File this one under: Was I ever really that young?

30 years ago I played in a Christian metal band. Recently I got a new job, and low and behold, who was working at this new company? But the former vocalist from that Christian metal band I had played in back in 1984. Well, it just so happened that he had a CD, (Made from a cassette tape made during one of our rehearsals) so, I uploaded it to youtube a genuine blast from my very own past.

Here are the songs that I uploaded.

Little Boy


His Guiding Hand


Judgement Day

Oh, and that’s me in the red shirt and the Fro, at the tender young age of 23… 😯 There was one other song on the CD, but since someone else owns the copyright to it, I can’t upload it to youtube.


Be Alert, the world desperately needs more Lerts…

From the dimmest mists of ancient internet times, one thing has remained as a universal constant regarding the internet. I see stupid people

There is absolutely no doubt or question that there are some brilliant people who post stuff on the internet. Yet even though this is an indisputable truth, it isn’t the rule for the internet. If the internet has one single involute rule, it is this. If you say or do something monumentally stupid, it is going to end up on the internet for the entire world to see and laugh about.

Here, please allow me to give you an example of exactly such an act of monumental stupidity captured for all posterity and the entire world to laugh at.

Slate: Only bad people won’t sacrifice their children on altar of public education, or something.

We still have four more months left in 2013, but we may have found a winner for the single most vapid column of the year, courtesy of Slate. Allison Benedikt wrote a “manifesto” which appeared on their site today demanding that parents stop using private schools for their children, because — and I am not making this up — putting more children in failing schools is the path to improvement. Benedikt begins her argument by pronouncing herself ignorant on education policy, and proceeds to demonstrate a nearly endless supply of ignorance throughout the rest of the article.

Actually, I’ve gotten ahead of myself. She starts off her argument by pronouncing anyone who does not put their children in public schools a “bad person”:

You are a bad person if you send your children to private school. Not bad like murderer bad—but bad like ruining-one-of-our-nation’s-most-essential-institutions-in-order-to-get-what’s-best-for-your-kid bad. So, pretty bad.

Take a moment to mull over that gem. Benedikt’s entire argument is that non-participants in an organization ruin it by their non-participation. It’s not the actual participants who are to blame for the institution’s failures – not the teachers, not the administrators, and not the policy-makers — but the people who avoid the failure that should be blamed. That argument conveniently lets the participants in this “most-essential” institution off the hook for their own failures. We’ll get back to that in a minute.

With that in mind, Benedikt then pronounces her ignorance on the subject, while demanding that children get sacrificed in the failing institutions for generations on the off chance that things will improve … by osmosis, or something:

I am not an education policy wonk: I’m just judgmental. But it seems to me that if every single parent sent every single child to public school, public schools would improve. This would not happen immediately. It could take generations. Your children and grandchildren might get mediocre educations in the meantime, but it will be worth it, for the eventual common good.

News Flash to Allison Benedikt, you are not just judgmental, you are in fact, a complete and total imbecile. Allison, if their were an intellectual version of the Darwin Awards, you would have an entire catagory of intellectual Darwin award named after you, that’s how stupid your argument is. The reason public schools are a failure is not because intelligent and financial capably parent send their children to private schools or home school them, no, they send their children to private schools or home school them because they do not want their children in schools that are utter and complete failures.

Here’s another news flash for you Allison, not all Americans are OK with imbeciles like you, (who, by the way are so damned stupid, that by comparison you make a bucket of used camel snot look like Albert Einstein), indoctrinate their children into Marxism or pushing on them morals and ethics that they personally find repugnant.

Yes Allison, American’s are by the millions, opting out of the public education system because they do not want their children being forced to receive a substandard education or to be indoctrinated into political, religious, moral or ethical values that they do not agree with. Allison, you and the other morally depraved moral busybodies pushing politically correct cr4ap and Marxism through the public educations system are exactly who CS Lewis was speaking about when he wrote this profoundly prophetic warning.

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
C. S. Lewis

Fortunately for the rest of us, your mind numbing stupidity has been captured and preserved like a mosquito in amber for everyone to mock, ridicule and laugh at. Hell, knowing the nature of the internet, it’s entirely possible that an intellectual Darwin Award catagory will be created in your honor now…

How to win a Nobel Peace Prize.

President Barack Insane Obama is working overtime attempting to get the dogs of war riled up, he desperately needs a war to distract people from the scandals plaguing his Administration. If and when he finally strikes Syria, it will be his third war.

Obama’s third war

You might as well try to teach a snake to juggle as hope the Obama administration will think strategically. The “peace president” is about to embark on his third military adventure, this time in Syria, without having learned the lessons of his botched efforts in Afghanistan and Libya. He hasn’t even learned from the Bush administration’s mistakes — which he mocked with such delight.

Before launching a single cruise missile toward Syria, Team Obama needs to be sure it has a good answer to the question, “What comes next?”

If Obama does a Clinton and churns up some sand with do-nothing cruise-missile strikes, it will only encourage the Assad regime. But if our president hits Assad hard and precipitates regime change, then what?

If al Qaeda and local Islamists seize Damascus, what will we do? The enfeebled “moderate opposition” we back rhetorically couldn’t dislodge hardcore jihadis, no matter how many weapons we sent (the jihadis would simply confiscate the gear).

What if we weaken the regime to the point where the fanatics rev up their jihad to drive out Christians and other minorities? What’s your plan then, Mr. President? After your night of explosive passion, will you still love the opposition in the morning?

Exactly which American vital security interests are at stake in Syria, Mr. President? Your credibility? Put a number on it. How many American lives is your blather about red lines worth?

Chemical weapons use? Horrible and illegal, a war crime. So is the mass slaughter of civilians. Is it really so much worse to be gassed than tortured to death by al Qaeda or burned alive in your church? Which is more important, the number of dead, or the means that killed them?

Islamist terrorists have killed tens, if not hundreds, of thousands, of innocent Muslims. Aren’t they the real enemies of civilization?

Mr. President, do you really think it’s wise to send our missiles and aircraft to provide fire support for al Qaeda? That is exactly what you’ll be doing, if you hit Assad.

Assad’s an odious butcher, filth on two legs. But in the world of serious strategy, you rarely get a choice between black and white. You choose between black and charcoal gray.

Obama has consistently backed the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda in every episode of the so called Arab Spring, in Libya he armed them with Stinger shoulder fired missiles, now he is preparing to put the American Navy and Air force at their beck and call. When in 2009 the Nobel Prize Committee awarded Barack Insane Obama the Nobel Peace Prize, it wasn’t based on anything he had actually done yet, but on what they believed he was going to do. The Nobel Prize Committee no doubt patted themselves on the back and went to sleep thinking that they had pointed a bright spotlight on the world newest Marxist Messiah. Meanwhile the vast majority of the world mocked them for transforming the Nobel Peace Prize into nothing more than a politically awarded caricature of what it was originally intended to be.

The Nobel Peace Prize 2009

The Nobel Peace Prize 2009 was awarded to Barack H. Obama “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples”.

Obama violated the War Powers Act with complete and utter immunity when he attacked Libya and deposed Muammar Gaddafi and it looks as if he has every intention of doing so again against Bashar Assad in Syria. One has to wonder if the Nobel Prize Committee members still feel that smug sense of self satisfaction given the reality of who Barack Insane Obama has in fact turned out to be, the worst war mongering president in US history rather than their supposed light bringer and harbinger of peace. Never mind his support for the terrorists organizations the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda, his wars alone obvious qualify him for that Nobel Peace Prize, hell, it’s a damned wonder the Nobel Prize Committee hasn’t awarded Hitler a posthumous Nobel Peace Prize.

What would George Orwell (Or Stalin or Goebbels) have made of this…

Look out folks, here it comes. Propaganda and indoctrination in the digital age may be about to become as fast and simple as a software patch or upgrade. American’s have been being indoctrinated into Marxism without their knowledge or consent for decades now, and their is little evidence that those responsible have any intention of ceasing their efforts, regardless of how catastrophic a failure Marxist has proven to be. More importantly, it looks as if science is about to hand them tools to complete their agenda that eve3n the most fervent of Marxist could have only dreamed about.

First human brain-to-brain interface allows remote control over the internet, telepathy coming soon

The first human-to-human, brain-to-brain noninvasive interface has been created by researchers at the University of Washington. The system allows one researcher to remotely control the hand of another researcher, across the internet, merely by thinking about moving his hand. The researchers are already looking at a two-way system, to allow for a more “equitable” telepathic link between the two human brains, and the telepathic communication of complex information.

Only a crazy conspiracy theorist could possible see this new technology being used for nefarious purposes, right? Because scientific advances have never been misused by tyrants, despots or evil people with secret agenda’s, right… It’s not as if the NSA and the US Federal Government have used their monopoly on violence to coerce large software companies and internet service providers to grant them access to the aforementioned companies customer data or anything.

So, one day you are at at peace with the entire world, and the next you put on your brand spanking new mental digital software upgrade helmet to upgrade your job skills and the next thing you know… “We’ve always been at war with Eastasia”…

Pure Marxist indoctrinated stupidity.

You have to give that Ed Morrissey credit, he loves him some Marxist indoctrination and propaganda.

Audio: If you want to toss around bogus McCarthy references …

Exactly. Perhaps they could also learn to be a little more careful with their demagoguery, too. Because tossing around charges of McCarthyism in the manner Finney did about Cruz looks a lot more like the kind of thing McCarthy did than anything Cruz has done since arriving in Washington.

Like most American’s who are Marxists and don’t even know it, Ed drank the kool-aid and asked for more. This imbecilic statement by Ed is proof that Ed doesn’t know any more about Senator Joesph McCarthy than the Liberal imbecile he is attacking. Senator McCarthy was 100 percent vindicated in everything he said regarding the Marxist/Communist infiltration of the US Government. Like most of his fellow useless Marxist imbecile fellow troglodytes Ed obvious doesn’t know the difference between what Senator McCarthy said, and the HUAC.

HUAC was a Democrat/Marxist disinformation program designed specifically to confuse American regarding the true allegations made by Senator McCarthy. HUAC’s specific purpose was to create the illusion that Senator McCarthy was on a Salem styled witch hunt, it was HUAC that blacklisted innocent people, and HUAC that made outrageous assertions, not Senator McCarthy. As I said before Senator McCarthy was 100 percent vindicated when the Vernoa papers were released.

If you want to know the truth, and quite frankly I seriously doubt any of you do, or have the stomach for it, read the following books.

Diana West: American Betrayal

M. Evan Stanton: Blacklisted by History

If, on the other hand you do have the courage and the desire to know the truth, these books will start you on the path. They will, if you are honest with yourselves, show you exactly how far down the rabbit hole you were pulled without your knowledge. Yes, if you are an American citizen and under 50 you have been being indoctrinated into Marxism without your knowledge. You are in fact far more of a Marxist than you realize. That was the plan all along. And yes, it is working exactly as planned.

It’s a Wonderful day in the Neighborhood…

If, as Erika Johnsen and Ed Morrissey over at HotAir insist on telling their conservative audience, their really are only 4 republicans talking about Impeaching Obama, then why are the Democratic spokesholes like David Axelrod and their pet Fifth Column Treasonous Media whores like Chris Matthews trying so hard to convince the American public that all of this impeachment talk is crazy lunatic fringe conspiracy talk?

Axelrod: Republicans are trying to delegitimize Obama just like they did Clinton

Yes, because that’s what it’s always about, everybody: These trifling conservatives’ personal contempt for a particular Democrat and their deep-seated desire to undermine him, and rarely-to-never about sincere qualms in matters of policy or the lawful administration thereof. So suggested David Axelrod, anyway, during an MSNBC segment bizarrely entitled “Impeachment Fever” — although, as Andrew Stiles noted at NRO, the grand total of Republican impeachment-mentions inciting this particular outrageous outrage from the MSNBC crowd comes to… four.

It looks as though Erika has joined Ed Morrissey’s merry band of Marxists wearing Conservative cloths. What she is doing here is attempting the same kind of Marxist propaganda and thought control that Ed so often engages in. She is attempting to tell her readers what they are allowed to think. Rather than asking why are douche bags like Matthews and Axelrod so worked up and trying to get in front of calls for Obama’s impeachment, she like Ed Morrissey is attempting to tell her readers, this is a subject you are not allowed to even consider.

Ed tried that the other days as well, though on a different subject. He was following the lead of Breitbart editor Joel Pollak in trying to tell their predominantly conservatives audiences that they were not allowed to discus the racist hypocritical double standard being used as a club against conservatives. Joel, in an act that straight up disgraced the memory of his former boss Andrew Breitbart wrote the following article, and then closed it for comments. Apparently Joel knew that his audience would not agree with him, so he exercised his god like dictatorial powers and ended any discussion before it even began..

The Racial Tit-for-Tat of Crime Reporting

Back when the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin story first exploded onto the national scene, with false accounts of a “white” shooter and edited 911 calls, we at Breitbart News made an editorial decision not to become involved in the racial tit-for-tat reporting that tempted many other sites. There was no reason to draw attention to the hypocrisy of the media and the so-called civil rights establishment regarding crimes where the racial labels were reversed, because the labels in the Martin case were wrong in the first place.

Ed’s version of this same propaganda crap was every bit as pathetic as Joel’s, perhaps the only difference is that Ed made the mistake of allowing his readers to comment on his bullshit.

Should conservatives resist the race tu quoque?

So says Breitbart editor Joel Pollak, a good friend of mine, who revealed yesterday that his site intentionally steered clear of the race discussion relating to recent crimes in Oklahoma and Spokane. While a good discussion of media malpractice is always welcome, the urge in using specific and unrelated cases usually leads people to take the arguments too far — a practice of the Left that Pollak would rather avoid (via Ace):

It is becoming harder for some conservative journalists to resist the tit-for-tat arguments when Sharpton et al. continue to pretend the Martin case was about race when everyone involved, including the prosecution, said that it was not. Even the Martin family, given the opportunity (before the verdict) to comment on the fact that there were no black jurors, said that they placed their faith in their fellow citizens and the judicial process. The fact that the racial argument has survived the trial and the facts is both sad and frustrating.

So the temptation to report the race of alleged perpetrators when the roles are reversed is now stronger than it was before–too strong for some conservative sites in the Christopher Lane murder, which reported initially (and inaccurately) that all three assailants were black. Yes, there is a crime problem in the black community. Yes, there is an failure among black leaders, from Obama on down, to do anything about it. That story doesn’t need new white victims to make it potent. This is a game without winners. I’d rather not play.

I spoke about this on my show this morning, in the final segment of the second hour. There are some issues that the Lane and Benton murders may have in common, mainly bored teenagers with little supervision and no engagement in core values — but those issues are not limited to any one community, nor are two incidents involving five teenagers a particularly good look at teens as a whole or an indication of broad cultural decline.

Last week, for instance, I wrote about the story of DHS manager Ayo Kimathi, who runs a website warning fellow African-Americans of a coming race war, complete with enemies list — including President Obama. The issue isn’t that DHS hired a racist, nor does one staffing decision indicate a broad problem with race in America. The public policy issue there was that Homeland Security apparently didn’t know that one of its managers was an extremist that publicly identified the President as an enemy of the people, an act that would probably be prominently featured in a DHS report on Tea Party extremism if Kimathi was part of that movement. I noted at the end:

I’m not “hesitating to be blunt” about race…[.] It’s rather obvious that Kimathi has an issue with race, but that’s not the public policy/performance issue here. Nor is it in any individual act of racism, either. Bringing up isolated incidents of racial animus and stretching that into a narrative about everyone else is what the Left has done for decades. Count me out of that nonsense.

Pollak is saying the same thing. Essentially, the argument from conservatives is self-defeating. We resist categorizing people by identity, and argue against the “society is to blame” explanation for crime and social ills. We preach individual responsibility and consequences. When we stray from that, even to score a few justified points on the media for their hypocrisy and bias, we risk turning individual incidents into “narratives” that aren’t really supported by the facts, and lose track of our philosophical compass. In my opinion, that’s too high a cost for too low a reward.

If you read the comments in at Ed’s article, you will see that the majority of his audience considered Ed and Joel’s actions pretty much on a par with Neville Chamberlain, the British Prime Minister who infamously attempted to surrender Europe to Adolph Hitler. Yes, a few of the brain damaged squishies tried to defend Ed, but the vast majority were having none of it.

The truth is pretty simple in both of these cases, the corrupt GOP leadership is taking, like Ed and Joel, a very Neville Chamberlain approach to Barack Insane Obama and his Marxist cabal. they (The GOP Leadership) utterly refuse to discuss Impeachment or the hypocrisy of the left’s racist attitudes, the Republican base and America’s conservatives on the other hand have no stomach for appeasement or surrender.

David Axelrod and Chrissy Matthews are desperately trying to get out in front of the impeachment issue because while the corrupt GOP Leadership is doing everything they can to avoid the issue, the republican base and conservatives are talking about it, screaming about it and demanding that their corrupt leadership take action. The same is true of the hypocritical racist issue, the republican base and conservatives are damned tired of the Democrats/Marxist and Fifth Column Treasonous Media’s hypocritical double standard being used as a weapon against them.

Ed Morrissey and Joel Pollak, along with the miserable excuse for a Speaker for the House John Boehner, have adopted a strategy. Never engage in any battle that the enemy has already told you you can never win. Combine that with their other strategy, of always taking the enemies advice on how to win your battles and it’s no damned wonder the GOP loses on every major issue.

80 percent of American citizen confess to being Christians to one degree or another, yet 3% of our population is dictating what the moral standards of the other 97% will be, 40% are Conservatives yet the 22% of liberals dictate the nations fiscal policies.

HUGH HEWITT reminds us that Obama is the worst President of the United States, but not because of his constant violating of the US constitution, not because of Operation Fast and furious, or Benghazi, or the IRS targeting conservatives or the NAS spying on average Americans, rather because 15,000 Democrat working for UPS are now receiving exactly what they voted for.

Is Obama the worst president ever?

“If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” — President Obama, Aug. 11, 2009

So said President Obama again and again through 2009 and 2010 as he sold Obamacare to the country. He promised. He put his personal integrity on the line. His word.

If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.

How many UPS employees voted for the president in 2008 and again in 2012? Because on Friday, UPS announced it was dumping 15,000 spouses of UPS employees from their UPS health plans despite the president’s many, many promises to the contrary.

The UPS spouse-dump followed by a few days the news from New Jersey that Obamacare’s rollout there will end the low-cost, high-deductible plan that more than 106,00 Jersey folks liked and which presumably many of them would have preferred to keep.

Oh, and the cost of individual plans are set to rise on average 41 percent in Ohio, and another major insurance company, Anthem Blue Cross, has pulled out of the California market for small businesses.

Is Obama the worst president ever?

With this kind of Neville Chamberlain leadership, is it any wonder that Barack Insane Obama and his Marxist cohorts are being so successful at “Fundamentally Transforming” America into a Marxist Utopia?

Obama grade bad decisions.

We all know that Barack Insane Obama has made some fatally bad decisions, like Arming Mexican drug cartels and trying to arrange the kidnapping of a US Ambassador and providing Stinger missiles to Al Qaeda. Seems like Barack Insane Obama isn’t the only world leader capable of making Obama grade decisions failures though. Now it seems just about everybody wants to get in on the act.

IDF intercept shows Syrian army used chemical weapons

A minister in Benjamin Netanyahu’s Cabinet publicly asserted that Bashar al-Assad and his forces used chemical weapons, and not the rebels in the Damascus suburb, and used them on a mass scale. International Relations Minister Yuval Steintz said it was “crystal clear” that the Syrian army used chemical weapons in the attack last week, arguing that this demonstrates why it is important to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons:

It is “crystal clear” that Syrian President Bashar Assad used chemical weapons five days ago in an attack that killed hundreds of people, International Relations Minister Yuval Steintz said Monday.

Although it is true that this is not the first time Assad has used chemical weapons, Steinitz said, saying he has used them two or three times in the past, this is the first time he has used them on a mass scale.

Steinitz, speaking at a press conference sponsored by the Jerusalem Press Club, said that this was the first time chemical weapons were used on a mass scale against civilians since Saddam Hussein used them two decades ago.

Picking up on a theme Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu first spoke of publicly on Sunday, Steinitz said that “what happened in Syria should remind us how dangerous it is if Iran is able to complete its military nuclear project and produce atomic bombs.”

Steinitz said that just as the Syrians used chemical weapons against their own people, the Iranians are capable of using nuclear weapons because, like the Syrians, they have “no moral compunctions.”

Why is Steintz so convinced it was Assad and not the al-Qaeda affiliates who deployed the chemical weapons? According to the German news magazine Focus, the IDF intercepted high-level communications in the Syrian government at the time, and has the record of orders to use the weapons:

“According to the findings of Israeli intelligence community, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is responsible for the gas attack in Damascus,” reports the publication.

According to FOCUS, the Israel Defense Forces Unit 8200, the IDF’s signals intelligence unit, had intercepted communications of the Syrian army during the attack.

“A former Mossad officer told FOCUS the analysis has clearly shown that the bombardment with poison gas missiles was made by Syrian government forces,” reports the publication.

A professor at the Naval War College noted on Twitter that the findings were quickly shared with the US and other Western allies, and took a parting dig at Glenn Greenwald:

Clear inference is Unit 8200 SIGINT findings re: Assad regime & chem attack were quickly shared with USG & close allies, incl Germany.

— John Schindler (@20committee) August 25, 2013

Or, in Greenwaldese: Israeli SIGINT violation of Assad’s “private communication” was illegally shared with rogue intel partners.

— John Schindler (@20committee) August 25, 2013

That won’t leave the US and the UN with too many options — and it won’t leave the Syrians with too many, either. Bloomberg notes that Assad is hoping Russia can bail Syria out of this jam:

The French have been suicidally ecstatic over the possibility of attacking Syria for quite some time now, and the British war-hawks likewise have been nosing around for a fight to interject themselves into. What comes more of a surprise is the Israeli shift in policy. Now I won’t go into Bashar Assad much, kind of a redundant thing to do, he is a man with very limited options and none of them good. For him to make a Obama grade decision failure is not a surprise, it was inevitable.

No, the real surprise was like I said that of the Israeli’s. They of all people know who it is that Bashar Assad is fighting against, Bashar is up against the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda. While Bashar Assad is no one in the western worlds idea of a good guy or hero, when realistically compared to the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda that is exactly how he comes out looking.

So, Barack Insane Obama,having already overthrown the Governments of Egypt and Libya on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda is all set to follow up with doing the same thing in Syria. Hell, Insane in the Brain Obama already provided the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda with should fired Stinger missiles to use against Assad. (What in the hell did you think Benghazi was really all about?)

The problem here is, that Assad was winning. His decision to use chemical weapons, (if indeed he did and the Israeli claims are not a disinformation campaign) was a true Obama grade decision failure on his part. At my age (having lived through a very significant portion of the cold war), it is a bit stunning and humbling to hear the Russian diplomats speaking as the voice of reason and sanity in that particular region of the world.

To hear that the average Egyptian believes that Barack Insane Obama is providing material support to the Muslim Brotherhood really isn’t much of a surprise, as the American Fifth Column Treasonous Media has been extraordinarily faithful to report the craziest and most insane conspiracy theories that have originated throughout the Arab Muslim communities over the years. What is disturbing is hearing how many American’s hold the same beliefs.

Does Obama Support the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt?

There seems to be something of a disconnect between who Egyptians think America is supporting, and who America actually is supporting in Cairo. In the U.S., story after story has been written about how the Obama Administration has bent over backwards not to call this latest change in government a “coup” and has been relatively muted in its reaction to the deaths of so many civilians – upwards of 1,000 in the last week alone.

Yet Egyptians remain convinced that President Obama is backing the Muslim Brotherhood and deposed President Mohamed Morsi. At a lunch at the Egyptian Ambassador’s residence on Thursday, Dr. Mohamed Abou El-Ghar, head of the Egyptian Social Democratic Party, bluntly warned a small gathering of journalists and policy wonks that he fears, “America is losing Egypt…There is a very strong perception that they are supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and they are against other parties,” he said.

The perception began even before the Egyptians elected Morsi, Abou el-Ghar said, when Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican and 2008 GOP presidential nominee, met with members of the Muslin Brotherhood in February 2012 but not representatives from competing parties. The headlines were: U.S. Warms to the Muslim Brotherhood. It was furthered when U.S. Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson criticized Egypt’s military for interfering in July when opponents deposed Morsi. That view has become more widespread since, with the Pentagon’s decision to defer delivery of F-16 fighter jets to Egypt and the Administration’s review of aid to Cairo.

The latest evidence of Obama’s purported proclivity towards the Brotherhood came in Thursday’s State Department briefing, which has made headlines in Egypt. In it, spokesman Jen Psaki says that the choice to detain of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak is an “internal Egyptian legal matter,” but in the next breath calls for the release of Morsi, who is accused of many serious crimes. Egyptians took this as further evidence that America is intervening on behalf of the Brotherhood still:

Regardless of whether Bashar Assad made the Obama grade bad decision to employe chemical weapons or not, what does seem evident is that various powerful government officials in France, Britain, the US and now even Israel have decided that Bashar Assad absolutely must be removed from power at any cost. So if and when this coalition of useless imbeciles and fools does attack Syria, you can be absolutely certain that the consequences will be catastrophically bad, for a) the Syrians (especially the Syrian Christians) b) for Israel (Helloieeee Al Qaeda/Muslim Brotherhood run government on their border) and everyone who foolishly participates in the attack.

Let me make this 100 percent perfectly crystal clear, their are absolutely no positive consequences or benefits to helping Al Qaeda/Muslim Brotherhood take over Syria. Getting involved in Syria, other than to provide Bashar Assad with weapons to fight Al Qaeda/Muslim Brotherhood has all the positive outcome possibilities of playing Russian Roulette with a fully loaded Colt Model 1911. It is in the truest sense a perfect example of what a Obama grade decision failure is.