ElRazur:

Allow me to play devil's advocate here.

People die on a daily basis in America, but hardly do Iran make comments on them? I dont know if this is a water tight arguement. However, should nation really interfere in internal matters?

Does anyone remember when liberals were champions of human rights and freedom? I don’t mean their infatuation with their politically correct domestic agenda, such as gay marriage or amnesty for illegal aliens. I mean the JFK, “I can assure you that every degree of mind and spirit that I possess will be devoted to the long-range interests of the United States and to the cause of freedom around the world” kind of freedom.

So what is president Barack Obama’s response to thousands of Iranian protesters putting their lives on the line against a totalitarian regime? He doesn’t want to “meddle” in Iran’s affairs.

Does anyone sense the overwhelming irony? Barack Obama is perhaps the most meddlesome president to ever occupy the White House. He’s taken federal control of banks, car companies, and the insurance giant, AIG. He’s appointed “czars” who answer to no one but him, which, if the American public weren’t in a coma, would be seen for the gross violation of the Constitution that it is. He wants to completely re-vamp the best health care system in the world, regulate salaries of corporate executives and save the entire planet from global warming.

The Iranian freedom-fighters? Screw ‘em--because supporting them might pose a problem in future “negotiations” with the thugs who run that country.

President Obama does not wish to “meddle?” Again, it is difficult to ignore the irony of a president whose considers himself a master of the rhetorical flourish, yet prefers to stand mute against the blatant oppression of a regime that is the foremost sponsor of international terrorism. And how is it that the same leftists who are obsessed with rights--women’s rights, gay rights, abortion rights, minority rights, illegal immigrant rights, and even terrorist rights--can ignore the human rights violations being inflicted on ordinary Iranians, seven of whom have already been executed for defying the regime?

Perhaps beneath the veneer of “caring” there exists nothing more than a “freedom for me, but not for thee” hypocrisy. But even if that’s true, liberals have always “talked the talk,” even when they lacked the courage to “walk the “walk.” Now, even expressing verbal support for Iranian dissidents is considered a bridge too far.

Is freedom “God’s gift to mankind?” Apparently not. Perhaps Bush Derangement Syndrome means never agreeing with anything the former president said, even if it used to be one of the pillars of liberal ideology. Better to sit on the sidelines, and leave decent Iranians twisting in the wind. Better not to offer a single word of encouragement or hope to those willing to risk their lives for freedom.

Better to be less “meddlesome.”

player_007:

Why is there bush fires in California yearly.?