Obama Earns Money For U.S. By Appearing In Japanese Television Commercial Obama Clueless

Obama Earns Money For U.S. By Appearing In Japanese Television Commercial

September 7, 2011  |                ISSUE 47•36

A scene from the president’s advertisement for Glico Pretz Ham & Cheese.
  •  

WASHINGTON—In an effort to obtain badly needed revenue for the ailing U.S. economy, President Barack Obama recently appeared in a 30-second television spot for the popular Japanese snack product Glico Pretz Ham & Cheese, White House sources reported Wednesday.

According to aides, the advertisement will air nationally throughout Japan and will feature the president endorsing a savory, stick-shaped cracker snack manufactured by the Ezaki Glico corporation, which agreed to pay Obama a one-time fee of $300,000 plus residuals, compensation to be used exclusively for U.S. economic stimulus purposes.

Enlarge ImageGlico executives say they hope consumers associate the president’s face with Pretz Ham & Cheese from now on.

“While the president does not ordinarily endorse retail products, he was willing to make an exception for Glico Pretz Ham & Cheese as a way of easing the current financial burden on our country,” said White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, stressing that the commercial’s quick, two-day shoot outside of Yokohama took little time out of Obama’s schedule and was of the highest production quality. “Also, we have been assured by Ezaki Glico CEO Katsuhisa Ezaki that the TV advertisement, and accompanying billboard and bus ads, will only be seen in Japan and will portray the president in a very flattering, elegant light befitting a world leader of his stature.”

Representatives for Ezaki Glico confirmed this week that the visually opulent ad will feature the president wearing swim trunks and relaxing with a group of young Japanese male friends by the side of an animated swimming pool filled with melted cheese and ham.

According to sources involved in its production, the spot will also contain a video montage of a smiling President Obama hitting a baseball, playing the cello, and dancing with a pair of beautiful Japanese women before biting into a ham-and-cheese-flavored cracker and saying directly into the camera, in Japanese, “I like the big taste of Pretz, the perfect snack with the big crunch.”

Ezaki Glico marketing executives said the ad, which features a brief three-second shot of film actress Meg Ryan riding on horseback with Obama, was greatly bolstered by the president’s participation.

“Everyone in Japan knows the face of Barack Obama, and we believe he is the perfect man to share loving words about the delicious Pretz snack,” Ezaki Glico marketing executive Kiyotaka Shimamori said through a translator, adding that the president was very cooperative throughout the nearly 50 takes required to film a special green-screened “moon sequence.” “Mr. Obama looks very good in the commercial holding the Pretz snack, eating the Pretz snack, and dancing with the pretty girls.”

While refusing to comment on the issue at length, President Obama did take a moment out of a press conference Wednesday to address his appearance in the commercial.

“Again, this was a simple revenue-generating measure and in no way does it present a conflict of interest for me or my administration,” the president told reporters. “That being said, in accordance with my contract with the Ezaki Glico corporation, I would like to briefly add that Glico Pretz Ham & Cheese is a fine product, a delicious product, and one that I fully endorse for snacking morning, afternoon, and night.”

The president then procured a bag of Pretz Ham & Cheese snacks from behind the lectern, smiled, and sang a 10-second Pretz advertising jingle in Japanese for the assembled press corps.

Israel facing ‘diplomatic tsunami’ with Arab neighbors

Israel facing ‘diplomatic tsunami’ with Arab neighbors

Sheera Frenkel | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: September 11, 2011 07:50:58 PM

JERUSALEM — The attack on the Israeli embassy in Cairo has brought into sharp relief Israel’s increasing isolation in a still region grappling with the changes of the Arab Spring.

Israel was forced to evacuate its ambassador and most of its diplomatic staff from Cairo this weekend after hundreds of Egyptian protesters tore down a security wall protecting the Nile-side embassy, ransacked its files and burned an Israeli flag. It came less than a week after Turkey, Israel’s other major ally in the Muslim world, announced it was expelling the Israeli ambassador and downgrading its relationship to the lowest possible level after a deadly skirmish involving a Turkish aid vessel that was attempting to deliver supplies in defiance of Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip.

With another potential predicament brewing later this month when the Palestinians are expected to request membership and statehood at the United Nations, Israeli-Arab relations appear to be plunging to their lowest point in years.

“Within a week Israel has found itself two friends down and about to face a so-called diplomatic tsunami with the Palestinians,” said one European envoy in Jerusalem, who spoke on condition of anonymity under diplomatic protocol.

“I would be nervous if I was an Israeli diplomat today.”

The damage to relations with Egypt and Turkey has struck many Israelis. Turkey was the first Muslim-majority country to recognize Israel as a Jewish state in 1949 and Egypt was the first Arab country to sign a peace treaty with Israel in 1979.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quick to condemn the attack on the Israeli embassy in Cairo but added that the historic peace agreement between Israel and Egypt was still intact.

“Egypt must not ignore the severe injury to the fabric of peace with Israel and such a blatant violation of international laws,” Netanyahu said Saturday.

Officials in Israel’s foreign ministry, however, said the embassy attack “could not be ignored” and marked a sharp shift in Israel’s diplomatic dealings with its neighbor since the resignation in February of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak — whose dictatorial regime had kept a lid on anti-Israeli sentiment.

“For a long time Israel has benefited from a positive relationship with Egypt that allowed Israel some sense of security. It is clear that Egypt today is not the Egypt of one year ago,” said an Israeli diplomat who also requested anonymity.

“Now Israel will have to look at its border to the south as one more to watch and guard. The burning of the Israeli flag in Cairo symbolized much more to those of us that watched from Jerusalem.”

The image of the burning flag figured prominently on Israeli television this weekend, with several commentators asking whether it would be the last time an Israeli flag flew in Egypt.

On Israel’s Channel Two news, the anchorman led the Saturday evening broadcast by asking whether Israel had found itself “alone without a friend” in the region.

Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman have been increasingly at odds over how to cope with the growing isolation.

Under the hawkish Lieberman’s directive, foreign ministry officials have begun drafting a list of “punishments” for Turkey. Meanwhile, Netanyahu’s office said it had heeded calls for restraint and a tempering of hostilities between the two nations.

 

Turkish officials have said that relations with Israel will not improve until Israel apologizes for the killing last year of nine Turkish nationals aboard a boat that aimed to breach Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip.

Israel has stood by its blockade, and its position was recently bolstered by a U.N. report that found the blockade lawful. The same report, however, said that Israel had used unnecessary and excessive force in stopping boats aiming to break the blockade, including the storming of the Turkish Mavi Marmara ship by Israeli naval commandos, who killed the Turkish nationals.

American officials have tried unsuccessfully to negotiate an apology from Israel to Turkey over the incident. Relations had already soured over Israel’s recent war in Gaza and a series of diplomatic snubs by Lieberman and his deputy.

In about 10 days, Israel likely will face another diplomatic hurdle when the Palestinians are expected to launch a bid for statehood at the U.N. General Assembly. Israel has been maneuvering to quash the bid — which the United States opposes and has threatened to veto —  but Palestinians have said they’ll go forward and attempt to win two-thirds support for an independent state that would include East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.

Several European countries have signaled their willingness to vote in favor of the Palestinian state, putting Israel in a difficult position.

Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawi, who will help launch the bid at the U.N., told McClatchy that Israel had “put itself in a corner.”

“We will go forward with this despite the threats from Israel and its allies. When the vote happens Israel will see how isolated it truly is,” Ashrawi said. She added that the United States, Israel’s main ally, would also be “embarrassed.”

“I think the United States has been warned time and time again — from its own people — that its partnership with Israel might not be in its best interest right now,” she said. “But they continue to stand by Israel, and ignore the changes in the region that the Arab Spring is bringing.”

(Frenkel is a McClatchy special correspondent.)

Obama and Our 9/11 Trauma

Obama and Our 9/11 Trauma

By Stella
Paul

Where did the idea of Obama come from?  Let’s examine
an obvious, yet overlooked source: the rubble of the Twin Towers.  9/11 was the
most traumatic day in American history, and its horrors left deep gashes in our
national soul.  We stumbled around in pain and confusion for years, groping for
a magical salve to heal our wounds — and there, suddenly, was Barack Hussein
Obama.

As we turn our gaze from our current Obama-induced
agonies to remember the terror attacks ten years ago, let’s do ourselves the
favor of honesty and admit how tightly the two are connected.

On that fatal Tuesday, as the World Trade Center and
Pentagon lay in ruins, President George Bush spoke to the American people, with
simple words that pierced the heart of our new situation: “Freedom itself
was attacked this morning… And freedom will be

defended.”

But as it turned out, millions of Americans were not
ready to defend freedom. Despite the “United We Stand” posters plastered
everywhere, Americans almost immediately divided into two irreconcilable camps:
those willing to understand the nature of our enemy and those who wanted to deny
it, at all cost.

Within days of the attacks, a friend coolly informed
me, “the people in the Twin Towers deserved it.”  Still reeling from that shock,
I almost lost it when another friend admiringly compared bin Laden to George
Washington.  Soon thereafter, a well-known academic in my circle complained that
the sudden outpouring of patriotism made her sick.

This utter madness, which I thought would be confined
to the fringe, rapidly spread to every corner of elite society.  The more we
learned about the savagery of the Islamist world, the more our moral and
cultural superiors turned their wrath on us, instead of the
enemy.

As headlines blared the almost surrealistic brutality
of Al Qaeda, Senator Patty Murray told a group of high school honor students
that Osama bin Laden was popular in poor countries because he paid for day care
centers.  “We haven’t done that,” Murray said.
“How would they look at us today if we had been there helping them with some of
that rather than just being the people who are going to bomb in Iraq and go
to Afghanistan?”

While patriotic Americans were learning that Saddam
Hussein used poison gas on his own people and gave his psychotic sons “rape
rooms,” American college students were learning enemy propaganda.  On the eve of
the Iraq war, Professor Nicholas de Genova of
Columbia University convened an anti-war teach-in and proclaimed to the
students, “The only true heroes are those who find ways that help defeat the
U.S. military. I personally would like to see a million Mogadishus.”
Despite his public yearning for the mutilation of the American soldiers who’d
volunteered to defend his worthless derriere, de Genova went on to a
distinguished career at Columbia and the University of
Chicago.

And so it went: The more evil the enemy committed, the
more hysterical grew the attacks on us by our own elites.  Wall Street reporter
Daniel Pearl was beheaded by Al Qaeda operatives, who filmed the procedure and
proudly put it online.  Al Qaeda agent Richard Reid tried to blow up a plane
headed to Miami with explosives hidden in his shoe.   Jihadis in Spain blew up
the morning commuter trains in Madrid, killing 191 people.

Meanwhile, Majority Leader Tom Daschle brought every
Democratic Senator to the premiere of Fahrenheit 9/11, Michael Moore’s
viciously dishonest smear job of America and its president, and led the standing
ovation.  The Democrats then honored Moore with a seat next to Jimmy Carter at
the Democratic National Convention, serenely untroubled by Moore’s gushing
comparison of Saddam’s armies to America’s Minutemen.

The yellow brick road to Obama was paved with febrile
insanity, a self-induced blindness that staunchly refused to see the massacres
unfolding before our eyes.   In 2005, the same year that homegrown Islamic
terrorists blew up London’s busses and subways, Democratic presidential
candidate John Kerry went on Sunday morning television and
said, “And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be
going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and
children, you know, women.”

A little-known incident in New York crystallized for
me the obnoxious lunacy of our times. To the world, New York symbolizes the
Ground Zero of pain, sacrifice and loss.  Yet, New York almost immediately
succumbed to self-hating delirium, desperate for vengeance against its greatest
enemy: America’s Commander-in-Chief.  In 2006, New York State Comptroller Alan
Hevesi spoke at the graduation ceremony of Queens College, a public university.
Here’s how he introduced New
York’s Senator Charles Schumer to the fresh-faced graduates: “The man who, how
do I phrase this diplomatically, who will put a bullet between the president’s
eyes if he could get away with it.”

And thus, from the ashes of the World Trade Center
arose Barack Hussein Obama — the One who would redeem us, floating above the
world like a multicultural Messiah.  He bore a miraculous name, redolent of our
two worst enemies, which seemed to promise some sort of divine intervention.  He
offered us the Muslim heritage of his father as a magical shield, deflecting the
homicidal rage of seething hordes in scary, far-off places, and preserving our
peace with no price to pay.   His jutting jaw, tilted upwards a la Mussolini,
would be our amulet, as all the world marveled at the Lightworker, the brilliant
new god America had made.

The hysteria that accompanied Obama’s campaign — the
fainting at his rallies, the Il Duce-like graphics, the Styrofoam Greek columns,
the singing of his praises by glassy-eyed students led by enraptured cadres of
apparatchik teachers — bore no resemblance to anything that had ever happened
in mainstream American politics.  We tried to create a god to defend our
freedom, because it was easier than the hard work needed to defend it
ourselves.

Alas, the destruction that Obama wrought may
ultimately dwarf the wreckage of 9/11.  As we are now relearning, there are no
man-made gods; only the All Mighty who never tires of teaching us that the road
to freedom has no shortcuts.

Write Stella Paul at
Stellapundit@aol.com.

Here’s how it happened

 Here’s how it happened
This one is definitely worth a glance…

        Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages.  How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer”; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.  He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as legislator.

And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor.  It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal:

To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.

Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass — held to a lower standard — because of the color of his skin.  Podhoretz continues:

And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon —affirmative action.  Not in the legal sense, of course.  But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow.  Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action.  Yes, racist.  Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin — that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is.  And that is what America did to Obama.

True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be?  As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate.  All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.  What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks?

In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character.  Those people –conservatives included — ought now to be deeply embarrassed.  The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that’s when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all.  Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth — it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.

And what about his character?  Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles.  Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess.  It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence.  But really, what were we to expect?  The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job.  When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense.  It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.

But hey, at least we got to feel good about ourselves for a little while.  And really, isn’t that all that matters these days?

From the Wall Street Journal

Why I Became A Republican On 9/11

Why I Became A Republican On 9/11

David
Lawrence

Some of my friends disappeared into a mushroom cloud
on 9/11. Many more who I wish were my friends also died.

The fallen left me here among the apologist Democrats.
I felt that the best of us died on that day.  I was forced to listen to the
Democrats blaming our three thousand deaths on Americans, tsk-tsk, building air
force bases in Saudi Arabia. They got this idea from paranoid schizophrenic
Osama bin Laden’s ramblings in his Afghan cave.

The Democrats said we weren’t multi-cultural enough
and that if we accepted Sharia Law the Moslems wouldn’t be so antagonistic
towards us. It didn’t bother them that Sharia Law allowed no separation of
church and state, despite liberal insistence on separation of church and
state.

Nor did it bother the Democrats that Jews and
Christians weren’t allowed in Mecca. Still, they felt the Moslems had the right
to build a mosque on every street corner in America.

The Democrats accused us of protecting Israel from
suicide bombers with cruel fences. They wasted our money on clean energy which
doesn’t exist and they refused to drill in Anwar or the Gulf yet they pretended
they wanted to wean us off foreign oil.

So what could I do?

I had to become a Republican. Nothing else made sense.
It was the only position that didn’t smell of treason.