Hillary Under Fire

I’ve been somewhat puzzled by the gleeful reaction to Hillary Clinton’s motorcade being pelted with shoes and tomatoes in Egypt. Is anti-Americanism a good thing now? I always hated it when the Left would get smug about anti-Bush protests. Clinton has been — and I hate to say this — a decent Secretary of State. She’s worked her ass off, done nothing to undermine the President and managed to smooth over their innumerable fuck-ups. That we are not at war with anyone after three years of these guys is remarkable and I think Clinton deserves the lion’s share of credit.

But yesterday, the New York Times dug into the story. Apparently, the protests were ignited because the Egyptians think we supported the Islamic Brotherhood in taking over Egypt. (My own opinion? The opposition failed to unite, leaving the Brotherhood as the only coherent political force. You’ll see similar patterns from history in the rise of bad regimes.)

But here’s the more incendiary allegation, one that’s been picked up by every Left Wing blog in existence:

Pressed by American reporters to explain where they got the idea that their new Islamist president, Mohamed Morsi, had been foisted on them through a U.S. plot, rather than the will of the majority, several Egyptians cited information gathered from American blogs or news sites.

An Egyptian-American Christian who met Mrs. Clinton on Sunday cited recent claims by Representative Michele Bachmann, a Republican, “that the Obama Administration is pursuing a closeted pro-Muslim agenda,” in a conversation with Time magazine’s correspondent, Abigail Hauslohner.

In an online conversation on Monday, when Matt Bradley of The Wall Street Journal asked an Egyptian blogger named Sara Ahmed for proof that the Obama administration was “financing” the Muslim Brotherhood, she directed him to a blog post about American aid to Egypt by an ultra-conservative Canadian blogger, Judi McLeod. Ms. McLeod’s post was based on a news story posted on Lucianne.com, a site run by Lucianne Goldberg, an American conservative who played a central role in the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

As Mr. Bradley pointed out to Ms. Ahmed, though, Ms. McLeod had badly garbled the original news report, which simply said that the U.S. had decided to release $1.3 billion in aid to Egypt’s military in April. Ms. McLeod falsely reported that the money had been given instead to a delegation of Muslim Brotherhood leaders who visited Washington around the same time.

Other information came from rabid anti-Islamists like Frank Gaffney.

First things first: it is shameful that this kind of conspiracy mongering has not only been tolerated, but positively embraced by parts of the Right Wing. During the presidential primaries, three non-Romneys directly embraced conspiracy mongering. Bachmann is mentioned above. Cain said he would not hire Muslims or require a loyalty oath. And Gingrich spewed ignorant bullshit about history, religion and property values. Only Paul and Romney specifically rejected it. The GOP has, for far too long, played footsie with anti-Obama conspiracy theorists. And now it’s biting them again.

That having been said, however, this smells like garbage to me. If Egyptian conspiracy mongering is being influenced by American pundits, it is a minor factor. The reality is that the United States is, has been and always will be blamed for the ills of the world. Whenever any country is messed up, its leadership and its people will find a way to blame us. And if they can find support for that blame in the massive and free American media — where every viewpoint is tolerated — that’s a bonus. But these blog posts and statements are being cited as supporting evidence, not the origin. Anti-American conspiracy theories can cook up just fine on their own.

The real problem is that the reality about America’s role in the world is colliding with Obama hero worship. The Left insisted for years that it was only Bush’s incompetence which caused us to be hated. And once we had the Enlightened One, all that would change. I remember Sullivan saying that the simple fact that Obama’s middle name was Hussein was going to help. These hopes for Obama’s foreign policy were always delusional. And now that they have been dashed on the rocks of reality, the media is determined to sustain their messianic delusions by blaming the Right Wing for Obama’s failures. It’s pathetic, really.

(I mean … seriously? You guys have a Nobel Prize winner in office, Hillary as Secretary of State, a new vision for relations and you can’t overcome the rantings of a few bloggers?! What kind of crybaby bullshit is this?)

Finally … and I hate to keep going back to this point, but it keeps being relevant … where were these guys, oh, four to eight years ago? Where they worried that “no blood for oil!” would undermine Bush’s legitimacy? When entire wars were blamed on Haliburton’s lust for profits, did they wring their hands over how this would affect the Arab street? What about 9/11 conspiracy theories being promoted by members of Congress?

This is why I tire of politics. Everything is fine when our side does it but vile when the other side does. Everything is the other side’s fault, never our own. They behave like beasts who hate America; we behave like angels who rescue kittens.

Conspiracy mongering is a vile and disgusting practice. “Reporting” sensational stories without fact-checking is deliberate idiocy. But that’s true no matter who does it. It’s wrong whether it’s Michael Moore or Pamela Geller.

But none of this has anything to do with why we are blamed for the ills of the world. When things go wrong, we will get blamed. When we act, we will get blamed. When we don’t act, we will get blamed. And, in the end, people will invent facts out of whole cloth to blame us. That’s been true long before Michele Bachmann and Glenn Beck.

Comments are closed.

  1. CM

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

    Thumb up 0

  2. richtaylor365

    Just curious as to what actions or accomplishments of Hillary’s that would tally her as a “decent” SOS.

    And regarding the glee you mentioned, I think a lot of that is directed at Obama and his minions who told us unicorns would fly out of his butt with his magical “reset” button, that all the world would now love us and work with us for a better world. We knew that was horseshit then, now they are figuring that out for themselves.

    Thumb up 5

  3. CM

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

    Thumb up 0

  4. Hal_10000 *

    I assume you’re judging that on more than this incident?

    I can’t the link now but anti=American sentiment in the Arab world, at least, is very close to Bush levels.

    Thumb up 2

  5. richtaylor365

    By not going to the UN and giving an embarrassingly woeful presentation like Powell did would immediately put her above him.

    Isn’t it one of the jobs of the SOS to carry water for his boss?

    I assume you’re judging that on more than this incident?

    Sure, I’m looking at the totality of her work (so far) and our relations with the rest of the world and I don’t see the direction you see. I saw her fail in bringing Russia and China to the Syria table or in curbing China’s ambitions in the South China Sea making her neighbors (our allies) very nervous. She was ambivalent about Libya and had to be brought (along with her boss) to the adult table. In the Egyptian transition she is seen as a friend and supporter of Mubarak. Bush was able to mid wife 3 UN security resolutions against Iran, Hillary only one, and even though we were told Obama’s reaching out to the mullah’s would bare fruit, the only thing he has really done is give waivers to American companies in doing business with Iran, as they continue their goal of a nuclear weapon. The only country Hillary has been stern with is Israel, (our friend), that and blabbing about their preparations for an Iranian attack. Oh, and not standing the Brits in their Falklands dispute.

    Obama is probably more popular with the people of the world then Bush, but that whole reset nonsense was pie in the sky. Hillary pegged Obama as a lightweight internationally, nothing has changed.

    Thumb up 5

  6. Seattle Outcast

    1) As much as I’d like to slam on Hillary just because she’s Hillary, I can’t really complain about her tenure as secretary of state

    2) I realized that I don’t give a fuck about the middle east any longer. Basically, I think I’ve just given up on the area and decided that they can go about being little uncivilized twits all they want as long as they know we’ll nuke them back into the stone age if they give us cause.

    Thumb up 1

  7. Mississippi Yankee

    I’ve been somewhat puzzled by the gleeful reaction to Hillary Clinton’s motorcade being pelted with shoes and tomatoes in Egypt. Is anti-Americanism a good thing now?

    They weren’t shouting “Down with America” they were screaming “MONICA”. They are much less enamored with ‘Herfilthiness’ than you. Perhaps the Conspiracy is yours.

    Plus, if the US had backed it’s mid-east ally Mubarak and affected human rights changes with political arm twisting we wouldn’t be having this conversation, right?

    Thumb up 1

  8. richtaylor365

    I wasn’t bagging on Hillary just because she is Hillary (she would have made a better president that the current occupier) and I know Hal did not label her as a “great” SOS, she is no Kissenger, Baker, Shultz, Marshall or Acheson, but just like the MSM is enamored with our wealth re distributor and places him higher among his peers then warranted, I think they do the same thing with Hillary. Sure, she is competent, but no more effective then say Madeline Albright.

    Thumb up 1

  9. Poosh

    Hilary is ok, she would have made an ok president in the scheme of things. She’s really tied down though and I don’t think she’s got much freedom. I do call BS on the entire story. These idiots have no one to blame but themselves. They’re burning churches and raping like muthafuckers. Fuck them. Let Egypt burn. Had the US tried to stop the brotherhood, they’d still be whining like the worthless bitches they are. And Obama OBVIOUSLY has a pro-Islamic agenda. Whether this is out of stupidity, ignorance of Islam, or political-correctness, I don’t know – or maybe his socialist roots, seeing as diehard socialists have a weird relationship with Islamism, seeing it as a good way to get rid of capitalism (so naive).

    Calling Newt ignorant is VERY dangerous. You better damn well support that. In that economist article the economist’s experts are actually spouting ignorant fantasy bullshit about Muslim Spain. Newt at a glance probably correct. He has certainly been accurate when speaking about Islam before.

    And I am disgusted that you mentioned Pam Geller in the same sentence as Michael Moore. I grant you sometimes she jumps the gun and posts articles she’s emailed without bothering to fact check, but she’s not making bloody documentaries and cutting different speeches of Charlton Heston to make him say something he never said. She’s one of the lone fighters in the US who actually understands what’s happening in the world.

    And god help ANYONE who is reading that shitfest Little Green Footballs.

    Thumb up 4

  10. Poosh

    I’ve seen Newt sit with the late leftist/liberal Christopher Hitchens and hold his own and actually come off better. It is a HORRIBLE SHAME he was undisciplined and unhinged during the nominations (as Ann Coulter predicted).

    Thumb up 2

  11. Kimpost

    An actual Pamela Geller fan. How sad…

    I’ve seen Newt sit with the late leftist/liberal Christopher Hitchens and hold his own and actually come off better.

    Where, and on what?

    Thumb up 2

  12. balthazar

    Kim, why the FUCK are you so goddamn lazy you cant even type into bing or google….

    Newt vs Hitchens

    Wow look at the links all fucking over. L A Z Y.

    And NO im not going to link the results, type the shit into a search engine for fuck sakes.

    Thumb up 4

  13. Kimpost

    I did google it (don’t use bing), but didn’t find anything fitting the description. All I could find was a discussion on the war on terror featuring the two of them, but since they were pretty much in agreement in that particular one, I’m hoping for a link. Or an elaboration.

    P.S. On laziness. I’m a liberal, you know how lazy we are.

    Thumb up 1

  14. Poosh

    As if you have a f*cking clue about Pam Gellar, Kimpost, Bet you think she’s “islamophobic” or some shit, now THAT’S sad.

    And lucky enough, I have the link saved in my faves in easy access, as a fan of the late Hitchens brother

    Thumb up 3

  15. Poosh

    I mean Pam Fucking Gellar is one of the only people out there pointing out you have MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD etc and other enemies, pretending to be “moderate” and being invited to consultations and even more, on counter terror. Dito in the UK, while we’re at it.

    Most of you aren’t fit to lick her fucking boots.

    Thumb up 2

  16. richtaylor365

    Good video, Poosh, thanks for sharing, although it did open up that whole What If with Newt, what the hell happened and how such a sharp intellect could have stumbled so badly on the campaign trial.

    And we are all diminished to a degree not having Hitchens around anymore.

    Thumb up 2

  17. Poosh

    I think the problem with Newt is basically the “Ann Coulter is usually right 90% of the time” factor. Everything she said about Newt seemed to turn out right in the end. Undisciplined, unlikable by those close to him, hot-headed, etc. Shame really, he’s bloody impressive when he’s in his stride.

    Thumb up 2

  18. Seattle Outcast

    Ann Coulter can be right 100% of the time and she’d still be a polarizing, annoying, pain in the ass.

    She’s a prime example of the messenger being confused with the message.

    Thumb up 0

  19. CM

    In what way, in his later years, was Hitchens a leftist/liberal?

    And we are all diminished to a degree not having Hitchens around anymore.

    So true.

    And Obama OBVIOUSLY has a pro-Islamic agenda.

    Yes, coming out in support of gay marriage is obviously a key part of assisting that agenda.

    Thumb up 0

  20. CM

    Hillary pegged Obama as a lightweight internationally, nothing has changed.

    How does Romney stack up? Can anyone argue he’s anything other than a lightweight?

    Sullivan:

    I suspect that visceral xenophobia, end-times theology and Cold War nostalgia are so strong in the GOP’s base that Romney – who is an instrument of that base – will reflexively back war and invasion and global polarization over Obama’s more classically conservative approach to foreign affairs.

    http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/07/would-romney-go-to-war.html

    I saw her fail in bringing Russia and China to the Syria table

    I don’t see how that would be possible. By anyone. Do you, honestly?

    or in curbing China’s ambitions in the South China Sea making her neighbors (our allies) very nervous.

    By doing what?

    She was ambivalent about Libya and had to be brought (along with her boss) to the adult table.

    Ambivalent, or waiting to see how things played out a little more before reacting? What would eliminate the later from being the reality?

    In the Egyptian transition she is seen as a friend and supporter of Mubarak.

    Yet apparently it was Clinton who came up with the idea of sending Frank Wisner, U.S. ambassador to Egypt in the 1980’s, to Cairo to deliver Obama’s pointed request that Mubarak not seek a new term as the country’s leader. And it was Clinton who was dispatched to appear on five Sunday morning shows to send a not-so-subtle message to the tottering dictator that the time had come for a “peaceful transition to real democracy,” not Mubarak’s “faux democracy.”

    “Hillary knows Mubarak is a dictator, and they aren’t close friends,” says a former top U.S. diplomat with ties to Obama.

    “Mubarak needs to be shown a path out of this, and Hillary’s trying to find a way to do that,” added the official, who says Clinton also is sharing her experience with other Mideast leaders who may be facing similar upheaval. “She knows a lot of these people on a personal level.”

    So yeah, why wouldn’t you use your personal experience with these people, an experience which tells you which might be the most effective way to proceed.

    Bush was able to mid wife 3 UN security resolutions against Iran, Hillary only one, and even though we were told Obama’s reaching out to the mullah’s would bare fruit, the only thing he has really done is give waivers to American companies in doing business with Iran, as they continue their goal of a nuclear weapon.

    The fact that only one UN resultion has been passed against Iran during the Obama administration’s term is an example of the world finding out that the different approach being promised was horseshit?
    Simply by not basing foreign policy on “visceral xenophobia, end-times theology and Cold War nostalgia” is pretty close to pushing a ‘reset’ button.

    The only country Hillary has been stern with is Israel, (our friend), that and blabbing about their preparations for an Iranian attack.

    Only if you see anything other than staunchly unconditional support for everything Israel does as how things should always be. I think moving ever so slightly away from that is significantly more in-line with the majority of the rest of the world (whether you personal agree with it or not).

    Oh, and not standing the Brits in their Falklands dispute.

    Now THAT is weird.

    Thumb up 0

  21. Kimpost

    As if you have a f*cking clue about Pam Gellar, Kimpost, Bet you think she’s “islamophobic” or some shit, now THAT’S sad.

    What makes you think that I don’t have a clue? She’s on my watch list over despicable Islamo fear mongerers who either thinks, or just spouts (for whatever reason), that we are “in a war of civilizations”, a war “the naive apologetic and socialist us (the west) is about to loose, because we don’t take the threat seriously enough”. Pathetic, IMHO…

    That would be the same kind of people who tend to think that Breivik was right in his analysis of the situation, but just happened to have a nutty solution.

    And lucky enough, I have the link saved in my faves in easy access, as a fan of the late Hitchens brother

    I saw that video, but I didn’t see much need for Newt holding his own. They weren’t exactly debating from separate sides, were they?

    I mean Pam Fucking Gellar is one of the only people out there pointing out you have MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD etc and other enemies, pretending to be “moderate” and being invited to consultations and even more, on counter terror. Dito in the UK, while we’re at it.

    Most of you aren’t fit to lick her fucking boots.

    Yes, she’s brilliant, according to you. A pathetic hater according to me. “Most of us aren’t fit licking her boots…” Fuck, you’re funny! :)

    Thumb up 2

  22. richtaylor365

    How does Romney stack up? Can anyone argue he’s anything other than a lightweight?

    He might by just as disappointing and amateurish as Obama, but at least we do know that he will put America first. He is not one of these “world citizens” first and an American second, he is not one who’s first reaction is to apologize and equivocate on America’s actions and place in the world, he is not one who talks down American exceptionalism so that the rest of the world can feel good about itself, he is not one of those blame America first types. I’m sure you disagree with the box I’ve put around Obama, noted.

    Sullivan:

    Say no more, if you believe one ounce of this nonsense then you are as nuts as he is. Nice objective source btw.

    I don’t see how that would be possible. By anyone. Do you, honestly?

    I honestly expect our side to be better negotiators, to at least get something out of the deal. I see her giving up the farm with these two and getting nothing in return.

    By doing what?

    You haven’t been paying attention to that area of the world?

    Ambivalent, or waiting to see how things played out a little more before reacting?

    This was not a criticism of Hillary, per se, ME affairs are always murky and treacherous, only that she changed course several times and was “led” to the ultimate action, she did not lead in any way.

    “Hillary knows Mubarak is a dictator, and they aren’t close friends,” says a former top U.S. diplomat with ties to Obama.

    From your own link that you got this from:

    But proximity has its perils. In a 2009 interview with Al Arabiya television, Clinton defended the relationship with the Egyptian president and his wife when asked about human rights abuses by the Mubarak regime, saying, “I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family. So I hope to see him often here in Egypt and in the United States.”

    The people of Egypt remember who her pals were. I did not say she was not acting proper now or doing her level best to calm the storm. And what she said on all those Sunday shows does not speak to actions done back channel. You can bet your ass, them being such good friends, that they talked often, despite what that administration official would have us believe.

    Simply by not basing foreign policy on “visceral xenophobia, end-times theology and Cold War nostalgia” is pretty close to pushing a ‘reset’ button.

    Wow, that was weird.

    Now THAT is weird.

    I’ll say, considering the special relationship and affection we share with England, you would think we would have treated them better, very weird.

    Thumb up 2

  23. Poosh

    What makes you think that I don’t have a clue? She’s on my watch list over despicable Islamo fear mongerers who either thinks,

    SO YOU DON’T HAVE A F*CKING CLUE. Do you? Do you? Too worked up over this disgusting, puerile ignorance to read any further than that. Makes me sick.

    Thumb up 0

  24. ilovecress

    Poosh could you educate me up about this chick, as I don’t really know her much past the ‘Islamification of America’ stuff, and a few Birther things.

    From Wiki:

    Controversial postings on Atlas Shrugs include:[57][58] accusations that Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan cited German socialists who supported Nazi ideology in her Princeton thesis (accompanied by a mock-up photograph of her in a Nazi uniform),[1][59] a video suggesting that some Muslims have sex with goats, a doctored photo showing President Obama urinating on an American flag[12] and false claims that Obama’s mother was involved in pornography and that Obama “was involved with a crack whore in his youth”.

    Now I may be being polluted by the liberal media – but she does seem a little bit obsessed with the coming Isalmic horde, doesn’t she?

    Thumb up 0

  25. CM

    He might by just as disappointing and amateurish as Obama, but at least we do know that he will put America first. He is not one of these “world citizens” first and an American second, he is not one who’s first reaction is to apologize and equivocate on America’s actions and place in the world, he is not one who talks down American exceptionalism so that the rest of the world can feel good about itself, he is not one of those blame America first types. I’m sure you disagree with the box I’ve put around Obama, noted.

    Yes, as you’ve guessed, I disagree. Like much of the world. And isn’t it ‘the world’ that we’re talking about? That’s your premise that I’m disagreeing with. To me (like many many others) he hasn’t put America second at all. Improving America’s engagement with the world is a far better long-term strategy for America. I can’t see how the previous style was putting America first in the long run. The whole ‘apology’ narrative strikes me as a bit silly. And anyway, as I say, it’s the world we’re talking about. Your opinion about what the world thinks is the relevant thing here.

    Say no more, if you believe one ounce of this nonsense then you are as nuts as he is. Nice objective source btw.

    Sigh, I thought you were above this rubbish. Didn’t you just link yesterday to an opinion piece from Heritage? WTF?
    Source? It’s very clearly an opinion. I’m not bringing any facts to the table with that link. It’s an argument.
    But sure, just dismiss an opinion because of where that opinion comes from. Fine.

    I honestly expect our side to be better negotiators, to at least get something out of the deal. I see her giving up the farm with these two and getting nothing in return.

    What in the (failed, vetoed) resolution was akin to ‘giving up the farm’?
    What could have been negotiated with China and Russia without giving up the farm’?

    You haven’t been paying attention to that area of the world?

    Pretend that I know everything you know. Now, by doing what? Making threats?

    This was not a criticism of Hillary, per se, ME affairs are always murky and treacherous, only that she changed course several times and was “led” to the ultimate action, she did not lead in any way.

    I guess I’d need to look into the facts/opinions that led you to this view to really decide whether I agree or not. I’m happy to just assume you might be right.

    The people of Egypt remember who her pals were. I did not say she was not acting proper now or doing her level best to calm the storm. And what she said on all those Sunday shows does not speak to actions done back channel. You can bet your ass, them being such good friends, that they talked often, despite what that administration official would have us believe.

    For sure. It must have been quite awkward for her. personally. But in terms of your original premise, Egypt isn’t “the rest of the world”. I don’t see that the “rest of the world” (which is what we are talking about) saw her and the administation in a negative way when it came to how to handle that situation. It might not have been a ‘reset’, but then it wasn’t exactly a specific situation that came up often during the Bush terms of office so it’s hard to compare.

    Wow, that was weird.

    You obviously don’t agree that it’s in any way an accurate description of the GOP base that Romney has to satisfy?

    I’ll say, considering the special relationship and affection we share with England, you would think we would have treated them better, very weird.

    Yep.
    I haven’t looked into the details of the Obama admin explanation, so can’t factor that into an opinion.

    Thumb up 0

  26. Poosh

    The wiki page part you quote is full of sad little smears on behalf of the scum who wrote it. Little Green Footballs, which used to be a good blog ten years ago, often has a big role to play, using Pam as a scapegoat for the “look at me, I’m a conservative with feelings, just like liberals!” crowd.

    She does link to pics for fun (she also links to music etc and movies) so her blog, though concerned with Islamism and the war on terror and the real root causes, is also fun for her. I believe one of the Obama type pictures were posted by her as a group of photos from some contest etc. She did not create the photo, they were humour – but of course the scum will always try to take the context away. Generally those smears are false, where the smear has taken a poor-taste picture – often just a repost – and decided that it was a serious piece of work, despite it being stated as “just for shit and giggles”. That being said she gets things wrong sometimes and is overexcited, far from perfect.

    She is obsessed because she is correct to be. Obsessed with defending her country (and others). Her and Robert Spencer’s work have been very valuable in dismissing the myth that Islam is “just another religion”. She is constantly labeled a Muslim hater despite constantly pointing out she has no problem with the average Muslim on the street who holds liberal views, and disgust at the amount of normal muslims killed by Islamists. But that doesn’t matter to the scum who want to smear her and call her “a hater” etc. She’s one of the few people who like to inform you of the actual massive kill count Islamists score every month – the majority of victims are Muslims themselves. If she hates Muslims she would not be condemning these acts or calling them atrocities (something fuckwits who think she is a racist or a hater of all things Islamic just for the sake of it, can’t work out).

    She is a very busy woman though, and tends to post on her blog a lot of content that she does not view herself, emailed to her by readers (a few are indeed racist, but far less than say the Guardian newspaper). She doesn’t check her sources sometimes for her website, as she doesn’t seem to maintain it very well (she isn’t really a blogger anymore, and her blog seems to be more a rush job these days). She makes mistakes, for example she gave – originally – support to the dubious UK group the “English Defence League” who used anti-Islamist language but in part were actually mere racists and working-class thugs, pretending to have an anti-Islamist agenda. She did, I believe, correct this mistake but it took time – as often real patriots who understand the Islamist threat are smeared as racist or mad (and even taken to court). Other bloggers have not paid attention to her posts and taken her reposting of other author’s posts (as many bloggers do) as her own. Sometimes she does not make this clear and brings it on herself (though she always supplies a link).

    I’ve sometimes thought she was going too far and been proved wrong (the Muslim rape-rackets in the UK turned out to be correct, however at the time I thought she was being silly in highlighting a small number of Muslim(ic?) rapists when the majority of rapists are white, atheist etc. But in the years that followed she was proved correct.

    What she does do is simply use the word “Muslim” and “Islam” when Islamist or Extremist might be more politically correct or sensitive (if you’re a liberal Muslim, it’s pretty offensive imo to see it phrased like that). This is a concern as she is not speaking of “all muslims” when she says “Muslim” but extremist Muslims, who she also, accurately, calls “devout Muslims”.

    I could just rant on about her but will stop. This is her blog.

    There ARE some obvious racists on her comments section, but she rarely reads the comments or moderates them. Unfortunate. Many people simply absorb selective bits from her blog to feed their racism, ignoring everything else she says.

    As for Elena Kagan, decide for yourself. But the photo seems apt to me. More info here. Up to you to decide if you can tell much about someone from their undergrad thesis. 50/50 imo, depends from person to person.

    There is a large story and vast information to take in when talking about her. But people really just want to say “omgz, I am not like a racist, I have no problem with Islam ’cause I’m not a racist! I’m not like this person who I’ve arbitrarily decided is a racist cause Media Matters told me so” credentials.

    And her warnings about Islamist infection of counter-terrorism apply to the UK just as much and has been confirmed by other authors.

    Thumb up 0

  27. richtaylor365

    Sigh, I thought you were above this rubbish

    What rubbish is that? Discounting a bias source because it is bias?

    just dismiss an opinion because of where that opinion comes from. Fine.

    Don’t we all pretty much do this? Don’t you do this all the time? Seriously

    What in the (failed, vetoed) resolution was akin to ‘giving up the farm’?

    Gee, how about the 7 Alaskan Islands he gave away, the missile defense secrets he gave away, the knuckling under to remove ground base interceptors in Poland or the radar installations in the Czech Republic, all to placate Moscow, or the Start Treaty, all farm give aways.

    You obviously don’t agree that it’s in any way an accurate description of the GOP base that Romney has to satisfy?

    No, I don’t. Come on CM, I know you view your role here as devil’s advocate and to be provocative but you really in your heart of hearts can’t believe all that happy horseshit,” visceral xenophobia, end-times theology and Cold War nostalgia are so strong in the GOP’s base”, is that really how you view the GOP?

    Thumb up 1

  28. CM

    And her warnings about Islamist infection of counter-terrorism apply to the UK just as much and has been confirmed by other authors.

    Oh well, there we go then, if other authors have confirmed the infection…….case closed.

    Thumb up 0

  29. Section8

    Hal

    The Left insisted for years that it was only Bush’s incompetence which caused us to be hated.

    CM

    WTF? I don’t think so. Bush was just the icing on the cake.

    Yeah, I agree. I said it for years when fuckheads from European countries and leftists here at home came on this site, and other media and continually shit talked about America. The anti-Americanism had deep roots prior to Bush. Our only ignorance was assuming our allies were allies. I can guarantee you the hate toward our friends across the pond was virtually non existent compared to the hate towards us. This stupid American learned his lesson though. Glad to see we agree on something. Too bad the anti-American left are running the show now. So I won’t shed too may tears over some thrown tomatoes other than that they could be put to better use being eaten. Shoes? Well they can still use them after.

    Hal, sorry man, but the base who backed this government of ours hates this country, so I don’t find it anti -American at all if someone tells them to fuck off.

    Thumb up 2

  30. CM

    What rubbish is that? Discounting a bias source because it is bias?

    Outright dismissal of an opinion (not wanting to discuss the opinion) simply because it comes from someone you think is nuts (for reasons I’m certainly be interested in exploring elsewhere).
    I really don’t understand your sourcing rules/regs/expectations. Who cares where it comes from, it’s not a ‘fact’ to dispute (if it was, and it wasn’t being claimed elsewhere, then the quality of the source is absolutely relevant). You can pretend I said it gets us over the ‘source’ hurdle.

    Don’t we all pretty much do this? Don’t you do this all the time? Seriously

    No way, I try hard to play the ball and not the man (I could claim “I don’t” but then someone will no doubt link to somewhere I did). I think it’s really important. It’s the arguments that matter, not where they come from. Wouldn’t you agree?

    Gee, how about the 7 Alaskan Islands he gave away, the missile defense secrets he gave away, the knuckling under to remove ground base interceptors in Poland or the radar installations in the Czech Republic, all to placate Moscow, or the Start Treaty, all farm give aways.

    You’ve immediately turned a specific point about Syria into a general issue about negotiating. Now the discussion on this aspect makes no sense.

    These islands?

    The missile defence secret thing seems a little murky (and likely to involve oversimplification and politics). Do you know for sure what ‘secrets’ he ‘gave away’?
    Yes yes, I know, he lies to America and tells truths to Russia, because he hates America so.

    No, I don’t. Come on CM, I know you view your role here as devil’s advocate and to be provocative but you really in your heart of hearts can’t believe all that happy horseshit,” visceral xenophobia, end-times theology and Cold War nostalgia are so strong in the GOP’s base”, is that really how you view the GOP?

    Based on what the right-wing pundity dishes up on a daily basis, and Presidential candidates put up, it’s not far off. It’s quite nutty.

    Thumb up 0

  31. CM

    Glad to see we agree on something.

    Ah, no, I don’t agree with any of that really. But then I know you know that. Otherwise you wouldn’t have actively pointed it out.
    Much of the whole anti-American and un-American thing (in terms of labelling people with those terms) seems completely juvenile and I think it’s largely a cop-out way of avoiding the issues. It also usually indicates someone who is unable to accept that others sincerely hold views they don’t agree with. I think it’s pretty much the bottom of the barrel. It’s so overplayed and so ridiculously used that it’s become meaningless. You might as start doing Nazi comparisons.

    To clarify, I’m not talking about foreign anti-Americanism in the Middle East and elsewhere. I’m talking about using it on other Americans (like Obama, and the Democratic base who voted for him).

    Thumb up 0

  32. richtaylor365

    Outright dismissal of an opinion (not wanting to discuss the opinion) simply because it comes from someone you think is nuts

    And you don’t do the same when someone posts something penned by Coulter, Beck, or Limbaugh, besides, we did discuss it, didn’t we? total lack of substance and objectivity notwithstanding.

    It’s the arguments that matter, not where they come from. Wouldn’t you agree?

    Well, lets see, an opinion bomb thrower throws around pejoratives like visceral xenophobia, end-times theology and Cold War nostalgia (gee, how did he leave out racist homophobic new earth creationists, he must be off his game) and you compare this tripe, this idiot to Heritage, a think tank staffed by dozens of PHDed policy wonks, that is about the biggest leap you ever made here.

    You’ve immediately turned a specific point about Syria into a general issue about negotiating. Now the discussion on this aspect makes no sense.

    Ah, no, the discussion was about Hillary and how effective she is as a SOS, remember?

    .

    Do you know for sure what ‘secrets’ he ‘gave away’?

    For sure? No, I don’t have that kind of clearance. But there are numerous links out there that discuss it:

    http://moonbattery.com/?p=6509
    http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/03/exclusive-us-offers-secret-data-for-russia-missile-shield-approval.html
    http://news.investors.com/article/597158/201201091847/obama-gives-russia-missile-defense-secrets.htm

    And throwing Poland and the Czech Republic under the bus was not insignificant. The Poles and the Czechs were none to happy about this:

    ‘Poles and Czechs voiced deep concern Friday at President Barack Obama’s decision to scrap a Bush-era missile defense shield planned for their countries.

    “Betrayal! The U.S. sold us to Russia and stabbed us in the back,” the Polish tabloid Fakt declared on its front page.

    Polish President Lech Kaczynski said he was concerned that Obama’s new strategy leaves Poland in a dangerous “gray zone” between Western Europe and the old Soviet sphere.

    Yes yes, I know, he lies to America and tells truths to Russia, because he hates America so.

    Reductio Ad Absurdum, now you are just getting sloppy.

    it’s not far off. It’s quite nutty.

    Too bad you believe this nonsense, it makes further discussions on the matter rather pointless.

    Thumb up 2

  33. Poosh

    Why are we Brits still dying in a war that America has now decided it’s going to arbitrarily end at a random point?

    And yes, Obama does seem to tell the truth to Putin. He was caught doing it. I have no idea why you Americans haven’t called for Obama’s blood. To sit there and tell a boarder line foe to not give me a hard time as its election year, and afterwards you’ll get what you want (as if he hasn’t already thrown the little euros under the bus) beggars belief – but he can get away with this shit, because the media are with him. And he has an army of drones to support him (human drones).

    Wasn’t it a convenient leak that made obama look “good” that messed up and endangered a UK intelligence outfit recently. Just to make obama look good. ‘course he had nuttin’ to do with it, eh?

    Thumb up 1

  34. CM

    And you don’t do the same when someone posts something penned by Coulter, Beck, or Limbaugh,

    No. At the end of the day it’s the argument that matters, not where it comes from.
    Again, I don’t understand your rule/theory on sources.
    Heritage is a clearly political and biased source, if someone linked there to confirm a ‘fact’ I’d go looking to another source. If an argument is being made and someone links to a Heritage page because some PHD genius says it better than they could, that’s fine.

    Your links (e.g the article quoted in Pam Gellar’s entry) confirm that it’s slightly more complex than “Obama just giving away secrets”. When I say ‘slightly’ I mean considerably.

    The Polish/Czech links don’t work for me (second one does but not the one to the primary source).

    <blockquoteToo bad you believe this nonsense,

    How else to explain the nutty behaviour of the GOP and the candidates. Are you suggesting the candidates don’t accurately represent the GOP base?

    Thumb up 0

  35. CM

    Why are we Brits still dying in a war that America has now decided it’s going to arbitrarily end at a random point

    ?

    Plenty of you died in Iraq, a war America decided to arbitrarily start at a random point. Presumably that was acceptable.

    Thumb up 0