Glenn Reynolds explains why Obama should resign

If you read nothing else today, nothing else this week, or even nothing else before the election, you must read Glenn Reynolds as he explains why Obama should resign.  Then, email it to all your friends, tweet it, put it on Facebook, and print flyers to put on people’s windshields.  (Just kidding . . . maybe . . . about that last one.)

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Ari Tai

    I suspect some of the AQ are having quite a giggle at our expense.
    Consider: A Coptic made a low budget film, in English? Wonder what grievance they might have given how well they are treated in (all but one of) the middle east countries? Interesting watching the MSM (and Justice Department) turn on a persecuted minority. Wonder who they’ll target next?  And even in mainstream comments we see some who think bigotry and blasphemy are criminal offenses.
    Since there’s no chance any of the rioters watched the movie and understood english, someone had to translate it – or why bother translating – just make up your own audio track. Perhaps an AQ affiliate? Or like the cartoons perhaps one of the AQ psyops folks said “Why don’t we improve on the meme and use it to make the great satan jump?” “See what happens when we poke here? They roll over and beg. Great fun and all we have to do is publish some blasphemous pictures and words. The immam says it’s ok, the ends justify any means.”
    Even more interesting is maybe 1 in 100 of those folks have internet access – they live in places where connectivity at a cyber cafe costs more than a week’s food. Where just downloading pictures over the satellite internet modem that services the typical cafe is painful – video is out of the question. So who are these “community organizers?” How are they inciting the crowds? Could they say anything and be believed? Why are they chanting “we are all Osamas?” Could it be they blame us (esp. given Mr. O takes personal credit) for ending UBL? And that’s the grievance motivating those at these “protests?” That happen to be held on the anniversary of UBL’s greatest triumph?
    A pity we don’t have a real press putting lives on the line to get the answers. Or at least doing what they do best – compromising U.S. and other nations’ intelligence collection efforts to get to and publish ground truth. Oh right – since it doesn’t support the meme it’s an even a more tightly held secret than by a government. Yesterday it was JFK’s corruption (buying elections) not just his womanizing (ditto Mr. Clinton and China interference in U.S. elections – with the women being a convenient, perhaps purposeful, distraction), today it’s turning a blind eye to the obvious.
    Mr. O’s senior staff should resign if he will not.  Shades of Mr. Nixon firing his AG.

  • Mike Devx

    Well, the picture is ugly, for sure.

    But is this quote false?  “Whitmore told The Times that Nakoula was taken in for a voluntary interview with probation officials and has not been arrested or detained.”

    And these are LA Sheriffs, not any national government agency security force.

    The story seems muddled to me.  Did the police force issue him an ultimatum: “You can come voluntarily, or we will arrest you and take you in.”  HA!  But the truth is hard to discern from the article, so this seems to be one of the rare instances where Instapundit might be over-reaching.


    Images speak a thousand words, they say, and that photo is TERRIBLE. The man has done nothing wrong; he has engaged in an act of free speech, is all.   The police, if they were to do anything, should have provided him a safe cordoned path to his vehicle, for his own security, and he should simply have walked to his vehicle and driven to the station.  If this truly were nothing more than a voluntary interview.  And why couldn’t the “interview” have been conducted inside his home?

    Where is the liberal outrage over all of this entire story?  They claim to be the proponents of free speech.  The protectors of our freedoms.  Where are they?  For shame, for shame.  Four innocent Americans murdered abroad.  What were their last terrifying moments like?  And where is the press in all this?  Ha ha… they were too busy engaging in their role as Democrat Party operatives, sliming and harassing Mitt Romney.

    What a nasty, shameful, terrible week it has been, in so many ways.


  • JKB

    You are own probation.  Quite literally, you belong to the government.  The police show up at your door after midnight and invite you to come down to the station for a chat.  You refuse and suddenly your in violation of your probation.  I believe it is a condition of most paroles that individual cooperate with the police, I do not know if that is explicit in probation.

    No doubt they are checking to see if he’s been using his Round Up in accordance with the directions and also no using more than the directed amount of lawn fertilizer.  

    One more question were these bureaucrats, who just had to have an early morning chat about possible prohibited relations with a computer  back in July, were they on overtime?  Looks like a bit of padding the old comp time to me.


    Be sure to read to the bottom of the page, which links to Brandon Raub, Marine, who was whisked away for 30 days against his will.
    And yes, I noted that the page has a video and other references (Ron Paul) but it does not alter the facts.
    16-YearOld Questioned by FBI Over You Tube Video Alex …


    oops, above link did not work. Cut and pasted for all to read.

       Justin Hallman, a 16-year-old student from the United States has been visited by a couple of FBI agents after making a YouTube video for his American Government class about Congressman Ron Paul and the fact that the US is becoming a police state. In the past few weeks, we’ve told you numerous times to be careful about what you write on social media websites, as it might be seen as a threat to the national security of the US. Here we have another example.

    Although he received an A+ for his work, the FBI must have thought he deserved an F, so they paid him a visit. A couple of FBI agents questioned Hallman about his hobbies and interests and, reportedly, even attempted to convince him to infiltrate Anonymous and spy on hackers and protestors from the Occupy movement. Other topics of interest, according to Prison Planet, were Ron Paul’s presidential campaign and the Illuminati. Why the Illuminati? Because he apparently had a conversation on the subject with his teacher, the one who most likely reported the teen to authorities. “My record forever scarred with the truth that the FBI questioned me. When getting a job they will see that, when getting a passport they will see that, when going to college they will see that,” Hallman explained. A few weeks ago, a former Marine was arrested because of some comments he made on Facebook. He was detained after authorities concluded that his posts were “terrorist in nature.” A similar incident occurred at the middle of August when an Arizona State student and his wife were not allowed to board a plane because of his t-shirt.

  • David Foster

    I can’t recall any public statements by Obama objecting to the treatment of Christians in the Middle East and other Muslim countries.

    Did I miss something? 

  • Beth

    Re:  Sadie’s story–In schools across the nation you will find internet safety classes.  I attended one as a parent a few years ago.  What I did not hear was how the government is one of the bad guys to be aware of…
    It used to be a joke to say “I’m on a list somewhere.”  Not so funny anymore.  Maybe I’m foolish to even comment on this blog…

  • Mike Devx

    Beth says, Not so funny anymore.  Maybe I’m foolish to even comment on this blog…

    Beth, I hope you decide in the end that you will not be silenced.  That as a free American citizen, you have the right to speak any opinion that comes to your mind.

    At times when I’m discussing current events with friends, I find myself lowering my voice, speaking in hushed tones, looking around me to see who might be listening, who might overhear.

    Think about that.  Isn’t it sad; isn’t it a little frightening?  As if I am engaging in a little bit of very nasty gossip that would do me discredit should someone overhear!  

    I don’t do this out of fear of some government apparatchik paying me a visit, saying “We hear you are speaking negatively of Our Glorious Leader and we caution you against doing so.”   No, in my case, I am afraid IN ADVANCE of offending someone who might overhear me.  I am suppressing myself, and silencing my own voice, just because someone, somewhere nearby, *might* take offense!  That is incredibly sad, and I am these days, engaged in fight that impulse.  I don’t shout my opinions from a rooftop; I simply try to speak them in an every day normal voice.

    Should someone nearby, at some point, happen to take offense, that is basically their problem, not mine.  I have had numerous occasions of similarly taking offense, BUT I DO NOT.  It’s their right to speak freely, just as it is mine.  Yet someone they are free to speak because their opinions are acceptable; and I am not free to speak because mine are not.

    I will not be silenced.


  • Marica

     To Beth, Mike said, “I will not be silenced.”

    Nor will I.

    What we care about makes us who we are. How we act defines us. We all want our actions to be consistent with our deepest cares. No one wants to be a coward in his own or anothersʼ eyes. Cowardice is a vice. On the moral spectrum, it is the opposite of rashness. Somewhere, between rashness and cowardice, lies the virtue of courage.   

    We don’t need to be rash. We don’t need, as Mike says, to shout from the rooftops. But we do need to summon a bit of courage.

    The link takes you to something focusing on the 2nd Amendment, but applies to the  1st just as well. 

    Blog Q: I’m having a lot of problems with abc  … backstrokes taking me back to the top of the page. anyone (i’m not correcting on account of this problem) else having similar issues? I’m on mac 10.7.4 and had no such issues with older OS. 

  • Beth

    Thanks, Mike, Marcia–I needed to hear that. 

  • Ymarsakar

    Unlike Richard Nixon, who did have enemies in the media and pentagon spying on him, as we all know now from various other tid bits we’ve observed from bureaucratic and Leftist propaganda circles, Obama has no desire for any greater good than his own.

  • jj

    Well, yeah: you will be silenced.  When they show up at your door at midnight, you’ll be silenced.
    This goes to what I said in another post on a different thread, when I remarked that the structure that’s been building in this country for 232 years turns out to be far more fragile than anyone thought.  Jugears pulled it down – openly – in three and a half years. A couple of people disagreed.  But between the Justin Hallam kid, Brandon Raub, and now this guy, we’re in some trouble here in the land of the (cough, cough) free.  Very obviously the first amendment is now notional, no longer the iron-clad law of the land.  You might have supposed something as basic as the first amendment was fundamental.  You need to wake up.  It’s not.  Not when this gang is in charge, and the guy at the top only believes in legal protections for himself.  Ronald Reagan wasn’t kidding when he said it requires vigilance every day. 
    “Transformation” is what this administration – if that’s what you call it – was all about.  He shares a belief with Lenin: that people can be changed if only the shape of the community in which they live can be changed.  That is the reverse of the American ideal, wherein the people shape the society – but it’s not at all a surprise coming from him.  He has nothing in his background that says “American.”  In his life he never watched a 4th of July parade, or had a Memorial Day picnic, or had a catch in the back yard with his father or the kids down the block.  His background has nothing in common with anyone you know, and you don’t know anyone with a background like his.  Where he was born doesn’t matter in the least: he is miles outside the American mainstream.  He is not “us.”  He has exhibited no understanding of any of our shared experiences.  The only shared American experience he ever had was apparently as an irresponsible idiot stoner in high school, and he grew out of it, as most people do.
    That’s not much of a basis for shared values, and it’s apparent he doesn’t share – or understand – American values.  The scapegoating he’s involved in here is no different than the scapegoating Stalin spent his entire worthless life engaged in.  His policy – to the extent that he had anything anyone could rightly call a “policy” – has failed, spectacularly.  There must be a reason, and it certainly can’t be that he and fellow democrats trumpeted 21 times during their convention that he killed Osama bin Laden, and is therefore tougher than rotten eggs.  No, no – those Egyptians in the streets chanting “Obama, Obama, we are all Osama” were merely disappointed film critics!  The solution is to jettison the first amendment.  The disappointing – and very, very, profoundly dangerous – thing about this is that he’s successfully moved an entire political party, the fundamentally stupid one, to go along with this.  Google, primarily a profit-making enterprise, is engaged right now in defending freedom (on behalf of us all) in that they are refusing to take down the video that he, Madame, and that whole party are demanding that they do.  Are you in any doubt there will be a repercussion for Google?  Unable to make any headway with them – yet – the “authorities” round on the guy who made the film.  Stalin would clearly recognize this as a viable course of action, and would certainly endorse it.  His only question would be: why hasn’t the guy been shot yet?
    And that’s another not-very-cheering thought.  Somewhere in the “justice” department you’d think there would be a couple of people who would say: “hang on a second, we’re not sending out the bullet-headed morons at midnight for this” – but apparently there aren’t.  Out goes the Goon Squad, at midnight.  This is America?  We do this here?  On a pretext like that? 
    Hope and change.  Democrats, witless at best, have forgotten – well, who knows what democrats ever knew? – that “change” is occasionally for the worse.  In fact, more often than not in human affairs the history indicates it’s for the worse.  It’s not only the empire of a Hitler, or a Tsar, or a Stalin into exploiters of everyone else.  Is Obama any of those?  No, of course not.  But don’t tell me his feet aren’t the first few steps along the road they all traveled, because they are.  The first amendment no longer counts, and his police aren’t very secret (though who knows what goes on behind the walls of the “justice” department – that goddam Constitution is awfully inconvenient.  As Obama has been dim enough to say in public) but the result’s the same.
    Right and wrong in this country is not – or was not, or was not supposed to be – dictated by something or someone beyond ourselves – Tsar, party, corporation, dictator, guru, scared texts, or runes.  Not even swell-headed, self-adoring presidents and their administrations.  We don’t round up American citizens.  He does.  His Secretary of State does.  His “justice” department does.  And he has a whole party (maybe I should capitalize that: “Party”) standing solidly, and witlessly – behind him.
    OH, and I note that once upon a time we were all talking about guns here, and I listed some of what lives in this house.  I made it up!  We don’t own any of those, not one!  We don’t own a single gun!  Peaceniks – unarmed pussycats!  Never even ever stood close to an actual gun!
    You think I’m kidding?


    Let’s play 20 questions. Okay, let’s play trying to ask one question to get a single answer.

    July 2012
    In a Constitution Subcommittee hearing, Congressman Trent Franks questioned Assistant Attorney General, Thomas Perez, over the Administration’s commitment to 1st Amendment rights. Franks’ questions were prompted by a Daily Caller article from late last year in which Perez was quoted as warmly embracing the proposals of Islamist advocates in a meeting at George Washington University, among them a request for “a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.”

    Perez reportedly ended the meeting with an enthusiastic closing speech and was quoted as saying, “I sat here the entire time, taking notes…I have some very concrete thoughts … in the aftermath of this.”

    In yesterday’s hearing, Chairman Franks asked Perez to affirm that the Administration would “never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalizes speech against any religion?” Perez refused.