September 10, 2009
Obama's stunning turn of phrase
I think it is instructive to remind people of exactly who it is we are dealing with here. Andrew Klavan wrote a devastating piece regarding Obama's August 19th call to Rabbis on his healthcare plan, where Obama was quoted as saying:
"We are God's partners in matters of life and death."
Let that sink in for a minute...
"We are God's partners in matters of life and death."
Klavan took issue with Obama's interpretation of his role vis-à-vis God. I quote:
In response to this statement I would like to make a subtle theological point: No, we're not. For those of you who aren't versed in the finer points of theology, let me try to simplify that for you: No. We're not. Or to put it even more simply: No. We. Are. Not.
How could Obama say something like that? It still stuns me. Maybe the man really does think he's the Messiah. After all, Louis Farrakhan, another, er... man of God, believes him to be.
Now, don't get me wrong. I don't take issue with "differently abled" people who imagine they are co-equal partners with God. I firmly believe they should be entitled to all the free healthcare they need, and free room, board, and round-the-clock medications.
However, these people should be subject to some modest restraints as well. For example, they should be prohibited from purchasing a handgun. As a lifetime NRA member, I am with Brady on that one. Similarly they shouldn't be allowed to drive. They should be let off the grounds every now and then...
But under no circumstances should they be allowed to be President of the United States!
Who vetted this man? Who checked his background?
We did. Many of us.
More importantly, who listened?
Are you listening now?
Now, don't get me wrong. I don't take issue with "differently abled" people who imagine they are co-equal partners with God. I firmly believe they should be entitled to all the free healthcare they need, and free room, board, and round-the-clock medications.
However, these people should be subject to some modest restraints as well. For example, they should be prohibited from purchasing a handgun. As a lifetime NRA member, I am with Brady on that one. Similarly they shouldn't be allowed to drive. They should be let off the grounds every now and then...
But under no circumstances should they be allowed to be President of the United States!
Who vetted this man? Who checked his background?
We did. Many of us.
More importantly, who listened?
Are you listening now?
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- The NYT Prefers its Own Conspiracy Theories
- Would the FDA Pass Its Own Audit?
- War By Other Means: Demographics
- The Trump Administration’s Support for the Israel-Azerbaijan Strategic Partnership Can Benefit America
- This U.S. Under Trump is Strengthening Critical Minerals Sovereignty
- Upheaval and Pushback
- Why Do Democrats Hate Women and Girls?
- There is No Politics Without an Enemy
- On the Importance of President Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’
- Let a Robot Do It
Blog Posts
- Nina 'Scary Poppins' Jankowicz's ex-NGO partner makes clear 'bankrupting Tesla' is his most important accomplishment
- America’s federal court judges: a self-anointed priesthood.
- Yvette Clarke: Don’t fire the bureaucrats, they’re the efficiency experts!
- Big Balls to the rescue: DOGE saves a terabyte of data destroyed by USIP employees
- As Trump’s EPA tries to recover ‘green’ slush fund dollars, Native communities face energy blackouts
- In Britain, ‘transphobic toddlers’ are the new menace
- One outrage after another: Europe is lost
- Judicial misconduct allegations shake legal system
- Look at all the benefits of socialism!
- French right-wing leader Le Pen banned from running for office
- The case for Alberta as the 51st US state
- Putting tariffs into perspective
- Iran’s nuclear countdown: Can Trump hold the line?
- Putin in the crosshairs
- I'm looking through you -- where did you go?