Remember all of those anti-war and anti-Bush Democrats from just two years ago? Remember all of their treasonous accusatons of war crimes and mortal deceit? Well, where are they now while their own beloved President, conceived in messianism and cultural redemption, routinely wages war on Pakistan with drones and CIA operations of every kind —just like that terrible braggart from Texas? These hippie users are mostly silent. And because they are they are shown for what they were under the previous Administration, which was a bunch of liars denouncing the War for Iraq and the War against Islamofascism, in general, for purely partisan reasons and not because they were genuinely opposed. What else would explain their silence now if not their common partisanship with this President?
And go get a sense of where the Chosen One has been on the issue of the “good war” in Afghanistan. He has no heart for it and everyone knows that now, thanks to his own authorization of Bob Woodward to do his latest leaky treatment of the Presidency.
Aren’t the nationalist elements in Pakistan eventually going to tire of this un-secret war Obama is prosecuting on their land and do something to retaliate? Don’t the Democrats know that their great savior is expanding the war? Where are all of those warnings and useless pop-psychologizing that the hippies used to issue that every word to come out of Bushitler’s mouth was just giving the jihadis more reason to come at us? Are those uselss old anti-war bromides no longer valid?
Watch Pakistan carefully. Obama has had his eye on that country for a long time now. He’d best make sure he knows what to do next if he takes the tiger by the tail.
Word on the street is that the White House gave NBC/MSNBC extra access and privileges to play up the withdrawal last week of what was nominally the last American combat brigade from Iraq. Why would they do this? Because most people don’t stop to consider that Obamajesus is a creation of Big Media and that it behooves them all to keep up the fluffery for his profoundly incompetent regime. Thus, we have a President who once denounced the War for Iraq and who derided those whose policies made success possible there now not only taking the credit for it, but relying even more heavily on his predecessor’s top guys. What a miserable hypocrite Barack Hussein Obama is.
Incidentally, there are still more than 50,000 American servicemen and women in Iraq. Do they not have means of self-defense and weapons of offense? Are they still not in great danger? The war isn’t over for them. So what occasioned such heavy coverage from NBC? What was that all about, anyhow?
Paul Mirengoff at the Power Line writes:
The Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at President Bush has been sentenced to three years in prison. The sentence seems harsh to me (a fine might have been sufficient), but I’m the last person who would presume to judge a great Arab culture.
I agree that the sentence is too harsh, but it would also give George W. Bush an opportunity to make a public appeal to Iraqi clemency. I think that would be a wonderful gesture —and emblematic of Bush’s essential goodness of character.
Looks like the Joe and Valerie Wilson Show hit another dead end today:
WASHINGTON, Aug 12 (Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday dismissed former CIA analyst Valerie Plame’s lawsuit against Vice President Dick Cheney and several former Bush administration officials for disclosing her identity to the public.
The Court of Appeals in Washington dealt another setback to the former spy, who has said her career was destroyed when officials blew her cover in 2003 to retaliate against her husband, Iraq war critic Joseph Wilson.
But it was Joe and Valerie who destroyed her CIA career by exploiting the opportunity she got him through her employment to try to publicly undermine the President’s case for war against a legitimate enemy. They doubled down on their stupidity with their disloyal liberal crap —and it’s gotten them nothing but the good opinion of people whose judgement isn’t worth the third bar piss of the night. People like the lunatic Larry Johnson and the anti-car tosser Duncan Black.
Guess it’s off to Hef’s mansion now, eh?
Since Obama and his surrogates concede that he has no foreign policy experience to run on, they are obligated to say that he has the “right judgement” instead, which is a subjective dodge. But since the legend of this superior judgement is almost always invoked with regard to the War for Iraq, aren’t journalists obligated to ask Obama why he believes a non-decision about a war made almost six years ago constitutes a relevant and timely demonstration of his “right judgement”? He can’t keep going back to that well when his actual decisions about Iraq have subsequently been proven wrong.
Obama may think that he will lead us and the world into a new age of unicorns and rainbows, but he is a dumb bastard to not understand that Presidents inherit real circumstances and accomplished facts. We went into Iraq for more reasons than weapons of mass murder. It’s way past time for him and the godforsaken dolts who support him to acquaint themselves with some of those causes.
Peter Wehner responds to Andrew Sullivan’s response to him. It’s all very meta, of course, but this much is devastating:
The main points of my post on Obama and Iraq are ones Andrew never really addresses; namely, that (a) Senator Obama was profoundly wrong in his opposition to the surge and his predictions of what would come to pass; (b) if Obama’s plan had been implemented, America would have almost unquestionably suffered a terrible defeat in Iraq by now (not to mention mass death and probably genocide in Iraq); and (c) Obama has been intellectually dishonest in his refusal to acknowledge, until only recently (and grudgingly), progress in Iraq. In that sense, Obama has been in a state of denial and the embodiment of the kind of rigid ideologue of which he claims to be the antithesis. Those points are ones I think Andrew, at his best and at his most intellectually honest, would concede.
Cults rob people of their integrity —and then their dignity.
Peter Wehner unloads on the Eleven Percenters’ Democratic half with respect to the success of the surge in the War for Iraq. The Democrats, he concludes:
have compounded their initial bad judgment about the surge with reckless obstinacy. As ethno-sectarian violence in Iraq rapidly declined, as al Qaeda absorbed tremendous military blows, and as political accommodation and legislative achievements have emerged, Democrats, rather than welcoming the progress, grew agitated. They embraced with religious zeal the belief that the Iraq war was lost; they therefore viewed the success of the surge as a terribly inconvenient development, one they sought to deny to the point that they looked silly and out of touch. Worse, Democrats acted as if they had a vested interest in an American defeat.
Rarely has a political party been so uniformly wrong, in such an obvious way, on such an important matter. And when Americans cast their vote on November 4, they should carefully consider how Barack Obama and the entire Democratic party fought ferociously and relentlessly to undermine a policy that has worked extraordinarily well and may yet prove to be among the most successful military plans in modern times.
Not only are the Democrats defeatists, but they have nominated an unqualified liar for the ostensible reason that he —and not Hillary— will act on his promise to them to end the war. But now that the war has already been won in large measure because of a commitment to victory and to political stability that Obama repeatedly denied our military could ever accomplish, what is he to say? Who knows? No one cares because it isn’t what he has to say that’s so damned mesmerizing, but how he says it. It’s all so Kennedyesque and wonderful and epochal in its significance.
Enjoy telling our troops in Iraq that they have accomplished nothing. Make a mockery of the very idea of leadership by turning this little junket of yours into a Big Media suckfest. Go and give us a speech on peace before a Prussian war memorial, Barry. Who says you have no sense of humor?
Barry, when the only thing that would validate your position on the War for Iraq, insofar as you could be said to have one, is the sudden escalation of violence there, particularly aginst our troops, it would be best for you to come to terms with reality and tell the hippies in your party to shut up and sit down. The war is won —if we choose to leave there on terms that serve our wider strategic interests in the region. If we withdraw in such a way that reawakens the hostile elements in Iraq just because you want to keep to some arbitrary date (a “date certain,” indeed), then you will have squandered what has been won at great cost for mere political purposes. Nobody oughta give a damn what your anti-military/anti-war party says about what Iraq really is and what we’re accomplishing there because all Iraq has ever been to you is a fundraising cause. Lots of Democrats supported the war in the beginning because Iraq had been festering for years. Even Bill Clinton knew Iraq was a danger —and officially endorsed regime change in Iraq as the policy of this country. But you’re to the left of them all. You’re supposedly better than them all because of your “superior” judgement —but that’s garbage and you know it. Right now, because of your lack of judgement and your lack of integrity, you are allowing yourself to be bullied by the anti-war Left for fear of offending them when you know that we have succeeded in Iraq. Your judgement is apparently inferior to those you have long insulted as incompetent. What are you going to be saying to the troops? Are you going to look them in the eye and tell them that they haven’t accomplished anything and that their sacrifices have been for naught? Do you have any optimism to share with a country thats democratic and free market future owes itself to our efforts there? I doubt it. But you’ll be sure to dispense platitudes like the soft soap of your ideology. The Eurofreaks will eat it up and the nauseating propagandists travelling with you will coo and moan at your every utterance, but maybe there’s just enough of us still here in America who won’t buy your lies and are ready to call you on them every time.
So, let’s have it, tough guy. Let’s see you shock and awe the Democratic Party with the news they haven’t bothered to hear —which is that we have succeeded in Iraq and have made a better world possible because of it. But let them down easy, Barry. You’re finally going to have to say something that matters. Don’t flub your lines.
Regarding Barry Hussein Obama’s latest lie —this time about Iraq— ABC News’ Rick Klein writes:
There’s been lots of speculation this week about whether Sen. Barack Obama has an Iraq problem. He does now.
His comments Thursday, saying that he will “continue to refine” his plan to withdraw combat troops from Iraq inside of 16 months, seems likely to leave the campaign on the defensive on this issue for days or weeks.
And it increases the likelihood that his trip to Iraq later this month will not turn out like Obama wants it to.
Well, Barry doesn’t even want to go to Iraq, but McCain has apparently shamed him into it. This horseshit about “refining” his position on the withdrawal of our troops makes Obama just another lying hack politician. Klein concludes:
Obama’s migration to the political center has been well-documented, and is already a frame McCain is building around his candidacy. But Iraq — this is qualitatively different, an issue that lives on a higher plane, since opposing the war was the rationale for his candidacy in the first place.
Being opposed to the war may have been a major selling point, but let’s not lie about Obama’s candidacy. He is where he is because of his race. Period. The Leftists have taken over the Democratic Party and have installed an absolute fucking clown on their Presidential ticket for the sake of identity politics.
Obama’s nomination is the final proof of the Democratic Party’s contempt for their own country.
David Ignatius, who is a respectable man and reporter, has some interesting observations on how America will end its time in Iraq:
The presidential campaign debate about Iraq, so far, has been a sterile one — implying that the choice is between an Obama solution of pulling out the troops and a McCain solution of staying the course and winning military victory. Neither alternative is realistic.
The right way out is something in between — ambiguous, messy, occasionally in the shadows — a course that recognizes Iraqi sovereignty but also works with care and cunning to protect America’s interests.
The purpose of our being in Iraq is to be in Iraq. There are many great rewards for our military’s sacrifices there in terms of diplomacy, intelligence, and commerce. Oh, and liberty and representative government for millions. This isn’t some colonial scheme. This is how we extend and sustain the Pax Americana. As long as the West has its dick in the Mohammedans’ mashed potatoes, everything will be fine.
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »