Leadership fail, and on the tax payer dime.

Do you think that if Obama was a good leader Team Blue would have to push the “I gave the courageous order that got Osama killed” meme so hard? Seriously? In another campaign speech at tax payer’s expense, this one in Kabul, Afghanistan, he pushed this meme yet again. It’s no wonder that the people that took all the real risks are pissed about the Obama glory seeking. This shit reminds me of the Kerry campaign and his constant bravado about being the Alpha warrior. “Did I tell you I won three purple hearts?” Team Blue, which has no real accomplishments to tout and has basically broken every campaign promise they made, is doing more of the same: “Did you know I am the one that got Osama?”. Look, Obama deserved the credit for giving the order, even if we are finding out that the CIA did all the heavy lifting, and I have heard rumors that Panetta is claiming he ran the operation despite WH apathy until Osama was in their crosshairs, but this football spiking exercise smacks of desperation. Especially considering candidate Obama told us that those touting their anti-terror bonafides where politicking, and he had enough of that, as far back as 2006. Now he wants to gain from it, going so far as to pretend Romney would not have been brave enough to give the order, and suddenly obvious politicking isn’t just that? Shya.

Comments are closed.

  1. Dick Fitzwell

    The irony of using Bill Clinton in an ad to suggest that Romney would not have gone after OBL is quite delicious.

    Obama gets no attaboy from me. What else was he going to say? “No…just let him go.” Yeah, right.

    Even though Clinton gets shit for not going after Bin Laden I can’t imagine that anyone would not give the order to take him out in a post 9/11 world–even wild Bill. The decision to not take him out was never a real option morally or politically. Without vice there can be no virtue. Without the opportunity to do the wrong thing you don’t deserve high praise for doing what everyone expected of you in the first place.

    Obama’s patting himself on the back reminds me of a certain Chris Rock skit. I’d post a link but I’m afraid I might be branded a racist.

    Thumb up 1

  2. bgeek

    The only credit I’m giving Obama is that he didn’t pull the troops out when he was elected (either directly or urging the super majority Congress to defund the effort). But, he won’t/can’t say that because he might lose some of his voting base.

    Thumb up 0

  3. Hal_10000

    Yes, it’s terrible when Presidents boast about their foreign policy success. If only he’d given a speech in front of a mission accomplished banner and put Osama’s pistol on his wall.

    This “spike the football” whining is bullshit. Any President would be boasting about it. If Bush had killed Osama, he would have made it front and center of his 2004 campaign (as he did with the liberation of Iraq). And this time it would be the liberals whining about ‘spiking the football’. The GOP can twist and turn like a twisty turny thing, but they can’t escape the fact that Obama ordered the risky mission that got bin Laden and Bush declared, way back in 2002, that getting bin Laden was not a priority. Romney said it wasn’t a priority. the GOP criticized Obama for saying he would go into Pakistan to get him. And meanwhile, the President made sure we got him.

    Oh, and yet another investigation has concluded that the idea that we got bin Laden from CIA stuff and torture is crap, which is the conclusion of everyone else who has looked at it.

    I’m not an Obama supporter, but the utter refusal to give him any credit whatsoever no matter what he does and the mental gymnastic people will do to give anyone else credit is ridiculous and a sad testament to how intellectually bankrupt the GOP has become.

    Thumb up 2

  4. Dave D

    Hal:

    You’ve become quite the lefty apologist. The above post had so many verbal gynastics in it I was looking for judges holding up cards…… When the right sinks to the lefts level, the right is now dumb. The enlightened left always superior. Sorry, but that’s how you sound.

    Your last paragraph is unadulterated hogwash, IMO. People DO give The Won credit for BL where I read. It';s just wierd hearing the left giving and taking attaboys for slaughter and escalating Afghanistan when they have been crying about us being so militant in the recent past.

    Also, the lefts reaction to “mission accomplished” was WAY worse than this. They STILL bitch about it. And all those risks that bHo took, authorizing this mission? The invasion of Iraq was far riskier, with tens of thousands of soldiers lives at stake and a possible (and true) quagmire a likely outcome. Not the same, at all. And that (courageous, imo) act, followed through on, did far more political damage to the right.

    Thumb up 6

  5. InsipiD

    I’m not an Obama supporter, but the utter refusal to give him any credit whatsoever no matter what he does and the mental gymnastic people will do to give anyone else credit is ridiculous and a sad testament to how intellectually bankrupt the GOP has become.

    Your posts often make you look like the token Obama apologist for this site.

    That said, I’ll agree that the GOP is reaching, but no worse than the Democrats (that’s not an excuse, compliment, or defense). Political discourse in this country is much less serious than it was 20 years ago overall, and racing for the bottom seems to be pretty effective sometimes lately. After all, if Obama is going to pretend that Romney wouldn’t have gone after OBL, what’s left to say to that? The fact that Obama’s supporters eat that up just speaks to the desperation of the whole thing. In a perfect world, we wouldn’t have any of the candidates currently showing, and people of substance instead. The closest we got in the last election were Fred Thompson (who just didn’t want it, really) and Duncan Hunter (who couldn’t see himself stooping to what was going on). Democrats can’t bring themselves to vote for Gephardt, though he’s always running. Just go ahead and admit that there hasn’t been a candidate worthy of the mantles of Reagan and Truman since, well, Reagan and Truman.

    Thumb up 3

  6. Hal_10000

    When the right sinks to the lefts level, the right is now dumb. The enlightened left always superior

    When the left sinks to the left’s level, they are as dumb as the left, which is pretty fucking dumb.

    Thumb up 0

  7. Poosh

    Killing Bin Laden was an act of vengeance and justice, but he was not a priority – or he shouldn’t have been. His demise only proved what a pathetic, irrelevant joke he had been reduced to – by what followed 9/11. We all knew that though. There are far bigger fish to fry than Bin Laden. There are far bigger threats now.

    And I believe posters here, back then, provided links detailing that it was in fact players like Hilary Clinton who were demanding action be taken. Obama was indecisive. If true, I assume Obama’s minions have quite efficiently rewritten history and covered up Obama’s ineptitude.

    Poor, poor Hilary.

    The main concern was Pakistan’s surely blatant protection of Bin Laden. What of this? What are any of us to do of this?

    Thumb up 2

  8. Mississippi Yankee

    Hal, glad to see you’re back, all the “righty” stomping around you’ve done in the past few days had us all wondering.

    BTW did you get the idea for your post from today’s Trifecta?

    Obama is waging war like a total barbarian.

    By Scott Ott’s count, Obama is waging six wars, all in Muslim countries. He also ordered the execution of Osama bin Laden. Should the country rally behind Obama the Warrior, and reward him with reelection for waging war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya and Pakistan?

    Thumb up 0

  9. Poosh

    And I don’t believe for a second that a Republican president, generally at least, would use the killing of Bin Laden as a campaign boost. They’re far more likely to specifically single out the actual soliders/operatives who got Bin Laden, so it’s hard to “absorb” the kudos for that (see Bush’s speeches for examples). Secondly, informed Republicans and conservatives who are up to date with the war on terror are fully aware of Bin Laden’s lack of importance in the scheme of things – trying to “brag” about getting Bin Laden simply would not please right wing voters.

    Thumb up 6

  10. Poosh

    to further cement some perspective, Islamists have taken out as many as 919 souls in March of this year. What a kill count! But the war on terror is over/never existed right? What a great job all these drones in pakistan are doing …

    The war is relentless. We can only take comfort in the fact that our enemies are divided.

    The problem with decapitating a hydra like enemy is yes, sometimes to kill a pretty talented leader. But likewise, sometimes you kill a pretty shit leader, who’s replaced by a far superior one.

    Thumb up 5

  11. Hal_10000

    By Scott Ott’s count, Obama is waging six wars, all in Muslim countries. He also ordered the execution of Osama bin Laden. Should the country rally behind Obama the Warrior, and reward him with reelection for waging war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya and Pakistan?

    As I said: if it were a Republican spiking the football, it would the Democrats whining about it. There is no question that the Left has been completely AWOL on Obama’s record on civil liberties, the War on Terror and, really, almost everything else. I have a post about to go up on that.

    Thumb up 0

  12. Xetrov

    This “spike the football” whining is bullshit. Any President would be boasting about it.

    In your supporting Obama tirade, you miss one very important point, Hal. Who said –

    You know, we don’t trot out this stuff as trophies. Americans and people around the world are glad that he’s gone. But we don’t need to spike the football.

    I’ll give you one guess.

    You’re flat out wrong, this “spike the football” “whining” is most certainly not bullshit. What’s bullshit is a President who can’t remember what he read off the teleprompter yesterday, let alone a year ago. I agree with many of your opinions, but your apologist tirade above is “bullshit”.

    Thumb up 4

  13. salinger

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Thumb up 1

  14. Mississippi Yankee

    Hey Sally, What did the banner say exactly?
    Who was the banner for exactly?
    Was the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln just returning from a 1 year deployment from the Gulf?
    Who’s being a dishonest petulant child exactly Sally?

    Even the Marx and Engels of RTFTLC didn’t stoop to that ridicule-less meme.

    Thumb up 7

  15. Mississippi Yankee

    Too good not to share:
    Hitler angry about his Forward slogan being stolen

    “We could have picked Pelosi, at least she’s Hot… and heterosexual”

    Thumb up 0

  16. AlexInCT *

    The only credit I’m giving Obama is that he didn’t pull the troops out when he was elected (either directly or urging the super majority Congress to defund the effort).

    Why would you give him credit for having reality brusquely smashed into his collectivist stupid head and/or lying to win an election?

    Look, I never for a second believed candidate Obama or anyone on the left that banked on the “Blame the cowboy Bush and his crazy ways” meme was either stupid or crazy enough to actually try to pull troops out of Iraq or Afghanistan immediately, close Gitmo at any point, stop fighting the terrorists and try to buy a shameful peace (immediately, say, because that’s what we are doing in A-Stan now) as we cut & run Vietnam-style, or even stop all wars/fighting when the threat was not going away, no matter how hard they pretended otherwise. Besides, democrats are only against wars they don’t start or run, and only against killing, implying atrocities or torture are committed, and in genral anyone doing things that make them wail, shriek, and tear their clothes off in anguish for political theater, when it is politically advantageous to hammer an opponent with that. When it is one of their own doing these things, or even better, taking it to the next level, its all fine and dandy. The last 3 years leading up to the whole “Did I tell you I bagged Osama” campaign they now are furiously pushing, should leave no doubt of that.

    People may forget or pretend it was otherwise, but after 9-11 the political left was all for going after the terrorists because they understood the problem. Pelosi and her ilk can pretend not to have approved or even known of the very things they now use to their political advantage, but have no doubt that they where all for it because then the immediacy of the threat and their survival instincts served to push back the hyena-like political opportunism that drives the left’s ambition and hunger for power. This was primarily because the terrorist targeted the Pentagon and where hoping to hit congress with the flight that went down in a Pennsylvania field, which means these politicos knew their ass was also on the receiving end. Since then they have made sure they are safe, so they have no problem grandstanding and playing dangerous games with the rest of our lives. Maybe a new attack that bags a bunch of them will remind them they are still in the cross hairs too, because 9-11 now is too long ago and too many of them think they are safe.

    Thumb up 3

  17. AlexInCT *

    Yes, it’s terrible when Presidents boast about their foreign policy success. If only he’d given a speech in front of a mission accomplished banner and put Osama’s pistol on his wall.

    This bullshit again, Hal? I understand you are an easy mark for the leftists and their talking point, but that banner was put their by the crew of that carrier, which incidentally had accomplished their mission with stunning success, to laud their people. Not to make it look like Bush was saying he did that.

    Your problem is that you seem willing to believe the stupid narrative that the callous and opportunist left, with a lot of help of their complicit DNC controlled LSM, created by projecting their mores and behavior onto their enemy, Bush. I remind you that Bush doesn’t see people in our armed services like idiot rubes to be used, abused, and made fun of – that’s SOP on the enlightened left, and they only pretend otherwise when they are being watched – which isn’t the case with these leftist twits.

    But, hey, pretend there is an equivalency between these two events, even if both where manufactured by the left and a complicit LSM.

    Thumb up 5

  18. AlexInCT *

    If you can stomach it, later in the vid, Obama talks about calling Bush, and actually gave him props.

    That was actually very smart on his part. It allowed them to quickly avoid the fact that claimin Obama got Osama was only possible because Bush had made sure it was our policy and the framework was in place, makes them look good, and then opens the door to the football spiking I hoped they inevitably would have to do to distract us from the fact the last 3 1/2 years have been disastrous for this country.

    Thumb up 0

  19. salinger

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Thumb up 3

  20. Dave D

    Sally: The right does NOT politicize national security. It is one of our core beliefs. Shit-poor statement on your part.

    Thumb up 3

  21. AlexInCT *

    Ah OK Sally, pointing out that you, unlike your opponent(s), take terrorist that have declared war on you, and terrorism in general, seriously, unlike the left which thinks they are criminals and wants to treat them as such after the fact, is politicizing national security. Fuck, that was funny.

    Next you are going to tell me that anyone that says Iran with Nukes is a real danerous thing, and something other than meaningless talking or, the ass kissing & know polishing that the left has been doing in their insane hope evil people will then think they are friendly, is only doing so because of politics.

    Thumb up 1

  22. Poosh

    I’ll assume the right can and have politicised national security over the years, though I can’t think of when. I can think of events were the right brought up national security because they HONESTLY and correctly believed that they would secure their country better, which is what you would expect, but I would NEVER expect them to be this transparent and absurd, as Obama has now been.

    Thumb up 4

  23. salinger

    but I would NEVER expect them to be this transparent and absurd

    See – this is EXACTLY the point. Depending on your personal slant – the lens you look through – ones interpretation is subjective.

    I find all the 9-11 ranting that went on by the right exponentially more transparently using the threat of terror for political gain.

    Same for the elevated terror threat levels right before elections – various pundits and candidates straight faced saying that the country would be unsafe with the opponents party in charge.

    Anybody remember, the “we haven’t been attacked in the last four years” chant during the second W. Bush campaign?

    Is Obama not allowed to claim the same thing now?

    I mean what is that – other than using national security for political gain? Whether warranted or not – it is still using national security as a bullet point in the argument of why your particular party is better qualified. Isn’t any argument which ends in one faction being better than the other intimately political?

    Add to this then, concurrently having a president say “I’m not too worried where Bin Laden is…” or a presumptive nominee saying “I think it is misguided to go into Pakistan after Bin Laden” and you have that extra patina of sour grapes.

    One could logically expect the right to be applauding Obama’s execution of the WOT – he’s kept in place some the most egregious components of the preceding administration and actually accomplished many of the goals unattained by the previous administration.

    I think all this uvulating is just the Right’s way of mourning the loss of one of their traditional political arrows from their quiver.

    Thumbs up for the lock step use of “spiking the ball” metaphor though.

    Like I said – this one came close – but I don’t think it’s gonna stick and pushing it much more will backfire in the end.

    Thumb up 0

  24. AlexInCT *

    I find all the 9-11 ranting that went on by the right exponentially more transparently using the threat of terror for political gain.

    That’s because only a measly 3K people and a few hundreds of billion dollars in damage was done, after a couple of decades of attacks being ignored by the Western Media, because there was nothing to gain from letting the American people know the barbarians where a the gate, right? I swear that biggest problem we faced after 9-11 was the apathy of the average American and the incredible ability of leftists to delude themselves into thinking this was all Bush’s doing anyway. Because of fear of another attack, Bush and his people took the terror threat seriously and acted to stop anymore of attacks. That the people involved kept other attacks from happening, be it through immediate action, sheer luck, or the enemy’s incompetence, didn’t stress the point how lucky we where with people like Sally: it made them think that this was all hype and much ado about nothing. I guess I should be happy Sally didn’t blame Bush for 9-11 and say he was behind it so he could invade Iraq and resolve his daddy issues while stealing the oil, like your average lefty in a candid moment will admit they believe was the reason for 9-11.

    It’s a shame that they let the left and the complicit LSM tell us we should not show those 2 towers and the Pentagon getting hit and then going down, every day, twice or more a day, on TV, so people wouldn’t get mad. Had this stuff been kept in people’s faces, then ridiculous statements like this one by Sally about terrorism being hyped would have produced the correct response from people: scorn and anger.

    I also want to remind everyone that it PRECISELY the belief that terrorism was hyped, and then it was done by the left during the Clinton years, for purely political reasons, and for Zipper control failure Bill to hide his shit behind, that people got lax before 9-11. Underestimating the enemy and thinking it was all politics is why they succeed on 9-11. Sooner than later they will get lucky again, because as many members of Team Obama have told us, the war on terror is over, and terrorism is a done deal. Barack got Osama, and the gig is up!

    Thumb up 4

  25. Kimpost

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Thumb up 1

  26. tika

    salinger that Rudy pic is obviously a photoshop are you kidding me? heh

    That was actually very smart on his part. It allowed them to quickly avoid the fact that claimin Obama got Osama was only possible because Bush had made sure it was our policy and the framework was in place, makes them look good, and then opens the door to the football spiking I hoped they inevitably would have to do to distract us from the fact the last 3 1/2 years have been disastrous for this country.

    That’s Obama’s only chance, shuck and dodge.

    Thumb up 2

  27. AlexInCT *

    “The apathy”? You’ve got to be kidding me. Sorry, but the biggest problem we have is the west’s absurd over reaction to the Terrorist Threat (TM).

    Thanks for so brilliantly making my point for me Kimpost. Because after all, they kiled some other rubes, and thus it doesn’t touch me directly crowd then feels they are not affected or immune. Lets just wait until these guys start killing many more people and actually put our own personal ass in jeaopardy to worry. Nothing can go wrong with that attitude.

    It gave us the Patriot Act, institutionalized rendition, torture. limitless incarceration and endless war. Kind of makes me wish for some “apathy”.

    Erm, lets take this list apart, huh. The Patriot act just codified a whole bunch of shit other presidents had wanted, including Clinton, and Obama, whom so hated it, has taken it to new extremes. How much whining about the Patriot Act have we heard from the usual suspect these days when the abuses they pretended would come under Bush now are happening?

    And speaking of Clinton, rendition was started and mastered under his watch. Sending terrorist to people we knew would use REAL torture to get dangerous terrorists to divulge information, especially in light of how adamant the left seems these days about torture not working and these terrorists not being such a big threat at all, didn’t bother any of the people that feel waterboarding, sleep deprivation, and having to listen to loud renditions of Madonna songs, are such evil forms of torture. That it is back in vogue is because the democrats think you are somehow morally superior if you don’t get your hands dirty but let others do some real nasty work for you. Heh.

    Limitless incarcerations are not a new idea. Teddy used them way back in WWII, and then to hold citizens, and he was a democrat. Personally I prefer Obama’s approach of outright killing them, but I do feel that the free-for-all has also deprived us of a lot of valuable intel. I wonder if you, whom I am sure is an anti-capital punishment type considering where you live, think killing them is better than locking them up for ever. After all, consistency never is a strong suit of the left when it comes to logic or reasoning.

    That endless war thing is a doozie too, but only if you ignore the fact that it is one side that is hell bent on having this war. And then, because they are certain that the decadent, apathetic, and weak west is ripe for the picking, so the time has come for the Caliphate to go global. Last I heard the choices when confronted with war was to fight them, or surrender. Ignoring them, like people like you want to pretend is a choice we have, always ends with you still fighting, only when it is too late, and in 99 out of 100 cases, followed by losing. For some reason I think you will have far more problem dealing with how they will then treat their enemies. If we go by their current behavior, they will torture, rape, and then kill any and all of us that they have no immediate use for unless we learn to put our head down and our ass in the air, while facing towards Mecca, five times a day. Me, I bet people that like you believe the wars are our fault and of our own making, won’t feel that’s too bad of a sacrifice to make anyway, since it absolves you from having to do any kind of heavy lifting.

    Yeah, I hear that. Many on the left have mourned of how they wished 9-11 had never happened, not because then innocent people wouldn’t have died and we wouldn’t have had to waste a decade at war, had countless of our best young people killed, pissed away a lot of treasure trying to play nice instead of fighting to win and do so in short order, all to appease the same leftist whom would use any setback to make political hay and seek advantage, but because it derailed the collectivist revolution and all that. Oh, the bad luck. This cry for apathy smacks of the ostrich and how it deals with trouble, and if memory serves me well, it doesn’t work out for the ostrich.

    Thumb up 3

  28. Kimpost

    You keep putting labels on people who don’t fit. I don’t care much whether something I consider bad, is coming from democrats or republicans. Bad is bad, torture is torture. Don’t do it ever, not even to save the planet from invading space Nazis. Nor do I give a shit about global governance or the new world order following the inevitable Marxist take-over. Or about the “evils of Islam”. They are all just bogeymen.

    On real life, your two parties generally agree on all fundamentals. The Patriot Act, with all its cousin perversions, is clearly a part of those fundamentals. Neither party is going to get rid of them anytime soon. If anything, their powers will expand. You’ll see.

    This is “the election of the lifetime”, I hear, but I see nothing to back it up. To me, this is just another election between two moderates. Or between “two big government politicians”, from a libertarian perspective. One is slightly more Keynesian than the other, but the differences aren’t exactly paramount. Neither party is going to manage to do anything about SS, Medicare or Medicaid without support from the other party, which basically means that it probably won’t happen. Anyway, any such progress will be slow.

    Thumb up 0

  29. AlexInCT *

    You keep putting labels on people who don’t fit. I don’t care much whether something I consider bad, is coming from democrats or republicans. Bad is bad, torture is torture. Don’t do it ever, not even to save the planet from invading space Nazis. Nor do I give a shit about global governance or the new world order following the inevitable Marxist take-over. Or about the “evils of Islam”. They are all just bogeymen.

    So I am right when I called you an ostrich.

    This is “the election of the lifetime”, I hear, but I see nothing to back it up.

    That’s probably because you have bought the MSM lies about the economy going in the right direction while those of us that live it see otherwise.

    Neither party is going to manage to do anything about SS, Medicare or Medicaid without support from the other party, which basically means that it probably won’t happen.

    So let’s carry this to its logical conclusion Kimpoist. If nothing happens, do you believe things will just stay the same, or are you able to see that eventually the system collapses and the tyrants take over? or is that just more bgetmen, because even when the world economy collapses you believe things will work out? I am curious,

    Thumb up 2

  30. Seattle Outcast

    On real life, your two parties generally agree on all fundamentals. The Patriot Act, with all its cousin perversions, is clearly a part of those fundamentals. Neither party is going to get rid of them anytime soon.

    There is a massive chasm between the parties (and the politicians) and the general public. Thinking that the parties actually represent the people is a mistake.

    Thumb up 2

  31. Tool

    You keep putting labels on people who don’t fit. I don’t care much whether something I consider bad, is coming from democrats or republicans. Bad is bad, torture is torture. Don’t do it ever, not even to save the planet from invading space Nazis.

    Yes, I bet you would harbor similar revulsion about executing complete scum like Breivik. Who knows, in 20 or 30 years perhaps Breivik can kill another 50 plus human beings, and Europeans like yourself can be satisfied that no individual was treated harshly by the authorities (conveniently ignoring of course the scores of victims who were brutally shot by a murderer). Please, spare everyone here your extremely warped sense of morality. Your concern for perpetrators of terrorism is absolutely sickening.

    Nor do I give a shit about global governance or the new world order following the inevitable Marxist take-over. Or about the “evils of Islam”. They are all just bogeymen.

    Excellent, I do not give a shit about the pathetic moralizing rants from a person who thinks executions for admitted serial murderers are “barbaric”.

    Thumb up 4

  32. Tool

    Ah yes, the unassailable logic of Salinger’s photo shopped picture. Glad to see what passes for logic and reason in your mind CM.

    Thumb up 4

  33. AlexInCT *

    Well said salinger and Kimpost. You’re done about as much as you can given the inability of the others to respond with logic and intelligence.

    This sort of sordid nonsense from you always is priceless CM. You wouldn’t know logic if it hit you with a clue bat, over the head, several times, while screaming at you that is what it was. Thanks for the laugh, though.

    Moral grandstanding by leftists, even the ones that pretend not to be leftists, fools nobody but other leftists. Especially when the grandstanding seems to vary greatly whenever it’s leftists in trouble/doing the wrong thing and the grandstanders keep quiet, except to say they disapprove, but are all over the opposite side, screaming their heads off, for inconsequential shit they think will score them political points. you know, like the whole anti-war movement that couldn’t shut up while Bush was president, but then all but vanished when the messiah won the WH and proceeded to escalate the existing wars, the killings, AND added some new wars of his own. You people fool nobody.

    Ah yes, the unassailable logic of Salinger’s photo shopped picture. Glad to see what passes for logic and reason in your mind CM.

    Don’t insult CM by implying logic was ever in his head. He is a true beleiver, and that’s all that counts.

    Thumb up 2

  34. Dave D

    Hmmmmm. We are neither intelligent or rational, per CM. Does his increasing use of insults mean he is weakening/doubting his core liberal beliefs or just that he simply cannot think any differently given his eurosocialist upbringing? Those are the only two possibilities.

    Thumb up 2

  35. Kimpost

    Hmmmmm. We are neither intelligent or rational, per CM. Does his increasing use of insults mean he is weakening/doubting his core liberal beliefs or just that he simply cannot think any differently given his eurosocialist upbringing? Those are the only two possibilities.

    New Zealand, land of the free.

    Thumb up 0

  36. Kimpost

    So I am right when I called you an ostrich.

    Yes, but since I’m only turning a blind eye on imaginary threats, I don’t mind much. Our reactions to 9/11 (and other terrorist acts) have cause more shit than the acts themselves. I.e., we are letting them win. I don’t like to lose.

    That’s probably because you have bought the MSM lies about the economy going in the right direction while those of us that live it see otherwise.

    No, I actually think that the world economy is in poor shape. The US is hurting, the EU is hurting, and China is booming on several bubbles. We’ll see more turmoil, but they won’t be the end times either. The EU and you guys will manage somehow, western democracies are strong that way. China on the other hand. Who knows what will happen there? In the long run, democracy, but what will happen to the world economy if/when the bubbles start popping? It would be good if EU and US were up and running again, when that happens.

    On the US economy, there are positive signs, and there are negative signs. I see them both, while you appear to see nothing but the bad, and a MSM conspiracy regarding the good. 2012 is better than 2008, when we were looking at a total financial collapse.

    So let’s carry this to its logical conclusion Kimpoist. If nothing happens, do you believe things will just stay the same, or are you able to see that eventually the system collapses and the tyrants take over? or is that just more bgetmen, because even when the world economy collapses you believe things will work out? I am curious,

    No, we’ll patch the system up and move on. Sometimes politicians actually make the hard choices, they just need a populace willing to back them up. Several countries have reformed welfare programs, even you recently with Clinton. I’m sure you could do it again. It’s just that now isn’t that time. You are too polarized.

    Thumb up 0

  37. Kimpost

    Did you mean land of the free shit paid by other people? :)

    The Heritage Foundation ranks NZ high on economic freedom. An important meter for conservatives isn’t it? I’ve seen conservatives discussing it as a possible refuge. Please drop by CM’s house for a coffee if you do. Don’t mind asking for refills, he’s a socialist after all. His casa is su casa. :)

    Thumb up 0

  38. Kimpost

    Yes, I bet you would harbor similar revulsion about executing complete scum like Breivik. Who knows, in 20 or 30 years perhaps Breivik can kill another 50 plus human beings, and Europeans like yourself can be satisfied that no individual was treated harshly by the authorities (conveniently ignoring of course the scores of victims who were brutally shot by a murderer).

    I obviously detest his actions, but I’m against the death penalty on principle, so he get’s to live, read books and watch TV. I don’t think he’ll ever get out, though, which is fine with me. Other than that, you must have missed that we too, just like Americans, have followed the path of “tough on crime”, since 1980 or so. Do I think that path is wrong? Oh, absolutely, and I would add. counterproductive, but my personal opinions don’t change the facts. Europeans are tough on crimes, and we keep getting tougher.

    Please, spare everyone here your extremely warped sense of morality. Your concern for perpetrators of terrorism is absolutely sickening.

    Not with encouraging reactions like that, I’m not. ;)

    Excellent, I do not give a shit about the pathetic moralizing rants from a person who thinks executions for admitted serial murderers are “barbaric”.

    Ah, well, what’s an elitist euro snob to do?

    Thumb up 0

  39. CM

    Let me know when someone on the right here (Hal aside) can cobble together an actual argument above fifth grade level. I don’t mean something I agree with, I mean something halfway intelligent that actually makes sense. Perhaps most of you can’t understand the difference – it sure doesn’t seem like it.
    And Dave D, you really should actually read the thread. The whole thread, like most ‘discussions’ here, is primarily based on insults. How does that fit your theory?
    My guess is that you’ll ignore it and double down on insults like everyone else who is in any way challenged at this place. Woeful. Hey, I know, click on the thumbs down again like a coward. Again, that’s what a fifth grader would do.
    Alex displays the whole thing again wonderfully with his ‘land of free shit’. As per, he demonstrates an winnng combination of ignorance and arrogance. Getting things completely wrong and being proud of it. It’s an impressive feat to never get any better. It must take a lot of work to refuse to improve.

    Thumb up 0

  40. Dave D

    CM: You can’t read. I was just saying that is not YOUR usual way of doing things. There were no linkbombs or haughty, self-righteous statements. Just a brief insult. And pissy, at that…….

    Thumb up 0

  41. Mississippi Yankee

    CM, you seem quite passive-aggressive since your return. Ya think it might be all that hormone replacement therapy?

    Thumb up 0

  42. Section8

    Why did Hal get a low rating? He’s absolutely correct. Besides, Bush had most of his presidency to get this guy, and we saw nothing. Obama should have never been given a football to spike in the first place. I’m not an Obama fan, and I won’t be voting for him EVER, but seriously why should he not remind people this was done under his watch? Anyone running for office would be doing this. You’d be nuts not to. An incumbent campaigning is all about “Look what great things I’ve done for you.” He doesn’t have a big list in my opinion, but he’s going to read off the ones that are likely to win over voters. That’s just how it works. Bin Laden was 9/11 in most people’s minds. Not just one part in many complexities of the war on terror, but the head of the snake. Getting the head of the snake is going to score points with voters.

    Now why the fuck we’re still there on and losing people on a daily basis to “save” some shithole is beyond me, but that’s another story all together. Maybe the GOP should start asking that question.

    Thumb up 3

  43. CM

    CM: You can’t read. I was just saying that is not YOUR usual way of doing things. There were no linkbombs or haughty, self-righteous statements. Just a brief insult. And pissy, at that…….

    You said no such thing.

    Hmmmmm. We are neither intelligent or rational, per CM. Does his increasing use of insults mean he is weakening/doubting his core liberal beliefs or just that he simply cannot think any differently given his eurosocialist upbringing? Those are the only two possibilities.

    Nowhere there do you infer that I’m acting any different to normal.
    My use of insults may be increasing but I’m still way behind the majority of posters here.
    I’m always doubting my beliefs. You don’t?
    What about my upbringing was “euro-socialist”? Can you give some specific examples?

    There are intelligent and rational people on the right who make good arguments. For so many people to be on the right, there must inherently be a good case to make. However there appear to be few here who can come even remotely close. Anytime it looks like we might be getting close to an actual discussion, out come the insults. General and personal. You personally went after Hal (lamely calling him a lefty apologist) because he went off script and expressed individual thoughts of his own.

    CM, you seem quite passive-aggressive since your return. Ya think it might be all that hormone replacement therapy?

    Could be, although can you imagine this face with a full beard? I think I’d better keep taking it.

    Why did Hal get a low rating?

    Because this is grade-school where people who express original thoughts are shunned.

    but seriously why should he not remind people this was done under his watch?

    Because the same people who spent years mocking idiots on the left screaming ‘Bushitler’ now act no better when it comes to Obama. It’ll be interesting if Romney wins in Nov – it’s not hard to predict that almost nothing being the President’s fault instead of almost everything.
    Can you imagine if a Republican President got Bin Laden? Would the same people be having a go at him for reminding people in election year? Pfffffffffffffffffft.

    Thumb up 1