Chuck Woolery on Term Limits

Subject: Letter to Pelosi Wow!!! SNOPES CHECKED

Check his credentials. Then read his letter to Pelosi!
___________________________________________________

Born St.. Louis, Missouri, August 21, 1944
Bar Admissions:
North Carolina, 1969
U.S. District Court, Eastern, Middle and Western Districts of North Carolina, 1969
U.S. Tax Court
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals
Education: Woodford College, 1966 A.B.
Mercer University, 1969 J.D.
Phi Alpha Delta
Vice-Justice, District XIV, 1968 - 1969
Professional Associations and Memberships:
North Carolina and American Bar Associations (Member, Sections on: Administrative Law; General Practice; Litigation)
26th Judicial District and North Carolina State Bar
Mecklenburg County Bar Association
American Association of Justice
North Carolina Trial Lawyers Association
Captain, U.S. Army, 1969-1971, Vietnam
National Defense Medal, 1969
Republic of Viet Nam Service Medal, 1970
Bronze Star Medals (2), 1971
Assistant District Attorney, Mecklenburg County, 1971 - 1974
Charlotte Chamber of Commerce
Chairman, Board of Trustees Providence United Methodist Church
Board of Directors, Alexander Children's Home
Board of Directors, Charlotte Culinary Institute
Wofford Alumni Executive Council
Scoutmaster, Boy Scouts of America
Board of Directors, Boy Scouts of America of Mecklenburg County
Board of Directors, Girl Scout Council
Life Member, National Eagle Scout Association
Life Member, Girl Scouts of America

Dear Ms. Pelosi:

I write to you out of utter disdain! You are as despicable and un-American as the traitor Jane Fonda.

I am a soon to be 65 year-old who has voted in every state and local election since 1966. I have voted for both Republicans and Democrats alike. I have worked on campaigns for both Republicans and Democrats, white and black. I served the country that I love in Vietnam, as my son did in the Middle East. I was awarded two bronze stars. I have been involved in politics since age 6 when my father was campaign manager for a truly great American Congressman, Charles Raper Jonas, who worked for his constituents and his country, and was to be admired, unlike you.

You obviously havent read the Constitution recently, if ever, the Federalist Papers, or even David McCulloughs book on John Adams. You ought to take the time while riding around in your government provided luxury executive jet to do just that. You represent Socialistic and even Marxist principals that our founding fathers tried to avoid when setting out the capitalistic republican form of government represented by our Constitution.

I find it interesting that you and your husband are multi-millionaires with much of your fortune being made as a result of your public service. You have controlled legislation that has enhanced your husbands investments both on and off shore. At the same time you redistributed the wealth of others. Our system of a free market economy is being destroyed by the likes of you, Harry Reid, and now our President. You ride around in a Gulfstream airplane at the tax payers expense while criticizing the presidents of companies who produced something for the economy. You add nothing to the economy of the United States; you only subtract therefrom.

I would like to suggest that you return to the city of fruitcakes and nuts and eat your husbands canned tuna and pineapple produced by illegal immigrants and by workers who have been excluded from the protection that 90% of the legal workers in the United States have.

I await your defeat in the next election with glee...

Dont ever use the term un-American again for protesters who love this country and are exercising their rights upon which this country was founded. By the way, while I served in the Army, I was spit on by the same type of lunatics who support you and who you probably supported in the 60s and 70s. You are an embarrassment to all of us who served so that you would have the protected right of free speech to call us un-American. But at the same time, I have the right to write you to notify you that I consider you to be un-American, as do the majority of the people of this formerly great country. You are a true disgrace to most of the people who served this country by offering themselves for public service in the United States Congress.

I feel certain your aides will not share this letter with you, but I intend to share it with many...

WASHINGTON TIMES KUHNER: Obama foments racial division President inflames emotions to mobilize black voters

Trayvon Martin has been tragically killed. The black Florida teen was shot by a neighborhood watch volunteer, George Zimmerman, in the suburb of Sanford, Fla. Instead of letting justice take its course, race-baiters are exploitingMartin’s death. They are being led by President Obama. His actions have been irresponsible, fanning the flames of racial discontent and division.

The 17-year-old was gunned down on Feb. 26 while walking back to the home of his father’s girlfriend. According to Mr. Zimmerman, Martinwas wearing a hooded sweatshirt and acting suspiciously. Police authorities and eyewitnesses say that Mr. Zimmerman and Martin got into a violent fight. Mr. Zimmerman’s face was bloodied. His nose was broken. His head was smashed on the pavement. He claims he shotMartin in self-defense. Local law enforcement refused to file charges.

Martin’s death has sparked national outrage, especially among civil rights leaders and the liberal media. He has become a symbol of racist injustice - a black kid killed in a gated community with a police department supposedly turning a blind eye. The Rev. Jesse Jacksonsays “blacks are under attack.” Louis Farrakhan vows “retaliation.” The Rev. Al Sharpton has organized massive protests, demanding Mr. Zimmerman be arrested and sent to jail. The New Black Panthers have placed a $10,000 bounty for the shooter’s capture. They issued a poster: “Wanted Dead or Alive.” This is racialist demagoguery - pure and simple.

Yet, it was Mr. Obama who turned this tragedy into a national issue. At a recent news conference, he urged Americans to engage in “soul-searching.” Moreover, Mr. Obama said, “If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon.” The president’s aides claim he was showing compassion for the victim’s family. In reality, he poured gasoline on the racialist fires. Under pressure from the Congressional Black Caucus, Mr. Obama gave them what they wanted: He put the presidential spotlight on Martin’s death - and thereby bolstered the burgeoning protests.

Mr. Obama’s comments were shameful. No one can know what his “son would look like.” The statement was meant as a sign of race solidarity;Martin was black, and so by extension, Mr. Obama shares the victim’s racial identity. Also, shootings take place all over the country on a regular basis. If Americans are required to search their souls every time someone is killed, we’ll be meditating ceaselessly.

Hence, what makes this case so different as to demand national attention? The answer is simple: the victim’s skin color. Race-hustlers, such as Mr. Jackson, Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Farrakhan, have made their careers - and lucrative fortunes - by fomenting racial grievances and demonizing the “white power structure.” In their eyes, segregation has never been truly repealed; it has just become invisible. They need the Trayvon Martins to continue perpetuating their central myth: America is a racist and evil nation. For them, it’s always Selma, Ala., circa 1965.

Their narrative, however, faces one major problem: Mr. Zimmerman is Hispanic. He has black relatives and close friends. He is also a registered Democrat, with no history of racist outbursts. In other words, this act was not white on black; it was minority on minority - not exactly Bull Connor with his attack dogs and water hoses tearing into civil rights activists.

If guilty, Mr. Zimmerman should be held fully accountable. Yet, there is now a rush to judgment. The media and the civil rights establishment have discarded the presumption of innocence. We do not know the full circumstances regarding the shooting. Yet, this has not prevented Mr. Zimmerman from being smeared as a murderer, racist and vigilante. Florida’s governor has appointed a special prosecutor to look into the case. FBI and Justice Department lawyers have been assigned as well. Instead of allowing the legal process to take its independent course, race-mongers are anointing themselves judge, jury and executioner. The rule of law is being assaulted by racial demagogues.

The debate is filled with hypocrisy and double standards. There is largely silence when it comes to black-on-black violence. Nearly half of all murder victims are black; the overwhelming majority of those crimes are committed by black perpetrators. Black male teens, especially in urban areas, have been ravaged by drugs, crime, violence and failing public schools. Rather than holding rallies on these key issues, the civil rights leadership - aided and abetted by Mr. Obama - focus on racially polarizing cases. This generates media attention and mobilizes black voter turnout.

Mr. Obama is exploiting a young man’s death to advance his political agenda. Nearly 95 percent of blacks voted for him in 2008. Polls show that many blacks have become demoralized under the Obama economy due to high foreclosure rates, 13 percent unemployment and soaring gas prices. Hence, Mr. Obama is implementing what The Washington Post dubbed “Operation Vote” - the deliberate targeting of minority voting groups by fostering ethnic resentment. The president, however, is playing with fire. Race, tribe, ethnicity - these are powerful forces that can tear a nation apart. Trayvon Martin deserves justice. In the meantime, the nation needs a leader who calms us rather than inflames a volatile situation.

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.

American Crossroads: "Individual Mandate: Obama v. Obama"

Washington Times KUHNER: Obama’s power grab Executive order expands presidential prerogative

President Obama has given himself the powers to declare martial law - especially in the event of a war with Iran. It is a sweeping power grab that should worry every American.

On March 16, the White House released an executive order, “National Defense Resources Preparedness.” The document is stunning in its audacity and a flagrant violation of the Constitution. It states that, in case of a war or national emergency, the federal government has the authority to take over almost every aspect of American society. Food, livestock, farming equipment, manufacturing, industry, energy, transportation, hospitals, health care facilities, water resources, defense and construction - all of it could fall under the full control of Mr. Obama. The order empowers the president to dispense these vast resources as he sees fit during a national crisis.

“The United States must have an industrial and technological base capable of meeting national defense requirements and capable of contributing to the technological superiority of its national defense equipment in peacetime and in times of national emergency,” the order says. “The domestic industrial and technological base is the foundation for national defense preparedness. The authorities provided in the act shall be used to strengthen this base and to ensure it is capable of responding to the national defense needs of the United States.”

In short, the order gives Mr. Obama the ability to impose martial law. He now possesses the potential powers of a dictator. The order is a direct assault on individual liberties, private property rights and the rule of law. It is blatantly unconstitutional. The executive branch is arrogating responsibilities precluded by the Constitution without even asking the permission of Congress. The order gives Mr. Obama a blank check to erect a centralized authoritarian state. This is a law one would expect to find in Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela or Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

The backdrop to the executive order is the looming showdown with Iran. The administration says the “window for diplomacy is closing.” Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta warned Tehran’s mullahs that “all options are on the table” - including military intervention. Mr. Obama stresses that his patience is running out. He vows that Iran will not acquire the bomb. Mr. Obama wants several more months for sanctions and international isolation to bring the ayatollahs to heel. Yet the signals are clear: Mr. Obama may be ready to launch devastating airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

If that should happen, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has promised massive retaliation. American troops will be targeted by Iranian proxies in Iraq and Afghanistan. American embassies will be struck across the Middle East and North Africa. Most ominously, Iranian-backed Hezbollah cells could launch devastating terrorist attacks in major U.S. cities, killing numerous citizens. The war may well come home, triggering domestic chaos. These are the very real risks of a major conflict with Iran.

Which begs the question: Would that tempt Mr. Obama to claim a state of emergency and thereby implement his executive order? No one knows the answer. And we shouldn’t have to find out. The president does not - and should not - have the authority to subordinate the entire private economy to the government, especially without the consent of Congress and the American people. It is national socialism masquerading as military security.

This is why conservatives - those who are serious about defending our constitutional republic - should demand that the executive order be repealed immediately. Liberals argue that PresidentClinton issued a nearly identical mandate. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the first national defense resources preparedness order, which has been amended by successive presidents, including George W. Bush. Hence, according to the progressive left, if it was good enough for FDR,Mr. Clinton and Mr. Bush, why not Mr. Obama?

The answer is simple: Because the Constitution matters - or at least it should. For more than 70 years, liberal Democrats and corporatist Republicans have been slowly dismantling the old republic, imposing a creeping social democracy. The Founding Fathers’ vision of limited government and federalism has been replaced by a new ruling class. FDR, Mr. Clinton, Mr. Bush - all of them were militarists expanding the size and scope of government. They were Wilsonian globalists, and they shamelessly violated civil liberties. FDR was the worst, by forcing Japanese-Americans into internment camps.

Mr. Obama’s executive order represents the culmination of the welfare-warfare state. He is walking in the footsteps of his predecessors, those who enabled the rise of the imperial presidency. And it leads to only one tragic end: the gradual deterioration of our democracy.

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.

If I Were the Devil: Paul Harvey (Warning for a Nation) 1965

Mailman to Ayers Father Claims He Met Young Obama Who Claimed "He Would Be President Of The United States"

The Road We've Traveled!

‘COMMUNISM DOESN’T WORK’: CHILLING VIDEO WARNING TO AMERICA FROM EAST GERMAN SURVIVOR

KUHNER-WASHINGTON TIMES: Oust Obama President’s globalist doctrine undermines American sovereignty.

The Obama administration believes it is above the law. It now openly claims that President Obama can go to war without congressional authorization. This is a flagrant - and dangerous - violation of the Constitution. It is a naked abuse of power. It begs the question: Is this an impeachable offense? A congressional resolution has been introduced to warn that such high crimes and misdemeanors will trigger impeachment proceedings. It’s about time.

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta recently gave congressional testimony saying that the United States no longer needs the approval or consent of Congress before launching a major military offensive. In particular, Mr. Panetta - to the amazement of Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican - argued that the administration needs only “international permission” to engage in war. In other words, Mr. Panetta stressed that international approval from the United Nations or NATO trumps the sovereign authority ofCongress. The administration is now contemplating whether to topple the brutal regime in Syria or wage devastating airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Mr. Obama seems to view Congress and our system of checks and balances as a nuisance. He is engaged in a massive power grab, behaving more like a Roman emperor unfettered by the will of the people and its duly elected representatives. His worldview is clear - and ominous: America is no longer a self-governing republic, but a supranational state.

This brazen assault upon congressional constitutional prerogatives has inspired remarkably little resistance. Like ancient Rome, republican institutions are slowly being drained of authority, power flowing to an arrogant, ever-growing leviathan. One congressman, however, finally has drawn a line in the sand. Rep. Walter B. Jones, North Carolina Republican, has issued a resolution stating that should Mr. Obama - or any other president - use offensive military force without prior and clear authorization by Congress, this would constitute an impeachable offense.

“The issue of presidents taking this country to war without congressional approval is one that I have long been concerned about,” Mr. Jones said. “Just last week, President Obama’s Secretary of Defense Leon Panettatold the United States Senate that he only needed to seek ‘international’ approval prior to initiating yet another war, this time in Syria. Congresswould merely need to be ‘informed.’ This action would clearly be a violation of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.”

He added: “Enough is enough. It is time this country upholds the Constitution and the principles upon which this country was founded.”

Mr. Jones is a patriot. He is a rare breed in Congress: a conservative constitutionalist who believes in putting America first. He rightly seeks to reimpose constitutional and legal limits upon the president’s ability to make war. Mr. Jones has implemented a trigger mechanism to potentially rein in the lawless, scandal-ridden administration. His resolution enshrines one absolute principle: The Constitution applies to Mr. Obama - as it should to every president.

Mr. Obama has already pushed the constitutional limits. Take his war in Libya. The decision to overthrow Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi was done without congressional authorization - something President Bush received for his military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Hence, theLibya adventure was arguably unconstitutional. It was a war undertaken without even the legal fig leaf of congressional consent. It violated the War Powers Act, which insists that any military action past 60 days must receive congressional approval. Mr. Obama simply circumvented Congress. His behavior was that of a creeping dictator.

Moreover, he insisted that the Libya operation was legitimate because it had U.N. approval. Unaccountable international bureaucrats are to have more authority over U.S. armed forces thanCongress. Mr. Obama also encoded the pernicious principle of “leading from behind.” In other words, the world’s superpower must engage in national self-abnegation for fear of upsetting Washington’s coalition partners. Instead of leading NATO, Mr. Obama wants America to be subsumed by it. The results of the Libya war were disastrous. Gadhafi’s murderous regime has been replaced by an Islamist Libya. Al Qaeda and the Taliban have infiltrated the country’s military, its large stockpiles of weapons plundered. Shariah law is being imposed. Libya is becoming a hotbed of jihadist radicalism. In other words, Mr. Obama waged an illegal war that ended up empowering America’s mortal enemies. If that is not a “high crime and misdemeanor,” then what is?

The administration is hoping to entrench the Libya model. This was the purpose of Mr. Panetta’s comments. From now on, Mr. Obama will launch military interventions based on a new doctrine: globalism. He hopes to erect a new world order where international bodies supersede American national sovereignty. U.S. military power is to become a tool of transnational socialists. George Soros is in, George Washington is out.

It is not just foreign policy. Mr. Obama has repeatedly behaved in an authoritarian, lawless fashion. He abused congressional procedures to ram through Obamacare. He has named numerous policy “czars” with Cabinet-like powers without the Senate’s advice and consent. He has made recess appointments while Congress was not in recess - a blatant transgression of constitutional authority. He has sued states, such as Arizona and Alabama, simply for trying to enforce federal immigration laws, which the president is legally obligated to uphold.

This is why voters must conduct the ultimate impeachment: Remove him from office in the November election. Until then, should Mr. Obama attempt an October surprise by bombing Syria or Iran in order to cynically win re-election, Mr. Jones has given Republicans the firewall to stop him. We don’t serve the president. He must serve us.

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.

Who really is Obama....the movie.

Judge Napolitano: Why Was Geithner Arrested Last Week? And Released?

FORMER REAGAN BUDGET DIRECTOR DESPAIRS: ‘I WOULDN’T TOUCH THE STOCK MARKET WITH A 100-FOOT POLE’

NEW YORK (AP/The Blaze) — He was an architect of one of the biggest tax cuts in U.S. history. He spent much of his career after politics using borrowed money to take over companies. He targeted the riskiest ones that most investors shunned — car-parts makers, textile mills.

That is one image of David Stockman, the former White House budget director who, after resigning in protest over deficit spending, made a fortune in corporate buyouts.

President Ronald Reagan with David Stockman

But spend time with him and you discover this former wunderkind of the Reagan revolution is something else — a scared investor who doesn’t own a single stock for fear of another financial crisis.

Stockman suggests you’d be crazy to hold anything but cash now, and maybe a few bars of gold. He thinks the Federal Reserve’s efforts to ease the pain from the collapse of our “national leveraged buyout” — his term for decades of reckless, debt-fueled spending by government, citizens, and companies — is pumping stock and bond markets to dangerous heights.

(Related: A Closer Look at the Jan. Jobless Numbers: Are They ‘Being Made Up?’)

Stockman may seem as exciting as an insurance actuary, but he knows how to tell a good story. And the punch line to this one is gripping. He says the numbers for the U.S. don’t add up to anything but a painful, slow-growing future.

Now 65 and gray, but still wearing his trademark owlish glasses, Stockman took time from writing his book about the financial collapse, “The Triumph of Crony Capitalism,” to talk to The Associated Press at his home in Greenwich, CT.

Daylight: The Story of Obama and Israel.... TRAILER

One day before the AIPAC conference kicks off in Washington, an anti-Obama pro-Israel group is widening its criticism of President Barack Obama's record on Israel -- while the White House defends its treatment of the relationship.

The trailer for a new 30-minute video, entitled "Daylight: The Story of Obama and Israel," cuts together clips of Obama quotes and outside commentary to put forth the narrative that Obama has made statements and taken actions as president that have put him out of step with the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his supporters.

"We believe that that the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines," Obama is shown saying, a reference to his May, 2011 speech, where he for the first time explicitly defined U.S. policy as supporting the 1967 borders with agreed swaps as the basis for Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.

"He didn't quite have a full grasp of what the full region looks like," conservative journalist Lee Smith is shown saying in the video. "This is not how you treat an ally."

The ad goes beyond the Israeli issue to suggest that the president is too solicitous of Muslim concerns. The end of the trailer shows Obama saying, "I want to make sure we end before the call to prayer," a clip from his town hall meeting with Turkish students in Istanbul in April 2009.

The video was produced by the group the Emergency Committee for Israel, which has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on its pre-AIPAC publicity campaign, including posters and billboards all over Washington that question Obama's commitment to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

"He says a nuclear Iran is unacceptable. Do you believe him?" the posters read. Then, next to a picture of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini and President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, it says, "Do they?"

ECI is run by executive director Noah Pollak and Michael Goldfarb, a former McCain-Palin staffer now working at the consulting firm Orion Strategies and as chairman of the board of theWashington Free Beacon, an new conservative website.

"Obama says a nuclear Iran is unacceptable," Pollak told The Cable today. "We hope he means what he says, but the recent statements from his administration, his contentious relationship with the Israeli government, and his consistent efforts to weaken congressional sanctions don't inspire confidence."

The ECI board is comprised of Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol, Gary Bauer, who has endorsed Rick Santorum, and Rachel Abrams, the wife of former NSC official Elliott Abrams, and the author of the controversial Israel-focused blog "Bad Rachel." The group is also the only Israel-focused advocacy organization to have formed a SuperPAC in the run up to the 2012 election.

As part of its pre-AIPAC activity, ECI took out a full page ad in the New York Times yesterday calling out donors for supporting two liberal advocacy organizations in Washington, the Center for American Progress and Media Matters, and accusing those donors of "funding bigotry and anti-Israel extremism."

Pollak also said that the video, billboards, and ads happen to refute a pre-AIPAC interview Obama gave to The Atlantic, in which Obama expressed frustration with the attacks coming from conservative lawmakers and groups like ECI that claim he is not pro-Israel.

"Every single commitment I have made to the state of Israel and its security, I have kept," Obama said. "Why is it that despite me never failing to support Israel on every single problem that they've had over the last three years, that there are still questions about that?"

"Obama said today he doesn't understand why there are questions about his record of support for Israel," Pollak said. "We think this movie will set the record straight, and remind pro-Israel Americans of the facts of this administration's failure to stand with Israel at some critical moments."

WASHINGTON TIMES KUHNER: Obama’s Islamist agenda President has backed every uprising except Iran’s pro-Western one

Radical Islam is on the march. It is being aided and abetted by the Obama administration. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clintonrecently warned at a conference in Tunisia that the Arab Spring is backsliding. The democratic transformation of the Middle East and North Africa is not working out as Mrs. Clinton and President Obama had hoped. Liberal reformers are being eclipsed by Muslim militants. Islamist parties are coming to power. Mr. Obama has no one to blame but himself.

He has encouraged Arab street revolts against corrupt autocracies. Long-standing American allies, such as former Egyptian strongman Hosni Mubarak, were abandoned. Yet, contrary to his simplistic narrative of freedom fighters battling tyranny, Mr. Obama has helped pave the way for the triumph of Shariah democracy - the drive to establish a global Islamic caliphate. At his core, Mr. Obama is a radical secular progressive. Like all multiculturalists, he believes in one seminal myth: Mass poverty and oppression in the Third World is America’s fault. Hence, he champions anti-colonial “liberation movements” - the uprisings of repressed peoples, especially those in the Muslim world, chafing under authoritarian rule. Yet he never bothers to ask: What comes next? What kind of regime replaces the previous one? The results are often even worse.

The Arab Spring is turning into an Islamist winter. Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen are now becoming Wahhabi Sunni theocracies. Shariah law is being imposed. Minorities, especially Christians, are being eradicated. Dissidents are imprisoned. Women are oppressed. The Muslim Brotherhood and its allies are in the saddle. One-man, one-vote is being used by religious fanatics to impose Islamofascist rule.

In particular, two countries are driving the Arab Spring - Saudi Arabiaand Qatar. The House of Saud has largely financed the Muslim Brotherhood and the street protests convulsing the region. Their goal is to promote Wahhabism, a puritanical strain of Sunni Islam. Wahhabism is profoundly reactionary; it is at war with the modern West, seeking to reimpose the Dark Ages. This is why it is virulently intolerant of Jews, Christians, women, atheists and even other Muslims such as the Shiites. The Obama administration has allied itself with wacky Wahhabis in the name of democracy and human rights. Yet the very opposite is taking place: Religious fanatics are seizing power. There is now an unholy alliance between the postmodern secular left and radical Islam.

Take Libya. The U.S.-NATO intervention that toppled Moammar Gadhafi has led to an Islamist state. Shariah is spreading. Young militant men with heavy firepower control the country’s airports, harbors and major roads. Militias roam the countryside. Former al Qaeda terrorists and Taliban fighters have infiltrated the country, targeting moderate Muslims and blacks. The nation is on the verge of splintering along ideological, sectarian and tribal lines. This is not a victory for humanitarianism but anarchy.

Now the Obama administration wants to repeat the Libya fiasco in Syria. Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are publicly backing the rebels in their battle against Syrian dictator Bashar Assad. Qatar and Saudi Arabia are funding the Free Syrian Army. Al Qaeda fighters and the Taliban are coming from Libya and Iraq through Turkey to join the swelling jihadist movement. The emir of Qatar has been open about his aim: Topple the last secular Arab regime. Washington is contemplating arming the insurgents, thereby tipping the military scales in their favor.

Contrary to media spin, however, the opposition is not full of Western-style democrats; rather, it wants to forge a Sunni-dominated Syria. Wahhabi rule would lead to mass killings and religious cleansing. The rebels vow to massacre the moderate Alawites. They call for Syria’s Christians to be expelled to Lebanon. Mr. Assad is a butcher, who has transformed Damascus into a proxy of Iran. His father, Hafez Assad, slaughtered more than 20,000 members of the Muslim Brotherhood at Hama in 1982. I have little sympathy for this cruel dictatorship. Yet the rebels do not represent the majority. Most Syrians despise the Wahhabis even more than they do Mr. Assad. They fear their country will revert to the 14th century. Mr. Obama is not interested in the wishes of ordinary Syrians. Instead, he wants the United States to partner with al Qaeda, the Taliban and the Muslim Brotherhood in an anti-Assad coalition. In the end, the only winners will be the Islamists.

Mr. Obama has supported every major uprising in the Muslim world - except the only one that truly sought to establish a pro-American, secular democracy. In 2009, Iranians protested stolen elections. The Green Revolution wanted an end to the mullahs, their implacable hostility to the West and the desire for a nuclear-armed Iran. Millions poured onto the streets of Tehran and other cities. Mr. Obama remained silent. He did not wish to offend the ayatollahs, hoping to appease Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. This act will go down in history as the most craven, reckless decision of the Obama presidency; the moment when America blinked in its confrontation with Iran, squandering a golden opportunity for its besieged people to overthrow the vile clerical fascist regime. For this treachery, Israel - and the Jews - may pay the ultimate price. Mr. Obama turned his back on the Iranian opposition - unlike Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen,Libya and now, increasingly, Syria. He has betrayed our friends while rewarding our mortal enemies.

Whether this is a deliberate expression of anti-Americanism and national self-abnegation, or naive multicultural liberalism, is irrelevant. The pattern is clear: Mr. Obama’s foreign policy has directly empowered the Islamist agenda. Future generations will ask: Who lost the Middle East? Historians will write: Mr. Obama did.

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.