John Hinderaker - Powerline, Claremont Institute, etc. - has
some comment today on a Rasmussen poll released yesterday. The poll indicated that "just 11%" of American voters thought the United States should apologize to Iran for " 'crimes' committed against the Islamic country." What caught his attention was the term "just." Was Rasmussen expecting more? Exactly what is on this "crimes" list? Where have we violated law with specific acts against Iran?
I must agree with him that I find it hard to understand how even one out of ten American voters - yes, these people voted - could hold this view. On the other hand I had eleven aunts and uncles, and only one of them, Uncle Bill, was an "outlier," to say the least. Maybe "one in ten/eleven" is a reasonable ratio for chronic fringe behavior among the general population as well.
More seriously, the use of the word "just" could be acceptable given what I perceive is a much higher infection of derangement syndrome still flourishing on the left. Granted, Obama's election is a balm that will sooth many in the syndrome crowd, but their nucleus cannot be penetrated so easily. Nothing short of the end of the U.S. as we know it will satisfy this group. In fact, they continue to hammer Bush-Cheney-Palin as if they were "in power." Soon, projection will set in and their anger will focus on the new power structure as the unrealized expectations accumulate day by day. This is not good for an administration likely to face an array of serious international challenges in the short term.
I see Obama responding in one of two ways. He can be a Harry Truman with some "give 'em hell" reality. Or he can be a Jimmy Carter and his "can't we all just get along?" strategy. Campaign rhetoric would support the former. I cannot see the middle way as a meaningful alternative these days. Either way, the Uncle Bills will be there making life a bit more challenging for them, more entertaining for us. Too bad they can't apologize for such misery making.
[Understand that I can see a Carter strategy working in the appropriate environment, but certainly not today. I'm sorry to be tough on him; he's a fine writer. We have enjoyed several of his books.]
In favor of lynching Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife? How about deporting Justice Samuel Alito to Sicily? Up for revolution now, just like in Egypt?
My favorite online psychiatrist, Dr. Sanity, has applied her professional training and experience to Joy Behar's application of the term "bitch" to Nevada Senate candidate, Sharon Angle. Whatever your party preference, you have to give credit to the good doctor for her succinct point by point exposure of today's "women's movement" as a leftist political prison. The transparency is so evident, I am amazed more of my liberal friends don't see the light. You can read Dr. Sanity's post here. As usual, you'll find plenty of supporting links in the post.
If you believe in freedom of the press, you need to pay attention to this story and be sure to access the Gateway Pundit link at the bottom of this post.
There is a good reason why the Congress of the United States is earning an approval rating hovering around 15%. We saw a perfect example today when Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Speaker of the House, issued a statement claiming the Central Intelligence Agency was "misleading" her on the issue of interrogation techniques. When asked if she was saying the CIA lied to her, she said yes. Her response came after several permutations of the briefing or briefings had been issued by her office over the past two weeks. Pelosi is spinning this story at her best because she has been caught. Sadly, she has spent much of her time as speaker in a state of denial acting at the fringe of the Democratic Party. By accusing the CIA of lying she has pushed herself from denial into delusion and thereby jeopardizing her role as a effective leader of her own party as well as the House.
