It’s getting to the point where, every time Obama floats some incredibly asinine new idea, I find myself automatically responding in the manner of Victor Meldrew (from the hilarious British comedy series, One Foot in the Grave).
The latest specimen of presidential preposterosity is Obama’s decision to rekindle the Falkland Islands dispute by siding with Argentina in that country’s desire to negotiate the “future” of the “Malvinas” (this puts us squarely in the camp of our trusty allies, Venezuela and Nicaragua). Inasmuch as the inhabitants are British and want to remain that way, Obama’s motives are completely inscrutable, except as another attempt on his part to oil his way into the good graces of crackpots like Hugo Chavez. Why? Why? I am reduced to simply repeating Jeff Goldstein’s lament: It’s what they do. It’s who they are.
By the way, here’s a video clip from an episode of One Foot in the Grave, which I offer as comedy relief to the relentless stupid tragedy that is the Obama administration.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The best response is to simply say no. The second best response would to play their own game and demand that the status of Tiera del Fuego and Buenos Aires also up for negotiation.
ReplyDeletePaco, here is the New and improved Practically Automated Campaign Organization. Now with double the Pacotacularness!
Paco for President!
I believe it. It's reached the point where if there is some political stupidity that can be committed, I count down until Obama has committed it.
ReplyDeleteRebecca, Obama is LOOKING for ways to piss Americans off. I have to wonder if he's trying to start riots.
ReplyDeleteBarack Hussein Obama [Injun name: Speaks With Two Faces] is living up to his reputation as a perfidious weasel among our natural and long-standing allies in The Anglosphere [and so is his henchman, Hillary Rodham].
ReplyDeleteQuoted from and Linked to at:
I Am Obama, Betrayer Of Free Worlds.
Just like I expect Obama to step up and slash the budget like an angry wolverine in a socialite's silk purse so he can keep his debate promise of "a net spending cut," I also expect him to insist on negotiations on other disputed territories.
ReplyDeleteOff hand : Alsace-Lorraine held by France but taken from Germany who took it from France, Gibraltar, Karelia and the other Finnish territories taken and kept by Russia, Königsberg held by Russia from Germany, the Kuril Islands held by Russia but taken from Japan and many others.
I'm sure he'll get right on that and not limit himself to only mentioning the disputed territories that the bien pensants focus on. I'm sure.
I'm beginning to think of Obama as 'The Faraway Prez' - in the Enid Blyton sense of the word.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Faraway_Tree
I suppose I would be sympathetic for our allies, save that I am at present reserving all of my horror and astonishment for what this feckless boob and his claque of malevolent mediocrities are doing to the US.
ReplyDeleteRight mow my attitude is "Screw you, UK! Why should we be the only ones suffering from this buffoon's stupidity?"
Why? I've thought of a few possibilities :
ReplyDelete1) the White House wasn't really paying attention and when the Falklands were brought up they shrugged and said "whatever..."
2) "Malvinas?" misheard as "Melvin's"
3) heard "Malvinas" and thought there is no such place so what could be lost by negotiations.
4) They want something from the UK and wanted to create some leverage.
5) They wanted to gain a favor from Argentina.
6) Well, the Socialist International said it was the right thing to do so…
(the bien pensants at the Socialist International are deeply concerned about the Falklands and the UK's "colonization" but shockingly a search of their site reveals not a single mention of Alsace-Lorraine, Karelia, Königsberg or the Kuril Islands even though these 4 are more recent acquisitions, directly effected more people, involved the expulsion of people (Königsberg & Kuril Islands), and in the case of Königsberg involved mass murder. It's almost as if they don't really care about the principle but only care about opportunistically using the issue as a club.)