Track-A-’Crat: The Roll Call of Democratic Delinquency

For those with a masochistic tendency, click here to watch Susan Rice, ambassador to the UN, refuse to concur with Mousavi’s charge (via the MSNBC interviewer) that the regime in Iran is illegitimate.

She instead timidly states, in the bestest International Relations 101 way possible, that,

“The political situation in Iran is for the Iranians to work out internally.”

Which is a fine sentiment when applied to a democracy, but not so much with regard to a theocracy that murders those who dare to protest.

So why did Rice refuse to call the mad mullahs illegitimate?

Because, in the short term, the mullahs are going to retain power in Iran.  And a central blank of Obama’s acclaimed appeasement policies is talking to the mullahs.  So if his administration were to label them illegitimate, he fears that they might be less inclined to sit down and jaw jaw with the Great Satan, which would not be too wonderful for the prestige that Obama so desperately craves.

This, of course, is the most naive train of thought in the history of time and space.

The theocracy in Iran could not care less what word the Obama adminstration does or does not use to categorize them.  They are not going to refuse negotiations with the US because their feelings are hurt – they are going to refuse talks because they truly and sincerely hate America, no matter which puppet is dangled in front of them.

King of the Freakazoids, Kim Jong-il, has been a naughty boy again.

Susan Rice, US ambassador to the United Nations, and thus the very first person to whom we should turn when empty words are preferable to swift action, said that, “they’re going to find they’ll pay a price because the international community is clear: it’s not acceptable.”

The statement was made in a midly (think Dijon mustard as opposed to Tabasco) threatening way.

I sure would hate to pee off the quote-international community-unquote.  That would definitely be a bad move.

Unless I were the Taliban.  Or the CCP.  Or the House of Saud.  Or al-Bashir of Sudan.  Or Robert Mugabe.  Or Vladimir Putin.  Or Chavez/Correa/Morales or any of the other past or future Latin American Castro wannabes.  Or…

You get my point.

And, almost certainly, the “price” that the DPRK will pay will be to receive ever-so-slightly less aid from us spineless westerners.  That’s the same type of mindset that in Washington DC defines a cut in government spending as a decrease in the rate of increase of government spending.

Fail, you morons.

[Yeah, the title is not one of my creations.  I read it elsewhere ages ago and decided there and then to steal it for my own use one day.  But it's still awesome.]