Harvey, I’ve tried to tell you. But you just won’t listen.
You can do this:
Are we clear?
Did you notice that the Obama administration did a couple of things recently that smacked of the Bush administration?
First, the decision by Obama to boycott the U.N. conference on racism. Back in August 2001, the Bush administration did the same thing, and was roundly criticized. The left said that it showed just how much contempt Bush had toward the world community and how insensitive it was to issues of race.
But now, Obama did the same thing — for the same reason Bush gave: wording in the text for the conference were out of line:
The United States, under the Bush administration, and Israel walked out over attempts to liken Zionism — the movement to establish a Jewish state in the Holy Land — to racism. The reference was later dropped, but concerns about anti-Semitism remained in the final text.
Plans to reaffirm the 2001 document were of particular concern to the Obama administration.
“(It) singles out one particular conflict and prejudges key issues that can only be resolved in negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians,” (State Department spokesman Robert Wood) said.
Follow that up with Obama’s decision to not pursue prosecution of CIA operatives that used interrogation methods that Obama sees as torture that Bush saw as reasonable.
The U.N.’s top torture investigator doesn’t like that:
Manfred Nowak first made the remarks to an Australian newspaper and later to the Associated Press.
According to Nowak, it’s illegal under International Law for the U.S. government to announce that it has no intention of prosecuting low-level CIA officers.
Bush was roundly criticized for not bowing to the U.N.
Obama might bow to the king of Saudi Arabia, but apparently is not yet ready to bow to the U.N.
Good for him.
And I’m looking forward to what’s next. That is, those on the left who won’t be able to get over Obama acting like Bush on two key issues. They love Obama. And they love the U.N. But what do they do now?
Do they applaud Obama? Or do they support the U.N.?
I’m going to watch the liberals’ heads explode as they try to figure out what to do.
I hope I get pictures.
We mentioned the other day that monkeys are now off-limits for humor. We pointed out that the left compared President Bush to a chimp often. But, after that cartoon in the New York Post, it seems that monkeys are now off-limits for humor. Because it’s offensive. And racist. Even when no racial comparison is made.
But think back. The left did more than compare President Bush to a chimp. Remember? They also compared him to Hitler. A lot.
But, according to a Fox News report, using Hitler in humor is now verboten.
…not everyone is laughing. The film itself was criticized for its humanizing portrayal of the Nazi dictator. Now some people are complaining about the YouTube parodies, which play Hitler up for laughs.
An umbrella organization representing Holocaust survivors in Israel asked YouTube on Tuesday to take down one of the spoofs, in which Hitler complains about the lack of parking spaces in Tel Aviv, according to The Jerusalem Post. The organization said that the clip was grossly insensitive to the feelings of elderly Holocaust survivors.
Which means, no more Hitler videos. No more watching Hitler meltdown over his XBox Live account.
They say you can’t use monkeys in humor.
They say you can’t use Hitler in humor.
Maybe all the good monkey humor has been used up. Maybe it’s now tiresome to make Hitler references.
You can still make fun of Jesus, though.
But only until the left gets tired of the references to “Obamessiah.”
They’re finding racism all over the place. It’s amazing where people find racism. Frank J. pointed out how silly it is that people are calling a cartoon in the New York Post racist, because it has a monkey in it. Okay, chimpanzee. Still, you get my point.
So, are monkeys off limits for humor?
No more funny monkey videos?
That’d be a shame.
The good news, though, is that you can still use monkeys in political humor.
You can do this:
The president commuted the sentences of border guards Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compea.
I’m having a hard time understanding why they were convicted … for shooting a drug smuggler in the butt.
We need more drug smugglers shot in the butt. Maybe this will open the door for more drug smugglers being shot in the butt.
What with all this talk about McCain and Obama, people seem to have forgotten: George W. Bush is still the President.
Oh, and by the way, I have a special message for North Korea, Iran, Russia, China, and anybody else that forgot: It’s still 115 days until January 20, 2009.
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) – Barack Obama and John McCain clashed repeatedly over the causes and cures for the worst economic crisis in 80 years Tuesday night. Both Democrat nominee Sen. Barack J. Obama (D-EU) and Republican candidate Sen. John McCain (D-AZ) spent 7-1/2 hours attacking the policies of the Bush Administration. Media observers, as well as viewers polled afterward, indicated the clear winner was President Bush.
Observer Olsen Johnson, of the nearby town of Rock Ridge, who describes himself as an independent, says neither Obama nor McCain resonated with him.
“Didn’t neither one of them fellas tell me a whole lot,” Johnson said. “They come up with all kinds of ways to spend my money, but neither said much about me keeping my money. I’m just tryin’ to figure out which one’s gonna leave me enough to buy groceries.”
“Olsen Johnson is right,” said observer Van Johnson. “They kept tellin’ me how much they wasn’t going to be like George Bush. But, you know what? At least, with George Bush, I know what I’m getting.”
Another viewer, who identified himself only as “Mongo,” summed up the feeling of most of the crowd, saying, “Mongo only pawn in game of life.”
Polling conducted in the hours following the debate showed dramatic losses by both the McCain and Obama camps. Each candidate is now hovering between 20 and 23% support. President Bush gained dramatically by his performance in the debate, with his support just under 30%.
“The only way anyone could win a debate with these two is to not show up,” said Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer. “McCain nearly won the first debate with this strategy, but showed up at the last minute. With both candidates running against President Bush, it paved the path for Bush to take the lead in this race.”
If Bush maintains his lead, Republicans would consider it a third term for the 43rd president. However, because the Democrats don’t recognize Bush’s win in 2000, a victory in November would give Bush his 2nd term.
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.