Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Obama says it would be wrong to remain silent on Iran

Which is exactly what he has been on Iran, silent. Seven people have now died in the protests.  How's that Cairo speech looking now? On the elections our leader says;
“I have always felt that, as odious as I feel some of President Ahmadinejad ‘s statements (are), as deep as the differences that exist between the United States and Iran on core issues, the use of tough hard headed diplomacy, diplomacy without illusions, is critical when it comes to pursuing a core set of national security interests," the president said. “We will continue to pursue a tough direct dialogue between our two countries.”

Isn't the Iran election an illusion? Why would Obama feel that he can negotiate openly, honestly and trust the agreements made with a regime that has rigged the election, tried to ban protests of the election and where seven people have died during those protests.

This statement by Obama speaks volumes;

That's leadership!


  1. I beg to differ.
    The way you spin everything speaks volumes.
    This type of political deamonizing is exactly what is hurting any conservative cause.

  2. He should be standing firmly with the Iranian people who are protesting the rigged results...he is weak and the enemies of the US know it.

  3. He certainly is not standing against the people.
    Amazing the pathological way you spin everything.

  4. The pathological cult-like worship of the man is quite disgusting...

    Never has a president not stood firmly behind people seeking freedom and liberty, until now...

    More hope and change...