“I believe with all of my heart that this is a new era for America”.. No truer words have ever been spoken by America’s rookie Secretary of State.
Already this “new era” has seen the liberal leader promise to bring “home” all of the misunderstood Middle East miscreants known to the rest of us as terrorists from the “hateful” confides of Guantanamo Bay, as their rooms at the Ritz await them. No more imaginary tales of flushed Korans and “cruel” waterboarding, the liberals just want all of their compatriots closer to their American targets so they can make a “level playing field” for their bet as to who can destroy America first, the liberals or the terrorists..
Rodham gave her little pep talk to the assembled underlings in order to underscore the “administration’s commitment to diplomacy”. The conservative interpretation of that is, “our willingness to have ‘peace in our time’..” With this “commitment” to “talk”, Obama should have chosen Oprah as his Secretary of State. After all, Oprah has as much experience as Rodham does. With all of this “talk show diplomacy” in the offing, we should simply sell off all of our military hardware and we will use the cash to buy some comfy couches, some glazed chintz for the walls and some wonderful votive candles for our new Secretary and her “ruminations and rap sessions” with Hamas and Al-Qaeda..
This is going to be a “new era of robust U.S. diplomacy (talk) to tackle the world’s crises and improve America’s standing abroad.” The Obama administration, like the Obama campaign, is and will be standing proof of the adage that “talk is cheap”. Can’t wait for the “hot air strikes” and the “syllabic sorties” of “Rodham’s Raiders”.
Why are we concerned now with “tackling the world’s crises”? Didn’t the liberals say that our “interventionist” policies were what made our country the target of terrorism? (We all know that that was and is tripe, but that is what the progressive pansies said..) Just how “interventionist” is Obama going to be? Since when did the liberals suddenly adopt the “we are the world’s policeman” philosophy? Never mind that Rodham is zaftig enough to play tackle, the liberals, who know what’s best for YOU, now know what’s best for the WORLD, whether they like it or not.. The real problem will end up being “America’s broad astanding..”
Rodham wants to “seize our opportunities” and she wants everyone to “think outside of the proverbial box”. This involves thinking outside of the pusillanimous Pandora’s Box of liberal appeasement, no small order for a gaggle of Democrats. “I want you to give me the best advice you can”.. Lets pick the best ending for that last sentence: “because I have absolutely no idea what I am doing” (otherwise known as the Obama administration mantra.) or “because if you don’t, you will all end up like Ron Brown or Vince Foster”..
Rodham unleashed a patented howler by saying, out loud no less, “I want you to understand there is nothing I welcome more than a good debate..” That is about as ridiculous as Rosie O’Donnell saying that she likes a “good man”, a “good book” or a “good diet”.. “A good debate”, unlike the ones she flubbed during the primary season.. “A good debate”, similar to the ones she has with Bill when he gets caught after embellishing the outfit of yet another female intern.
Rodham spoke of “the importance of defense, diplomacy and development- the three legs of the stool of American foreign policy”. The unfortunate thing is the Rodham State Department is responsible for two of those legs. In the spirit of collectivist share the wealth liberalism, at least one other liberal will be responsible for the demise of the nation’s defense.. When the softies starts talking about stools, Barney Frank usually ends up running into the room and turning all of them over so that all of the liberals have a place to sit..
When you have complete beginners running every element of the government, there becomes an internal desperation to assemble a supporting staff with something remotely resembling experience. With that in mind, Rodham has tapped Richard Holbrooke as a “special envoy” to Afghanistan and Pakistan. Holbrooke does have experience but it is the kind of experience that the pacifist liberals may not approve of.
Here is a quote from Holbrooke during his farewell press conference to the United Nations on January 11, 2001. “Iraq will be one of the major issues facing the incoming Bush administration.. Saddam Hussein’s activities continue to be unacceptable and, in my view, dangerous to the region and, indeed to the world, not only because he possesses the potential for weapons of mass destruction but because of the very nature of his regime. His willingness to be cruel internally is not unique in the world, but the combination of that and his willingness to export his problems makes him a clear and present danger at all times.”
If we dissect the “potential for weapons of mass destruction”, (nuclear versus the obvious biological weapons of mass destruction that he repeatedly used.) and the “cruel internally” (the libs just can’t bring themselves to consider mass graves anything other “cruel internally”, so that’s about as good as it gets..) and we remember how Rodham herself along with other liberal luminaries like Bill, Kerry and Edwards, to name but a few, all found Hussein to be conveniently scary when it came to useless saber rattling and pedantic posturing. These traits will undoubtedly be the hallmarks of the budding Obama diplomatic corps.
Also brought into the fold is the former majority leader George Mitchell who has been tasked with the responsibility of being the special envoy to the Middle East. Mitchell’s last full time job was that of Chairman of the Walt Disney company. There we see the application of direct experience as it seems that Mitchell has considerable experience in dealing with Mickey Mouse organizations, so he should fit right in..
Never one to temper her lunacy, Rodham conclude with “we are no longer going to tolerate the kind of divisiveness that has paralyzed and undermined out ability to get things done for America”. Considering that the liberals have actively and intentionally encouraged “the kind of divisiveness” that has separated the races and the genders for generations, this new “intolerance” is a refreshing “change”..
As the neophyte administration deals “with particularly vexing problems abroad”, I will bet that they will be dealing with the “problems” of a “particularly vexing broad” that they have for some unknown reason made the Secretary of State.