The Obama Administration's policies: Attack Americans, soothe Muslims

In a pair of news stories from the last few days, we learn that the Obama Administration is filing a lawsuit challenging Arizona's controversial immigration enforcement law while instructing the head of NASA to make improving relations with the Muslim world part of the space agency's primary mission.

Every time this Administration does anything, it simply reinforces my belief that Obama is the Manchurian President, intent on doing anything and everything he can to damage this nation, to make it the equal of others by bringing it down, by apologizing for it -- a mirror image of his Marxist economic philosophy of making people equal by "spreading the wealth around" because, after all, "at some point you've made enough money."

One can easily imagine that the Arizona case could go either way initially, depending on the judge (or judges) who hear(s) it. But it will inevitably end up at the Supreme Court where, if I were a betting man, I would bet that Arizona loses a 6-3 decision.  In my view, the suit is a political loser for the Democrats and a big political win for Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (who seemed on her way to losing a GOP primary before she signed the law) no matter the outcome.

In any case, the suit shows the Administration to be hostile to the rule of law in America since the Arizona law is little more than a restatement of a federal law -- a federal law which the federal government is conspicuously not enforcing.

If the Obama/Holder challenge loses, it will show the Administration yet again as incompetent while reminding people that they were willing to spend millions of taxpayer dollars trying to bring down a law which most Americans support and believe is important for our national security.

If Obama/Holder win and the Arizona law is struck down, it could be the political equivalent of the moment in Star Wars when Obi-Wan says to Darth Vader "If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine."  The Arizona law is widely popular in America, even if not in the bluest of blue states.  If the law is struck down, independent voters across the country who might be fence-sitters now will pull the lever for Republicans in November.  And Republicans who are on the fence about their level of political participation will donate money, man phone banks, and walk precincts for the many Republican candidates who will campaign on the back of the ruling.

Given that the Arizona law is scheduled to come into force this month, it's likely that initial arguments will happen soon and that a judge will issue a relatively quick decision.

In the meantime, we learn that President Obama has strangely ordered the head of NASA, Charles Bolden, to improve relationships with Muslim nations as he described in an interview with al Jazeera television on the first anniversary of Obama's first major apology to the Muslim world.

Bolden's words are remarkable: Barack Obama asked him to "find a way to reach out to the Muslim world, and engage much more with dominantly (sic) Muslim nations, to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering."  Bolden said his goal is "not a diplomatic anything" but rather to get Muslim participation in science programs.

But like it or not, it's hard to imagine that Bolden is right when he says "there's much to be gained by drawing in the contributions that are  possible from Muslim nations."  At least not unless Bolden can raise the dead.  If only Alhazen could talk to us again.  Yes, the Muslim world produced a large number of great scientific minds -- but primarily before the 13th century and the rise of the dominant cult-like antipathy to rationality which characterizes Islam today and for these last many centuries.

Seriously, when was the last time that the Muslim world was broadly interested in forward-thinking science? Are these not the same aniconistic people who believe, at least in certain segments of their religion, that it is blasphemous to create drawings or images of humans or animals? So much for the great Muslim biologists, anatomists, or anthropologists.

But seriously, I'm not saying there aren't some brilliant scientific minds at work in Muslim countries.  But if I were running a mining company, I wouldn't spend a lot of time and money prospecting in Indiana just to make Hoosiers feel better about themselves.  I'd go to the Yukon or Peru or Russia; I'd go someplace where we'd actually be likely to find gold.

As far as I can tell, two Muslims have won Nobel Prizes in the sciences, despite Muslims representing somewhere between 15% and 20% of the world's population for most of the last century.  For comparison, Jews, representing less than 1% of the world's population have garnered roughly 140 Nobel prizes in the sciences.

If Obama wanted to get good international input for a space program, maybe he should have set up an outreach program to Israel.

Actually, all the Administration needs to do is announce at a press conference that the best scientific minds who want to be involved in the space program should contact NASA.  The message would take less than a minute to give and would not put so much focus on mining such relatively unfertile soil.

In any case, the claim that Obama hasn't tasked NASA with an essentially diplomatic mission, and a ridiculous one at that, is laughable.  Charles Bolden has a new job description: it's to be the next Stewart Smalley for the Muslim world, getting Muslim scientists (the ones not afraid to draw pictures, at least) to add a daily affirmation to their prayers to Allah: "I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough, and Doggone It, People Like Me!"  If that's not a great use of American taxpayer dollars and a great mission for what was once the world's preeminent scientific organization, I don't know what is.

Have you ever -- ever -- seen a government with such confused and misplaced priorities?  Really...Ever?

  • kjdiamond
    Comment from: kjdiamond
    07/08/10 @ 09:47:22 am

    Are we willing to say now that Obama's policies towards the Muslim faith are based in the fact that is that he himself is a believer. He is this great world schlolar that has been exposed, through various venues (early Muslim school in Indonesia, his 20 years of attending a pro-Muslim fascist Black Theology church in Chicago), to the Muslim faith as well as Christianity. It may be that he is agnostic, but not in what I would call the Christian sense. I believe he has melded some parts of Christianity when it serves him, but he ultimately identifies with the Muslim faith and the Marxist thinking that is part of that faith. He has to be, by a WIDE margin, the most radical, progressive, dare I say communist President we will most likely ever see in our lifetime. Speaking of immigration, if you want people to get really pissed, then talk about the Robert Wallace case in Jeffco. I am sure you have been listening to Peter Boyles about the prosecution of the 82 year old man. It is ridiculous. If you want to know what the Left stands for in America, this case is a good start. This will get the base fired up about the ridiculous policies of the political class in this country. It has to end.

  • Comment from: Rossputin
    07/08/10 @ 09:50:30 am

    Keith, I'm thinking about writing about the Robert Wallace case. It's unbelievable... RGK

  • Mark Smither
    Comment from: Mark Smither
    07/08/10 @ 11:48:27 am

    Muslims in SPACE???? http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-july-7-2010/wish-you-weren-t-here?xrs=share_copy By the way, I wouldn't expect you to mention the exoneration of the scientists' research in "Climategate". (You'd be crowing if the conclusions had been different.) Google it. (you won't find any mention on the Fair and Balanced website.)

  • Comment from: Rossputin
    07/08/10 @ 11:54:35 am

    Mark, The Penn State inquiry was an utter whitewash. They didn't even take testimony from those who made the claims of Mann's fraud and best understood what was fraudulent about his work. The university doesn't want to lose the grant money. By the way, you're absolutely wrong that Fox didn't cover the story. They did, here, and it's worth a read: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/02/hockey-stick-climate-scientist-innocent-mann/ More commentary here: http://www.climatedepot.com/a/7182/Penn-State-investigation-cited-Manns-level-of-success-in-proposing-research-and-obtaining-funding-as-some-sort-of-proof-that-he-was-meeting-the-highest-standards

  • Mark Smither
    Comment from: Mark Smither
    07/08/10 @ 01:28:26 pm

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/07/british_report_clears_scientis.html this was an independent British panel.

  • Mark Smither
    Comment from: Mark Smither
    07/08/10 @ 01:30:52 pm

    http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/07/british-panel-clears-climategate-scientists-bias/ I was wrong. Found this on the site.

  • Comment from: Rossputin
    07/08/10 @ 01:59:42 pm

    Mark, Mann's work and the IPCC's use of that work are obviously unethical and probably fraudulent. Don't rely on these bogus self-serving panels of academics. Read the information yourself.

  • kjdiamond
    Comment from: kjdiamond
    07/08/10 @ 07:44:43 pm

    Nothing like a peer review by fellow academics to exonerate a fellow researcher. The fact of the matter is that the data has been manipulated and those involved have either destroyed the original data ore refuse to publish their algorithms. it is kinds of like having BP America investigate an hold harmless thew BP parent oil firm and calling that an independent panel.