American Elephants

Winnie the Pooh and Ahmadinejad Too! by American Elephant

Welcome Michelle Malkin readers and People’s Cube comrades! We hope while you’re here you’ll stop and have a look around our humble little grass-roots conservative, capitalist pig blog and tell us what you think!

I can’t think of a better metaphor for Barack Obama’s childish foreign policy than the one proffered by his own “key foreign policy adviser” and presumptive National Security Adviser, Richard Danzig:

Richard Danzig, who served as Navy Secretary under President Clinton and is tipped to become National Security Adviser in an Obama White House, told a major foreign policy conference in Washington that the future of US strategy in the war on terrorism should follow a lesson from the pages of Winnie the Pooh, which can be shortened to: if it is causing you too much pain, try something else.

Mr Danzig told the Centre for New American Security: “Winnie the Pooh seems to me to be a fundamental text on national security.” [read more]

Obama’s foreign policy? Big soft cuddly America gets the stuffing knocked out of it. As Jim Geraghty at The Campaign Spot observes:

It’s good that Obama is going to Iraq and Afghanistan. And he would be wise to articulate a national security policy that relied more on personal meetings with Gen. David Petraeus and less on reading Winnie the Pooh.

25 Comments so far
Leave a comment

think Danzig is right on, personally. From my time studying psychology and geopolitics, I’ve learned that the point presented here is very valid. With terrorism, in order for a person to become dehumanized enough to carry out terrorist attacks, some aspects of reality need to be changted. They do that by turning part of it into a game, like they are the freedom fighters. The Luke Skywalker comment was brought up because he spoke to terrorists, and that was a first hand account of how they felt. Also, it makes perfect sense, since the rebels in the movie were the ‘terrorists'(little guy fighting big guy who is trying to oppress them).

As for Winnie the Pooh, I’m not actually up to speed on the specifics of the philosophy behind it… but I know that many people respect it as something much more than a children’s character. The stories address universal situations from a specific angle. Maybe Danzig is able to see how that relates to geopolitical events. Maybe that’s easiest for him. For me, I do the same thing. Although I’m not planning foreign policy. I’ll still try to live my life in a way that is congruent with the morals taught on Mr. Roger and Sesame Street. When I was young, those shows played a significant role in my development, and it would be ignorant for me to say that those learned morals still don’t impact the choices I make. I’m sure that’s what Danzig meant.

Comment by Peter

I forgot to mention that this is a retarded article. Debate me on policy any day, and I will crush you.

Comment by Peter

Somehow I seriously doubt it. But, by all means, go study the “philosophy.” Then perhaps you can tell us who Tigger is in this scenario? who is Eeyore? Roo? Piglet? Muslims don’t like pigs you know, yet Piglet is one of Pooh’s best friends. Problematic at best. Please! Enlighten us!

Comment by American Elephant

Comrade Pachyderm!

I’m impressed. First cast and you snag a passive/aggressive Dr.Spock hatchery raised Chumpy McHopeless libtard pufferfish troll.
Don’t toss him back.

Comment by Laika The Space Dog

Good post. So, that’s Danzig in the red shirt standing next to Obama? Interesting comment from Peter…seems he coulda saved a lot of space by simply saying “I don’t know what Danzig is talking about.”

Comment by JOS

Thanks much! I think what Peter was trying to express is that he’s going to support Obama no matter how idiotic and incompetent he proves himself to be.

Comment by American Elephant

Peter needs to let go of his childhood.
But that is usually the problem with liberals.
They refuse to mature past the warm-fuzzy feelings of youth.
Grow up,useful idiots.

Comment by LnT

[…] Via American Elephant… […]

Pingback by Michelle Malkin » The Obama/Pooh Photoshop collection

love the pic (saw it on m/m) and really agree with the post! love your blog too 🙂

Comment by zoey

Thanks much Zoey! We’re very happy you stopped by.

Comment by American Elephant

[…] American Elephant ( Permanent Link | email story […]

Pingback by Lump on a Blog » Blog Archive » Obama advisers: Bin Laden can appeal to U.S. courts

[…] Hats off to the American Elephant! Only ONE man could possibly lead Obama’s foreign policy, only one my friends and his name is Pooh! Yes, I said POOH! […]

Pingback by The DaleyGator » Blog Archive » Obama’s new foreign policy advisor?

[…] Photo Source: American Elephant […]

Pingback by Obama’s Vero Possumus Seal of Approval? « Miss Moneypenny CPU

[…] Photoshop: American Elephant Posted in: Uncategorized Send to a Friend Printer Friendly comments (6)   trackbacks (0) […]

Pingback by Michelle Malkin » A cast of hundreds: Who isn’t an Obama foreign policy adviser?!

In response to “peter”, above:
Danzig’s point was not the philosophy of Pooh in toto, if there is such a thing, but only the opening passage were Pooh is coming down the stairs bounce, bounce, bounce on his head and thinks to himself that there may be a better way of coming down stairs if it would just stop bouncing long enough for him to think of it. Danzig misinterprets that bit of whimsy to mean “if something hurts you should stop doing it.” Pooh was only saying that he should look for alternatives.

In foreign affairs Pooh is right and Danzig is wrong. You should always be looking for better ways to do things but pain is specifically not a determinant of changing course. If pain determines a change in course the terrorists win. We become Spain. You are wrong, you are cruel, you murder thousands of innocents but if you kill 400 of our citizens we will do whatever you want. Taken to its logical extreme Danzig would have us take up Bin Laden’s offer of converting to Islam to end the war they are fighting against us.

I also think Peter is wrong about terrorists. He is going to the wrong side of the spectrum. Terrorists are not at the anguished desperate extreme of the impoverished but the philosophical extreme of college students in Germany. While the average street bomber may be poor and uneducated they are the pawns in the process. The real terrorists are educated and well off (e.g. Bin Laden). It is the same megalomania that motivated every dictator from Genghis Kahn to Mugabe. And they can only be defeated in the same way megalomaniacs in the past were defeated. Or wait, Pooh is right, let’s see if we can think of a better way. Until we do we will keep up with the old fashioned way.

Comment by Mark

Everything Peter (and Danzig) needs to know he learned in kindergarten.

Comment by sully

” JOS said this on June 17, 2008 at 7:21 pm – Thanks much! I think what Peter was trying to express is that he’s going to support Obama no matter how idiotic and incompetent he proves himself to be.” HELLO JOS, this is what you’ve been doing, voting for W the last two elections…. Idiotic? Incompetent? Nookyuller?

Comment by Even-handed

Sorry, American Elephant should have been credited with the comment to which I responded…

Comment by Even-handed

Hi Even-handed,

Yes, I agree, Al Gore and John Kerry were absolutely idiotic and incompetent — not to mention disturbing — and that is part of the reason I voted for George W. Bush. But mostly I voted for him the first time, because I believed his policies and character superior, I voted for him the second time because he proved me right. He has kept us safe, devastated al Qaeda, turned a rogue, enemy dictatorship into a free, democratic ally, twice, and with the help of the Republican congress, turned the Clinton refcession into robust growth — that is until Democrats took over the purse strings and the economy went to hell.

And I will vote for Republicans this fall for precisely the same reason. The best thing we can do for the economy is to get rid of the party that has been obstructing us from increasing our oil, nuclear and other energy supplies, the party that championed the biofuels that have caused food prices to skyrocket, world wide food shortages, riots and increased hunger, the party that wrote the laws that forced lenders to give loans to people who wouldnt otherwise qualify, and the party that promises to dastically increase taxes and regulation.

If we don’t Democrats will make things far worse than they already have!

Not your point, I know, but right nonetheless! 🙂

Comment by American Elephant

“…Taken to its logical extreme Danzig would have us take up Bin Laden’s offer of converting to Islam to end the war they are fighting against us.”

The “logical extreme” on every issue is NOT the Dem platform?

Comment by sully

300 it shows total lack of policy, it is confused mass of protoplam, can we afford it, columbia univ. hot bed of socialism has never prepared you for it.

Comment by P.Barman

All conservatives suffer the same fate. They covet the truly rich from afar while cheerleading for policy that only benefits that top class while pretending that thier low rent, middle management existence somehow qualifies them to also benefit from thier all out war on the poor. I can never be angry, only sorrowful for these confused and pathetic lap dogs of Satan.

Comment by Siddhartha

You are projecting Siddhartha.

It is Democrats that use the government to steal money from others and give it to themselves. If that isn’t proof of covetousness, I don’t know what is. Conservatives support policy that enforces the rule of law and gets the government out of the people’s way as much as possible. It is policy that favors anyone and everyone with a will to work and get ahead. Democrats on the other hand support policy that makes people dependent on government, punishes them if they try to get ahead, and thus KEEPS them poor. Right where Democrats want you. For as long as you depend on the government, you are going to vote fot the party that offers to take more amd more from others and give it to you.

Republicans have not only taken 6 million poor off the tax rolls all together, they support policy that has allowed more poor to get ahead, start their own businesses and own their own homes than ever before. Democrats support policy that makes the poor dependent on government, and keeps them there, as we saw all too clearly in New Orleans, which has been run exclusively by Democrats for 40 years and where most people are poor and dependent on the government and have been for a very long time. Fortunately they now have a new Republican governor who is changing that.

If keeping people poor in order to keep them voting for you isnt “war on the poor” I dont know what is. That’s what Democrats do. Republicans make it easier for everyone to get ahead, but they cant MAKE you take advantage of opportunity. You have to do it for yourself.

Comment by American Elephant

[…] Photoshop: American Elephant Posted in: Homeland Security Send to a Friend Printer Friendly comments (6)   trackbacks (0) […]

Pingback by Michelle Malkin » The resurgence of left-wing extremism

[…] Photoshop: American Elephant Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Read and WEEP!Morley takes first at stateThe Plight of the Ultra-RichIs A $10 Billion Bailout Enough To Save Dubai? […]

Pingback by The resurgence of left-wing extremism « Locust blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: