


No credibility. No accountability from him and his party for the mess they've had a large part in creating. No new ideas. No good solutions. Just lots of words. But I give him a 10 out of 10 for achieving the epitome of disappointment.

Frank Warner

Kennedy spoke of the long twilight struggle.

Generally, it was about bearing any burden for the future of liberty, particularly during the Cold War. But geez, Eisenhower's Interstate Highway program was an instrument of defense, not a goal. The goal is the protection and expansion of freedom itself.

Kennedy 1961:

"Now the trumpet summons us again—not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need; not as a call to battle, though embattled we are—but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, 'rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation'—a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself.

"Can we forge against these enemies a grand and global alliance, North and South, East and West, that can assure a more fruitful life for all mankind? Will you join in that historic effort?

"In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility—I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it—and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.

"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country."

That's a real liberal.


I'm surprised he mentioned freedom even once. Why bring up a concept that, at best, he's obviously uninterested in, or, at worst, actively hostile to? Unless it were to say, "It's overrated. Let's take those final steps down the Road to Serfdom NOW!"

David Holliday

He looks good in a suit and speaks well. And, he gives new meaning to the term, big spender, Other than that, I don't think there is much there.

I learned a long time ago, to listen to what someone says but watch what they do. Obama's actions do not live up to the content of his words.


Now Eric holder signals that the assault weapons ban is a goal of the administration.

I thought "The Won" had said he can't because he didn't have the votes.

jj mollo

It's a lot easier to find the votes when cops are getting shot twice a week.

The comments to this entry are closed.