Are we seeing the end of America? Hyperbole, sure - but look at the twin absurdities of Hillary becoming president and Baltimore and you've really got to wonder.

Hillary has one accomplishment in her life relative to putting her near the pinnacle - she married one of the slickest and craftily cunning politicians ever - that's it - if not for slick Willy Hillary's just another smart person with a law degree. She has zero accomplishments or attributes aside from her marriage and the fact she's a woman that would justify or rather simply explain why in the hell she should be considered presidential material - and when as Secretary of State she actually had a chance to accomplish something her record is full of errors and emptiness - add to that the emerging storyline that she and her husband are corrupt self serving liars using a 'charity' as a cover for enriching themselves - add to that that regardless of her penchant for lying she's actually, unlike her husband, a pretty awful politician - add it all up and how can one not shake their head in despairing disbelief that there's a very good chance she'll be president, especially since we've already had to sit through two acts of this piece of crap movie with Obama?

Then there's the insanity of Baltimore. The city and the state have been run by left wing monopolies for more than a generation now so the place is a withering indictment of 'blue model' thinking and governance - and yet the narrative being pushed is this is all about racism which is another way of saying it's all the fault of conservatism - Baltimore is a majority black city with a black mayor and a majority black city council and a majority black police force in a state that has been governed by left wing thinking for a very long time - and yet it's all the fault of those evil white conservatives.

I mean, really, how can one not shake their head in despair?

The chaos in Baltimore once again makes clear what I've said before: since the black community and white liberals seem convinced that the only problem with black America is racist cops who apparently wake up in the morning with a burning desire to kill young black males, then the obvious solution is to stop policing black neighbourhoods - problem solved. I mean, if liberals are right, pulling back these ostensibly racist cops should produce a bounteous harvest in black communities, no? Because that's what the endless grievance mongering of liberals suggests. 

What's one to make of US moving some heavy hitting naval assets to Yemen in order to interdict an Iranian arms shipment? In one sense, Obama has no choice if he wants to stop this thing from turning into an actual shooting war between the Saudis and Iran rather than just its proxies - on the other hand, you're essentially drawing a red line and we know Obama's record with red lines - if Iran seeks to push against that line, Obama might be forced to decide between backing down or sinking one of their ships and sinking any dreamed of nuke deal with it. To say the least, I do not trust Obama to make the right decision.

* and right on cue - so on cue it's both funny and disconcerting - right on cue the Obama admin sends out conflicting statements about what the mission of the added naval assets is - the Pentagon seems to think it's about stopping Iranian arms shipments to Yemen - Obama spokespeople seem to want to say it's just about keeping shipping lanes open. Does this incoherence surprise anyone? 

Why did Dempsey say what he said about Ramadi? Is it what he really thinks? Was he thinking in some limited strategic sense which caused his answer to be 'misunderstood'? Or were his thoughts merely a reflection of what the Obama administration has instructed him to say - or rather a reflection of his attempt to make sense of Obama's policy without sounding like a complete idiot? Therefore: Ramadi falling to ISIS would obviously be a bad thing so now I have to try and find some way to talk about it as if that isn't the case. I'm guessing that's it - if you have a flawed policy and Ramadi reveals that yet you have no intention of altering the policy then you really have no choice but to act as if Ramadi is not that big a deal. You see the same song and dance with Iran - they can't admit that they're wrong, they have no intention of altering policy, so they just keep changing the definition of what a successful deal will look like - we're making so many concessions that eventually Iran agreeing to limit its future nuclear arsenal to a parity with Israel's will be celebrated as an historic success. I mean shit Obama just yesterday opened the door to lifting all sanctions on the signing of a deal - exactly what Iran has been demanding since the 'framework' stipulating a gradual lifting of sanctions was released. Obama seems to be putting an absolutely ridiculous amount of faith in 'snapping' back on the sanctions if [when] Iran cheats - but the guy is such a cynical self serving schemer and serial fabulist that I wouldn't be surprised if he intends to squirm away from responsibility for this mess by blaming the failure of others to 'snap' back on those precious sanctions for things going awry - you just know this guy has his excuses already lined up. That's the way people like him are: it's always someone else's fault - has to be that way - an absolutist ideology is a house of cards: you dare not admit to even a single flaw for fear the whole illusion comes tumbling down. This is why dictatorships suppress dissent - they can't defend their policies and ideas so all that's left to them is to insist on the illusion of perfection - and if anyone challenges that perfection you put a bullet in their head. Don't doubt for a second that progressive elitists like Obama would love to wield the kind of power Stalin did - if the far left had their way people like me would be marched into re-education camps [thought prisons that increasingly America's universities resemble] - ultimately suppression of free speech and dissent are the only sure means progressives have to protect the illusion that sustains them. Media bias is nice, fine, and is certainly the enabler of a lot of idiocy from the left - but media bias isn't a guarantee and unfortunately there are still some ill mannered reporters and thinkers out there who actually value integrity and objective analysis. Nope - it's tough running a leftist state without gulags and firing squads - such limitations must bother Obama no end.

This nails the obvious about the framework to a framework to a proto-agreement to a deal non-deal re Iran's nukes - what's startling is how many simply can't bring themselves to see or acknowledge the obvious - Obama is lying, has been lying all along and even if one gives absolute benefit of the doubt to his version of what's been agreed to you still only get a best case scenario that merely delays by a decade or so Iran getting the bomb - but in reality, as Kissinger pointed out, there are so many problems with Obama's fact sheet you're not gonna get anywhere near that best case scenario even if Iran were to agree to what's stipulated in the fact sheet, something which Iran has already made clear they have no intention of doing. And yet people still treat this farce as if somehow it's legitimate. Remarkable.

Rouhani - the moderate - once again declares that no deal gets signed without the removal of all sanctions - what people are not saying about this is that Rouhani is making these declarations on state controlled media which means this is the precise message they want getting out to the Iranian people - which means how and the hell can Rouhani accept anything less - which means how and hell can these 'negotiations' end in a deal that makes any sense whatsoever?

Can the Obama administration possibly be this farcically incompetent? Or is this just the consequence of Dear Leader thinking he could sneak by an Iran policy that has always been secretly about containment and not disarmament?

As I've said before, this is the clusterfuck you get when you have a president who believes that a far left agenda is plenty worth lying for and a media that happily endorses this abuse as it genuflects before him.

What's the most dispiriting thing re the sad state of democracy made manifest by Hillary's 'van' tour to Iowa and her eating at a Chipotles? How disgustingly transparent an effort this is to make her seem like something she absolutely is not? Or the fact that the average voter is so stupid that it might work?

Obama is getting upset with people who disagree with him re Iran exhibiting the insufferable impudence of actually thinking they have a right to express this disagreement - don't know if this contempt also extends to left leaning or 'independent' pundits, some whom have even served in his administration, who share in the deep scepticism being directed at the non-agreement agreement to a framework of a framework - but right now the peevishness seems targeted mainly at conservatives. It's tempting to see this peevishness as just another manifestation of arrogance from Dear Leader, but rather I think it's probably yet one more in an endless line of political ploys - ie the Republican response is so unhinged and over the top and unprecedented that it must be... and then let people fill in the blanks with 'they're racists'. Obama wants to shame Democrats in the senate who might be thinking of joining the ranks of those racists by signing onto the sanctions bill so that he can drag this thing out to June where it seems he must still think he can get a deal that he can at least sell as legitimate regardless of whether or not it actually is - or in June we'll get an announcement of more talks and another deadline months down the road - or Iran will walk away having gotten essentially what they want and knowing that eventually Obama will beg them to come back by offering still more concessions - what we definitely will not have come the end of June is a viable deal that stops Iran from becoming a nuclear power. As Kissinger expertly pointed in his WSJ article even if all the steps in the 'fact sheet' on the non-agreement agreement come true - something which is impossible for a variety of reasons, many of which Kissinger lays bare - but even if an absolute best case scenario plays out you're still left with Iran becoming a nuclear power approximately 12 years down the road - and since that will also be the opinion of the Saudis Obama will essentially have set in motion a nuclear arms race in the most dangerous and unstable neighborhood in the world.

Again, there's only two ways to stop Iran from nuking up - through crippling sanctions you force them to dismantle their militarized nuclear infrastructure - or we do it for them. That's it. Any deal that doesn't explicitly spell that reality out will be a sham. Since Obama is pursuing a deal that very clearly does not acknowledge that reality, what that tells the Iranians is that force is not on the table, walking away from the table is not on the table, and therefore 'negotiations' for them merely become about: one, a means to undermine the sanctions regime; two, a way to undermine American strategic interests because the talks are not linked to Iran's behavior in the region - Iran is using the the talks to strategically tie one hand behind Uncles Sam's back; and three, as a means to keep Israel on the sidelines since if Israel is indeed serious about a unilateral military option the assumption is they would never do so while negotiations are ongoing - although I think that's a flawed assumption since if Israel is serious about a unilateral strike against Iran that would mean that they judge a nuked up Iran as such a primary existential threat that the imperative of stopping such a thing would trump all other considerations - ie Obama's negotiations might delay but not stop them making a move, if they are indeed serious about a unilateral strike. 

Can I say that there is possibly nothing that annoys me more than the referencing of public opinion polls when it comes to foreign policy? I don't give a god damn shit what the average person thinks when it comes to foreign policy - that's like asking what the average person thinks when it comes to running a fortune 500 business - or hell any business - the average citizen is a fucking moron when it comes to complex esoteric problems like those that vex foreign policy. One can legitimately argue about what that means when it comes to the efficacy of democracy etc etc - but the fact remains that the average citizen does not have a clue what the hell they're talking about when it comes to foreign policy and therefore polls are meaningless when it comes to making decisions - which is exactly why Obama and his minions often reference public opinion when trying to defend their god awful foreign policy - if you're wrong best to ask for blessings from those too stupid to realise just how wrong you are. 

And now Rouhani, who the leftist American media still think is some kind of moderate - just because he's more 'moderate' than the commander of the IRGC doesn't mean he's moderate in any meaningful way re Western democratic norms - whatever, now Rouhani comes out and says all the sanctions come down before Iran signs anything. I mean, this is farcical. Ask yourself, why would Iran, virtually from the moment the non-agreement was agreed upon, be acting as if it relishes the idea of making Obama look like an absolute chump? Because he is? Because they don't fear him at all? Because they know his true goal all along has been the fantasy of containment and rapprochement? Because as a true left wing ideologue they know Obama is utterly loathe to being forced into actions that legitimate the idea and need of overwhelming American power and therefore will agree to just about anything in an attempt to avoid such a scenario? Because they've taken the measure of the man and know that as a member in good standing of the arrogant progressive elite Obama is incapable of admitting to or even just imagining the notion that he's not nearly as clever as he thinks he is?

I get it - when the liberal elite has been telling you for years that you could be the greatest human being ever born with the possible exception of Christ, I get that that sycophantic idolatry can spoil ya a wee bit - but let's face it, it's not just Obama, the entire progressive elite exhibit this same absolutist arrogance of they're of course right, anyone who doesn't agree with them is of course wrong, and therefore little things like debate, argument, tolerance of others' ideas, culpability are really none of their concern.

And he does it again - he's telling so many lies they're starting to spin back on him - in interview with NPR Obama admits that his 'deal' in a best case scenario only delays Iran's ability to nuke up - and then tries to make the argument that that's the reason why this deal is so necessary - I mean, c'mon - if we cannot trust Iran to change its ways [which obviously we can't] then it follows that if you want to truly prevent Iran from getting the bomb the only way is by destroying or forcing Iran to dismantle elements of its nuclear infrastructure that in any way point to a military application - which means Obama's deal is not self evidently good, it's rather self evidently bad. This administration is nothing more than absurd political spin at this point - and it's frightening how many are willing to buy into it.

[actually, what may be more frightening is that this isn't spin - what if Obama really thinks he's doing something good? After all, liberals do have a messianic tendency to think they are by nature right and everyone who doesn't agree with them inherently wrong. Look at his defense of bypassing congress with executive action on the Iran deal - he says it will only be a temporary thing if the next president is so foolish as to not agree with what he has done - in other words, if the next president is really smart like Obama they'll keep the deal, if not he can't be held responsible for that. I mean, the man is absolutely shameless - and again, the scary part is this may not be spin - he may actually believe in what he's saying - anyone who disagrees with him is by definition an idiot. Amazing]  

And yet more proof - Obama declares Netanyahu's idea that Iran acknowledge Israel's right to exist before any agreement move forward a no go because it would imply Iran change its nature which is too steep a hill to climb - this argument only makes sense if the 'deal' you're signing with Iran is ironclad - if the deal isn't a sure thing then this argument makes no sense whatsoever - in other words, it's a lie, disingenuous obfuscation - like I said, Obama's gonna spend the next year and a half doing nothing but lying in service of his agenda - and he's doing this because he believes media bias will allow him to do it.  

This post by Theissen expertly but simply makes clear the central problem with Obama's framework to a framework to a proto deal to a nuke deal with Iran - it's all based on assumptions which will never come true. Which points to another huge problem - even if every assumption by Obama came true you've still got an intact nuclear tech infrastructure left behind - the only deal that makes sense is one that demands Iran destroy that infrastructure because that's the only way to protect yourself against Iran's inevitable subterfuge - nothing in Obama's proto deal does that. It's a flat out farce - or, more accurately, a lie. Obama makes clear this lie in his interview with the NY Times where he says 'Iran will never become a nuclear power during his presidency' - this is deliberately misleading language which tells us Obama fully expects Iran to become a nuclear power just not during his presidency - like I said, the man is going to spend the rest of his term abjectly lying for the purposes of pushing the country as far left as he possibly can.

Proof of what I'm saying - Obama tells NY Times he'd view a weakened Israel as a result of his actions as a failing, a moral flaw - either the man is delusional or this is proof of what I'm saying: unmitigated lies will be at the foundation of Obama's remaining time as president. The man overtly tried to topple Netanyahu in recent elections and yet Bibi flourished - why? Because Israelis view America under Obama as more enemy than friend and are right for doing so. The man is either delusional or an abject liar - I'm not sure which would be worse - although, it's true, socialists who resort to lying to defend their misbegotten ideas do do so out of a delusional fixation on how brilliant they consider themselves to be - so could be both.     

Obama's Iran no deal nuke deal, the framework to a framework of a possible consensus towards a deal of sorts, maybe - it's something, that we can say for sure - although it's clear the Iranians think it's a very different something than we seem to think it is - but I guess like a cloud of smoke you can shape it however the hell you want to shape it just so long as in the end you don't start thinking it's anything other than a cloud of smoke - but that being said, what this mess makes clear is how dangerous a thing media bias is - Obama is now governing as if it simply doesn't matter how grotesquely estranged from truth and reality his words and actions are because he clearly believes the media will protect him - the Washington Post, as stalwart of an Obama apologist as there has been, has called the 'deal' an obvious capitulation - but it's too late, they and all the other biased 'news' sources out there helped make this monster and now belatedly stepping up and taking a stab at truth is not going to be enough to unmake him - unconstrained by the need to win another election Obama is clearly going to spend the next two years pushing the country as far left as he possibly can behind a phalanx of unmitigated lies - he doesn't care about the constitution, he doesn't care about congress, he doesn't care about public opinion or the will of the people - and that's because he believes and probably rightly so it seems that no matter what come the end of the day the media and the 47% who are ready and willing to believe whatever lie you wanna feed to them will be there to protect him and preserve the illusion of the progressive wonderland.

We're now into the 'break a few eggs to make an omelette' phase of uber liberal madness - doesn't matter how the country is pushed left - the lies and missteps and gross incompetence and corruption and if the left could get control of the military the sure as shit to follow gulags and firing squads, all that doesn't matter - just so long as the country is pushed left - because even if you don't get that omelette, absent an Orwell willing to break ranks and ask why not,  you can always lie about it. And that is exactly how Obama is governing.

People like me have been saying for a couple of years that the Iran nonsense was going to play out exactly how it has played since Iran knew Obama needed a deal more than they needed a deal because he was not being sincere when he said force was an option - they knew that Obama's aversion to American power left him with little leverage if the sanctions were not enough to force concessions from Iran - but when Obama offered to ease sanctions long before there was any need to do that, Iran knew they had him - it was a clear admission that force was never an option, just like walking away from the table was never an option. This has been clear to anyone willing to look for a very long time - and the liberal media refused to look. That they're sort of doing so now is too late. All Obama wants now is a 'deal' that he can 'portray' as legitimate - it doesn't matter one little bit to him if it actually is since his policy objective all along as been the fantasy of containment and rapprochement with Iran and a foreign policy that was as far removed from Bush's as he could possibly get. Didn't matter if in objective terms it made sense or not - objectivity is for losers. Revolutionaries can't be wasting their time worrying about 'objective truths'. What kind of egg breakers would Stalin and Mao et al have been if they'd tolerated impertinent questions about truth and common sense. Jezz. Obama has broken one hell of a lot of eggs in search of his omelette - and he's perfectly happy lying about whether he's managed to make one or not. The best egg breakers are also always the best liars.

Please please - of course the supposed putative ostensible nuke deal with Iran is a bunch of bullshit - only a fool would have expected anything else from this most atrocious of leaders Obama - but this is not something we really need to discuss - just watch what Saudi Arabia does - if this "deal" with Iran is as bad as it certainly seems to be the Saudis will be moving towards acquiring a nuclear capability of their own and that will tell you all you need to know. 

The almost unbelievably absurd outrage from the left over Indiana's religious freedom bill lends credence to my contention that the only way to protect free speech from the utterly illiberal insanity of modern liberalism, which gay marriage is nothing but a front for, is to get the gov't out of the marriage business - marriage should be nothing more than a private agreement two people acknowledge in whatever way they choose - once gov't is out of the marriage business a Catholic priest will have the right to refuse to marry two lesbians just as he has the right to refuse to preach Islam from his pulpit - and what's more, once the gov't is out of the marriage business the political value or utility of gay marriage, which is the very reason it is such a cherished 'cause' for the left, will vanish, and that will be a good thing for free speech.