The American Spectator : Obama's Crazy War

Text Size

Obama’s Crazy War

By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. on 3.24.11 @ 6:08AM

What should he have done?

WASHINGTON – Well, it is official. The President of Bolivia, Evo Morales, has asked the Nobel Prize Committee to take back President Barack Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize owing to Obama’s missile strikes in Libya. The head of Russia’s Liberal Democratic Party, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, has also weighed in, and President Vladimir Putin is really in a snit. This is the best news Colonel Moammar Gaddafi has had in weeks.

President Obama, who ordered air strikes against Libya, and then took his wife and the girls on a sightseeing and official junket to South America, probably took little note of the Bolivian’s and Russians’ actions, but it does show how difficult it is to get “world opinion” behind the use of force even against a fla fla dictator like Gaddafi. There is more unease in the “world community.” Amr Moussa, the head of the Arab League, at first was for enforcing a “no-fly zone” over Libya. Now he is not so sure. The next thing you know he will be on Gaddafi’s side. World opinion can be volatile.

Progressives have long been in favor of One World vouchsafed by the United Nations. Henry Wallace, Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s second vice president and the 1948 presidential candidate for the Progressive Party, spoke of it often. On the campaign trail in 1948 he spoke of “jobs, peace, and freedom” that “can be attained together and make possible One World, prosperous and free, within our lifetime.” He too promised to coordinate policy through the United Nations. Had President Roosevelt died but six months earlier, America would have had this fantastico in the White House. As it was, in one last act of cunning for his country, Roosevelt maneuvered Wallace out of the vice presidency and Harry Truman in. Harry was green but he was not naïve. We came that close to Henry Wallace and his “Gideon’s Army” in the White House.

Now we have another progressive on the scene, and this one is in the White House. He sleeps in the very bed that Wallace sought, though Wallace got only 1,157,328 votes pursuant to the big bed at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. In the 1940s the Democratic Party was divided among diverse groups: the urban machines, the populists of the West, ethnic groups with roots behind the Iron Curtain, labor unions that were often staunchly anti-Communist. It was more difficult to get a left-wing loony through. Certainly it was difficult to get a left-wing loony through with no executive experience. Even Wallace had been vice president and secretary of commerce. In the homogeneous Democratic Party of today, Henry Wallace might have made it through a convention. Certainly a community leader from Chicago, Barack Obama could and he only had four years experience in national politics, two of those years spent on the campaign trail.

Now he has shown the progressive’s traditional impatience with our Constitutional process. He did not go to Congress to get a declaration or an authorization of war. He has no authorization from Congress to spend money on his no-fly zone. In fact he did not go to Congress at all. He went directly to the United Nations, seeking authority to act in Libya. There he was given the runaround for four days, while Libyans were dying.

What should he have done? I think Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, had a very good thought on this. According to him, President Obama should have first sought “a Congressional debate on a declaration of war under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.” Now, President Obama did not do this. He went over the Congress of the United States to the United Nations. He was more comfortable with “world opinion” and “the community of nations.” But now that community is breaking up. China and Russian are not with him. The lesser nations are in flux, and even military commanders in the coalition are uncertain. President Obama does not really know what is happening. I suggest he have another of his Beer Summits, this time with George W. Bush, though I would caution him to follow George’s custom and make it a Sarsaparilla Summit. Ask George, Mr. President, how he got the wisdom to go to Congress before going to war.

If there is no hero in this mess, there is at least an anti-hero and one of the first order, Colonel Gaddafi. He has proven that a tyrant spared the presence of a resolute leader in the White House can get away with murder. How unlucky for Saddam Hussein and, for that matter, Adolf Hitler that they did not have an Obama or a Wallace in the White House in their day.

About the Author

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. is the founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator. He is the author of The Death of Liberalism, published by Thomas Nelson Inc. His previous books include the New York Times bestseller Boy Clinton: the Political Biography; The Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton; The Liberal Crack-Up; The Conservative Crack-Up; Public Nuisances; The Future that Doesn’t Work: Social Democracy’s Failure in Britain; Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House; The Clinton Crack-Up; and After the Hangover: The Conservatives’ Road to Recovery.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (193) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Deborah D | 3.24.11 @ 6:34AM

How unlucky for us that we do have a Wallace in the presidency today...in more ways than just as commander-in-chief. I keep wondering how much more this country can take. How many body blows before we crumble.

Hey, Mr. Tyrrell, we need some uplifting commentary to help us see us through the end of the Obama malaise. Do you see any sunshine on the horizon? Sometimes I feel like running away screaming, but I know I must stand and fight the insanity that has taken over the executive branch (and the legislative branch under Wacky Nancy).

Just when you think they couldn't possibly do anything more to hurt the country, they manage to find a way.

chuck| 3.24.11 @ 7:14AM

The nightmare will be over in slightly less than two years, so hang on. Living through Carter was bad, not nearly like today, but Carter led to Reagan, and you know the rest of the story. Churchill once said that you can count on the American people to always do the right thing, usually after exhausting every other possibility!

Stephanie| 3.24.11 @ 7:48AM

But Chuck, I see so many progressives out there that will follow this barry fellow off the cliff. They are convinced he is the cat's *ss, wise, wonderful and intelligent and we are RACIST! I just hope there are more of us than them, who see that this emperor is indeed buck naked and will vote for the Republican candidate. I pray it is so.

Frisbee| 3.24.11 @ 12:47PM

Now Michael Moore is a racist, and the President of Bolivia is a racist, and the CEO of Starbucks is a racist. Eventually the only non-racist in the world will be Obama himself, and we'll all realize "hey, we're not racists, we hate Obama for his bad ideas and lack of character, not because he's half white".

ENOUGH ROPE| 3.24.11 @ 2:36PM

Obama obeys Soros.

Mike D.| 3.24.11 @ 2:56PM

That would be Uncle George in Obama's world!

ENOUGH ROPE| 3.24.11 @ 3:50PM

There should be no doubts about Soros' intentions to weaken America., Here is an article about his arranging a conference to remake the "...Entire Global Economy." He is quiet about the meeting.
http://www.mrc.org/bmi/comment.....onomy.html

ENOUGH ROPE| 3.24.11 @ 3:59PM

Above link was truncated.

Search "Unreported Soros Event Aims to Remake Entire Global Economy"

kai| 3.24.11 @ 6:15PM

I guess that would be the left wing version of the annual yet selective Koch brother's conference, remaking the global economy after their image and ordained by God for the righteous, of course.

beebop| 3.25.11 @ 5:38AM

Did I miss the report that the Koch brothers had manipulated the currency of a nation for their own benefit? Can you find me a link for that, please. Because here is the one about Soros and the English currency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Wednesday. It was hard to find one that wasn't either written by a source you would dispute or to read the spinnnnnnnnn of the uber left. What is it you have a problem with when it comes to the Koch brothers? And. Please make it something factual and not a cut and past from your email account.

wbheff| 3.24.11 @ 8:19AM

I hope the nightmare will be over in slightly less than two years, but I am far from certain that it will. I can foresee two very real possibilities: 1. Massive voter fraud on a scale heretofore unseen, including Black Panther and SEIU Thugs intimidating people attempting to vote, or, even worse, 2. A manufactured "crisis" to justify "postponing" the elections in 2012. Obama and his fellow traitors in the democrat party have show over and over again that they will ignore the law whenever they want to, so npothing would surprise me.

Ned| 3.24.11 @ 10:45AM

Your #1 is a very real threat... they practiced their moves in the Washington state governor's election, and perfected it putting that buffoon Franken in the Senate... #2 just won't happen... the manufactured crisis WILL, but even talking about postponing the election would lead to rebellion.

beebop| 3.25.11 @ 5:39AM

Early voting is the only way to make sure that you get to the polls and that your vote is counted. I highly recommend it.

squalis| 3.24.11 @ 8:37AM

If you want to get really depressed, and fearful for the future of this country, read the posts on just about any article on HuffPo. Some advice; take some Prozac first.

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 10:10AM

Chuck, I'm with the other responders to your post here - I have an awful feeling that Obama will be re-elected. Particularly if the GOP follows its usual course of nominating a loser determined to make liberals like him in 2012.

And despite greatly exaggerated rumors of the mainstream media's demise, cultural America is still in its thrall, notwithstanding the inroads made by conservative outlets in recent years (and many are wobbly in any case; just look at the execrable Bill O'Reilly, the jewel in Fox News's crown, to see the eventual fate of conservatism in America).

The false consciousness of liberalism, an existential evil that has assumed the pleasing disguise of Utopian fantasy for idealists and free lucre for the corrupt in order to dupe the masses, is thriving in this country. Don't kid yourself.

That is why there wasn't widespread outrage about what happened in Wisconsin, the naked thuggery of which should have opened the eyes of Kumba Ya lefties and social justice idealists alike. But it didn't.

To the contrary, each act of brutality at the hands of bloodthirsty leftists only emboldens the malleable, resentful rabble to move closer toward initiating a reign of terror against "the rich" that would put Robespierre to shame.

That's why Pelosi, Reid, Barney Frank, Dick Durbin, Anthony Weiner and countless other criminals, not the least of whom is our feckless, nihilistic, narcissistic piece of crap in chief, haven't been shamed, if not out of office entirely, at least into quashing their more destructive impulses.

America has hemorrhaged not just jobs, not just money, not just productivity. We've hemorrhaged character. And even if by some miracle the Republicans mounted a real leader in 2012, it's still too late.

We are over the cliff; we are Rome in its last days.

Teaghan| 3.24.11 @ 10:24AM

OOOPS! Gotta go! American Idol is on and then DWTS!
Not really, I don't watch either, but a great majority do. So, right before the election, the masses will awake from their TeeVee induced haze to come out and vote for who is best looking, who wears a suit the best or can promise them the moon. I am worried as well folks.

Ned| 3.24.11 @ 10:41AM

Watching O'Reilly's guy, Watters, the night before last, doing street interviews in New Yawk... the sheer ignorance of the people he talked to was just stunning... and they'll all vote Dim-O-crat come November, 2012... without a really stellar candidate (who, for example?) we are well and truly done for...

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 11:23AM

I saw that too. I was struck by the cheeful young woman who said the world would be a better place without conservatives.

Yeah. She seemed pretty well dressed, living in a very expensive city. So either capitalism supplied her with her little fantasy cocoon or else she works for the state, which leeches off of capitalism.

Either way, evil capitalism and the wealth it produces made her cushy, well coiffed, blissfully ignorant lifestyle possible. Perhaps she should go work on collective farm in her beloved Venezuela and live the dream of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" to experience the true joy of liberalism.

Or maybe she can stop making payments to the mob - oops, I mean the IRS.

Then DRed below or one of his partners in crime can come and visit his brand of "democracy" on her ass.

GavInTucson| 3.24.11 @ 10:52PM

I saw that too. The sheer ignorance is outstanding. It reminds me of Jay Leno's "Jaywalking."

Did you notice that robot that walked by yelling, "Fox Lies?" As usual, he couldn't point out a single instance. They're mindless I tell you, mindless.

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 10:45AM

Naked thuggery? Odd-I didn't see any injured victims. Doesn't thuggery usually result in injuries? Especially thuggery involving naked brutality and bloodthirsty leftists. Perhaps people would take conservatives like you more seriously if you weren't so shrilly hysterical.

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 11:15AM

Nice try, Neanderthal.

I'll try to use small words so you'll understand: Thuggery doesn't have to involve actual violence. Death threats, intimidation and mob takeovers constitute thuggery.

Surely you've seen those old mafia movies where a guy walks into a local store and tells the owner that it would be a shame if his establishment burned down, and that if he only pays the mob each week, they'll ensure that nothing bad happens to his store - or god, forbid, his family.

Guess what, pea-brain? That is thuggery. Even though not a single act of violence took place.

Having a mob surround a Rebublican senator and physically preventing him from entering the capitol until cops arrived is thuggery.

But I'm guessing you know all about thuggery first hand, don't you DRed?

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 11:25AM

Besides, DRed, you'll get your chance to crack some heads and break some bones.

Patience, my criminal friend, patience.

It's coming.

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 11:44AM

haha. So you agree that the tea party is also a group of thugs?

If you'd said 'it was repulsive to read about those death threats' in Wisconsin, I'd agree with you. But when you start frothing at the mouth about bloodthirsty acts of brutality, I just have to laugh. All that hate is gonna burn you up, kid.

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 12:27PM

Very amusing, kid. This from a liberal for whom, like ALL liberals, hatred and resentment of others is his reason for getting up in the morning. Who cries "hate" when people call him on his thievery.

Having contempt for his fellow man even as he masturabates his moral vanity by gazing in the mirror and telling himself he's GOOD because he pays lip service to an abstraction called "social justice."

Hatred lives on the left, kid. And when we defend ourselves against your hatred, you resort to the only defense your brilliant minds have come up with: Whaaa! You're a hater because you don't want to give me your money! Whaaa!!!

Holding signs and gathering peacefully is not the same as mobs who issue death threats and surrond individuals, preventing them from going about their business. There's just a WEE bit of a difference there.

See, my son, there's a constitutional right for the people to assemble. Last time I checked, death threats and intimidation aren't protected speech. It's called racketeering.

But let's recap your position, shall we? Hate from the left is not hate; it's "democracy" in action. All of the rioting you people do at G-8 meetings the World Economic Forum conclaves, G-20 gatherings, Watts, The Rodney King riots and on and on, all of the vandalism you engage in, all of the destruction you wreak, all of the hate speech that comes from your gurus like the NY Times, Huffpo, Daily Kos, Bill Maher, just to name a few -- that's not hate. No. it's tough love!

You can tell a GOP senator that you're going to kill his family and rape his wife and daughters and that's just your way of being warm and fuzzy.

But a Tea Partier says "we have to target blue states," and oh my god, it's hate speech! The evil conservative evoked war imagry!

Just because you believe your puerile resentments are justifed does not mitigate against your hate. Just because you pretend to care about victim groups doesn't absolve you of your malevolence. Just because you bray about social justice doesn't change the fact that you're a greedy, selfish, narcissistic thief. And just because you think it's your right to live off of the sweat of my brow doesn't make your own hate any less; it makes it more.

But in the liberal's twisted mind, peaceful tea party gatherings by people who make less than you do and still pay for your cadillac benefit packages - gatherings at which NO VIOLENCE IS THREATEND or enacted - except by your SEIU thugs - one of whom bit off the finger of a peaceful Tea party protester - that's just "democracy" right?

And I suppose when your common-law wife pisses you off and you slap her around, that's not abuse, is it? Nah - it's her owned damnd fault, right pig?

Bitch just didn't shut up when she was told to.

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 2:21PM

oh, come now. There were no death threats during the whole brew-ha-ha over 'Obamacare'?

Have you ever read any of your own posts?

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 3:16PM

Yes, I read my posts. I happen to enjoy good writing.

Who reads them to you? Because i think they're skipping parts.

Tell me of a single, documented death threat over Obamacare. Because I have to tell you, so far your argument is mighty weak, particularly given the many well-documented threats and acts of violence at the hands of SEIU THUGS and other lefties at Tea parties.

Or don't you pay attention to those parts of reality? What is it with you liberals and your selective vision? You simply do not see what's in front of your face. Or you see it and lie about it. I gotta tell you, there aren't any other options.

And in coming up with your documented examples of death threats against Obamacare, you can't use the logic that "there must have been some," or "everybody knows" or other intellecutally vapid proof. I know that brand of illogic serves the left - the narrative is what matters, but the facts - not so much, as the Washington post so pithily put it.

I want one that is as well-documented as the threats that came from the left.

You can't be serious in what I assume is your general thesis - that the left is all about what they claim they're all about - peace, love and understanding and social justice and celebrating diversity and tolerance an all of those other excuses to grab power.

They are about exactly the opposite - power and greed and self-serving vanity. End of story.

All of the political violence in the 20th century and this one come from the LEFT, not the right. And no, Hitler was not a right winger. He was a national socialist whose economic policy was classic fascism. Here's a quick rule of thumb for you: Conservatives like me - actually classical liberals - believe in LESS government control and more freedom. Useful idiots like you and other mindless liberals believe in MORE government control and less freedom under the odious, highly-elastic rubric of "the common good." Well, of course, somehowe YOU'RE always exempt from coersion, but the other guy? HE'S fair game.

Got it? Of course not. You're a liberal.

Look at all of your gurus - Cass Sunstein, Margaret Sanger, Rachel Carson, Saul Alinsky, Donald Berwyck, Noam Chomsky - the list goes on and on of people from the left who advocate totalitarian power from the top down, huge, bloated, nihilistic bureaucracies and the killing all of those who refuse to be subsumed by The Party.

If you think that the policies you advocate haven't ruined this country, look around you. Detroit has been ruled by a monolithic Democrat ideology for 60 years. it is about to slip off of the map.

You people are destroyers. Look at how many of Obama's cronies - Anthony Weiner the latest Obamacare lapdog - are getting exemptions from the national health care. Why do you think that is? Because it is a toxic destroyer of value.

You are a bloody fool. Cannon fodder.

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 3:55PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl.....ican-obama

There's one.

Here's one more:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/200.....rates.html

I don't even know where to begin with your list of gurus. Do you know anything about Cass Sunstein other than that Glennbeck rants about him? He has about as much in common politically with Noam Chomsky as I do with you. I'm glad you enjoyed reading Liberal Fascism, but you should try to broaden your horizons a bit-maybe it would make you less angry.

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 4:31PM

Maybe you should stop reading Howard Zinn and Paul Krugman and getting your information from the Huffington Post and Daily Kos.

Angry? Nah. I'm a piker compared to the howling loons of the left. Maybe you can youtube some of them. Start with Bill Maher, then go to Dick Durbin or maybe check out Joy Behar or Barney Frank or Sean Penn or Michael Moore or Cindy Sheehan or Medea Benjamin or Lawrence O'Donnell or Maureen Dowd or Rachel Maddow or Keith Olberman or, again, NOAM CHOMSKY or Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi or Howard Dean or Anthony Weiner or Al Franken or Andrew Sullivan or Al Gore or Kathy Griffin or Ezra Klein . . . . whew! I could go till next week and not even scratch the surface of leftist hatred.

Besides, I'm just taking a page from one of your gurus. You know, good old Saul Alinsky - freeze the target, personalize the target, polarze the target.

Hey, libs aren't the only ones who can play that game, you know.

Listen to the SEIU's old chief, Andy Stern, talk about the "persuasion of power." Listen to Richard Trumka. Then get back to me.

Oh yeah, if I see those videos on a right-wing site, they must be doctored, right?

And what part of Liberal Facsism is a lie? Somehow you left that out. I'm just curious, not having read it.

As for Beck, don't like him, never have. But just because a man's crazy doesn't mean he can't tell what time it is. Where was he wrong about Cass Sunstein? Did Sunstein not say what he was quoted as saying? I'm curious.

Angry? Kid, you ain't seen NOTHING yet.

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 4:59PM

Before we continue, did you look at those links? So you'll concede that the Tea Party is a bunch of violent thugs, right? Or maybe you were just over stating things a bit earlier.

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 5:30PM

I looked at the TWO links you sent. I have a question: Did you read them before you linked to them? Because not one incident mentioned was linked with a tea partier, or was even linked definitively to anyone on the right; in fact, one could easily - and plausibly - posit that these were hoaxes perpetrated by the left, which is a common practice among you sleazeballs.

In the first incident, there was a vague reference to an unnamed tea partier who may or may not have had anything to do with the incident. Cutting the propane line of the brother of a democrat. Yeah, that's solid enough to prosecute.

Your second link is even more pathetic -again, not one conclusive link to the Tea Party - in fact, the one representative they discuss in that story says the following:

"I don't agree with people cussing them," said Bob Ballard, an organizer with Kansas City Tea Party, a conservative activist group involved in the protests. "I do believe people get very passionate, but passion and vulgarity are two different things."

Or are you equating vocal protests and the freedom of speech with violence? Oh that's right - whenever anyone disagrees with you and suggest the gravy train is running out of track that's hate speech to you morons. I find it ironic indeed that you have nothing to say about the homicidal, violent, chaos-promoting, corrupt regimes that have come from the left with alarming regularity for the last 150 years and yet you are crying like a baby because some anonymous person threw a brick through a window - and that incident makes the entire Tea Party a violent mob???

You are friggin' out of your mind.

And even if you come up with a couple of REAL Tea party related threats to liberals, it would be easy to come up with a dozen for every one of yours.

Try as you assholes might, you can't make the Tea Partiers into violent thugs. It blows me away that you come up with two lame maybe-examples and equate that with the documented threats and obvious thuggish behavior, and on-the-record threats from actual Democrats in positions of power - that anyone with eyes can see on video in Wisconsin.

So when did you join the SEIU, you thief?

And explain to me how Detroit slipped into third-world status under Democrat regimes? How Under Bloomberg (only nominally a Republican), NYC went from being in the black to being in the red? How you bitched about Bush's $400 million deficit but are silent on Obama's $1.5 trillion (and counting) deficit? Or the absolute, naked corruption that is Obamacare?

EVERYWHERE liberall ideology becomes official policy, dearth, crime and misery follow. It's in the history books - look it up, if your goons haven't burned them all yet.

You have NO leg to stand on; you are living in a false reality.

Paul McGrath| 3.24.11 @ 4:55PM

Speaking for myself, I think what makes many of us angry, Mr. Dred, is the constant, uninterrupted spate of lies coming from your side. Every day there is something new, and in each and every case, the same solution is provided.

In my youth it was pollution and how we were all going to die from it, then it was overpopulation, then it was global freezing, then it was the growing hole in the ozone layer, then it was DDT (the ban of which made starvation more common in Africa), then it was "heterosexual AIDS," then and now it continues to be global warming--I mean, climate change. I'm sure I missed a few.

In each and every case, the answer is higher taxes and more government regulation. Each and every time. We become poorer, the unemployment rate goes up, and, most disgusting, those who implemented these policies become filthy rich. Vultures, on a carcass they helped to kill.

But what really makes me angry is that there are foolish, ignorant, superstitious dolts out there who actually believe this nonsense. Gore, yeah, he's a crook. As are Clinton, union bosses, Pelosi, Barney Frank, Dodd, Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc., etc., ad nauseaum.

But you, Mr. Dred, are no crook. You are just a willing dupe. And this is what makes me angry.

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 5:28PM

There's a lot less pollution now than there was in your youth, no? Liberals in your day complained about it, worked to get pollution lessened-and lo, we have less pollution. That certainly doesn't prove that they were wrong about the dangers of the existing levels of pollution.

As for "heterosexual AIDS" (despite my time here, I'm not fully conversant in conservative), I'm not sure what you're getting at. Are you saying it doesn't exist in America? My late cousin Paul would have been amused to know he was killed by something that doesn't exist. If you're saying that here, AIDS is primarily a risk for intravenous drug users, sex workers and homosexuals, I think you're probably right. But heterosexuals do get AIDS, and lowering the incidence of AIDS in any community in America benefits the rest of us. Perhaps heterosexuals in America don't have high rates of AIDS because of money spent here, and the effort we put in to changing peoples sexual behavior.

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 5:40PM

Please.

Market forces would have made pollution control de rigeuer for any corporation that wanted to stay in business.

And one can argue that so many of your policies have exactly the opposite of their intended effects - ethanol being a perfect example - it's messed up multiple ecosystems, increased the price of food everywhere, clogged fuel lines, and on and on and on. It's a non-starter.

Here's another:

http://www.recycled-energy.com.....-15-08.pdf

Making cars lighter to increase fuel efficiency doesn't cut down on fuel usage - it increases it. And it makes car accidents far less survivable.

Gee, you make a cryptic remark about your cousin. How did he contract AIDS?

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 5:48PM

As far as I know, he contracted it by having sex with a woman (who was not a prostitute).

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 6:47PM

As far as you know.

Uh huh. You're just a wealth of legitimate documentation.

Wrong on every count. Although now I'm getting a picture of your mind - you have ignored or mounted a pathetic riposte of every point I've brought up about 1) on which side of the political spectrum lies the violence - it is virtually always from the left; 2) the abysmal track record of liberal/socialist/marxist/leftist policies on this planet since the mid 1850s; 3) the efficacy of liberal policies in places like Detroit or New York (I may throw in Cuba, but no doubt you believe it's a workers' paradise with state-of-the-art health care a la Michal Moore); and 4) the reality behind "activists" fighting pollution.

And, other than trying the old "guilt by association" ploy, you cannot refute what I said about Cass Sunstein or Noam Chomsky - Sunstein believes people have to be forced into thinking the "right" way (i.e., the State is all), that government censorship should be official policy, and he believes that the "elites" should create phony organizinations (kind of like factcheck.org) to spread disinformation in order to discredit dissenters.

Chomsky is a friggin' linguist by trade, out of his depth as a pseudo-intellectual anarchist and known apologist for communist regimes such as the Khmer Rouge who, like Sunstein, believes that American freedom is the ultimate evil, and who buys into the world's greatest grift - global warming (the global warming hoax supplants the world's previous greatest grift, which was the "oil for food"scandal at the UN - a LEFTIST organization, which resulted in the theft of hundreds of billions of dollars).

Whereever the left is, there is corruption, hatred, resentment and misery for all but the kleptocrats who extort money from the subjects. And when they try to consolidate power, you can always count on the emergence of gulags and wholesale slaughter of enemies of the state.

But I know you will continue to believe what you believe; that you are on the side of sunshine and lollipops and goodness. I mean, gosh darn it, they never talk about all that yucky stuff on NPR, do they? They just stroke your ego, cooing at you about what a sophisticated little egalitarian you are because you support policies that look for all the world like velvet gloves on the outside, but in the real world, those gloves cover a murderous, iron fist, and it is always clenched. Sure, there's plenty of money out there to support a bloated and ravenous, avaricious government leviathan. Just go out there and confiscate the wealth of all those bastards who have more than you do.

Go back into your cocoon, liberal. Keep telling yourself what a caring person you are even as the policies you advocate shred people's dignity.

Because rule #1 of liberalism - its very sina qua non - is that facts don't matter, reality is not relevant, and cause-and-effect can be repealed if your one of the good people.

And if we all wish REAL hard, hold hands and squint our eyes, maybe Barack Obama will look like something other than the braying, destructive, phony, puerile, resentful, shallow, ignorant and foolish ass he is.

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 7:53PM

Well, yes, as far as I know. My cousin is long dead, and at the time I wasn't following him around every day. My family believes he got HIV from his girlfriend, who also had HIV. Maybe they got it from a third party in a bisexual orgy, or at a heroin den. I don't know.

I don't like Noam Chomsky. You can find someone else to defend him.

Cass Sunstein I don't know much about. The few papers I've read of his have not advocated the government force anyone to do anything-that's actually what he's arguing against.

I also don't listen to NPR. So again-I'm not sure who you're talking to. You seem to be yelling at a your own liberal caricature. I don't know what to tell you-you think the Nazis were left wing. If you told that to a German in 1934 he'd laugh in your face. But I guess you know better. Was Pinochet left wing as well? Generalissimo Franco? The Taliban? Let me guess-Ayatollah Khomeini was a left wing communist? Georgios Popadopoulos? How about the Contras? Maybe you should just stay in your cocoon, conservative. Keep telling yourself what a good person you are, and how evil everyone who doesn't agree with you is.

Nunya| 3.25.11 @ 11:18AM

DRed, please go back and read some history. Back in the 30's before the war, there were arguments of who was a better communist--Lenin or Hitler.

Announcing that Hitler was a right winger is a LEFTIST lie.

Anthony| 3.24.11 @ 7:00PM

Grzm my man, I've been watching this reparte between you and this idiot DRed all day. You are indeed a trooper and I, as always, admire your stamina and determination at troll education.
You've made your points, cogent and intelligently. The sign in front of DRed says "closed until further notice".
Relax pal, go have a well earned single malt. We will clean up after these dopes when end game comes, which as you have opined, will be soon.

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 10:55PM

Good advice, Anthony.

Thank you.

I have broken the suction. :-)

Paul McGrath| 3.24.11 @ 5:45PM

Mr. DRed,

The reason heterosexuals in America don't have AIDS is because it was never a threat to them to begin with. You obviously don't remember--you can look it up!--that in the mid-eighties it was predicted that anywhere from an eighth to a quarter to a third to half of all Americans were going to die of AIDS related illnesses within five or ten or twenty or thirty years. (Very similar, by the way, to global-warming arguments. It hasn't happened yet, but it will in 2050, or 2080, or 2100, etc.)

I'm sorry about your cousin, but the chances of him contracting AIDS from heterosexual sexual contact--and only hetersexual sexual contact--are practically nil, even if the female had AIDS. I'd be interested to know the circumstances, if you'd care to share them.

Your comment that heterosexual AIDS has not increased because of money spent to change people's sexual behavior is hilarious. Sexual morality has certainly improved in America, hasn't it?

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 5:53PM

Have you ever seen the rates of AIDS infection in some countries in sub-saharan Africa? That's not all gay sex and heroin.

Skippy| 3.25.11 @ 4:22PM

Don't go there, fool.
Our pal has run a clinic in Rhodesia...er...Zimbabwe...er...hell for 25 years.
It's not gay sex or heroin that kills the majority of these savages, it's the hut-hopping.
They just cannot dump their tribal...habits and get to die horribly as their reward.
But they are keenly attuned to Nature and are good stewards of the land!
In which they are buried at the age of 34.

Occam's Tool| 3.25.11 @ 6:29PM

If you excoriate your vagina so that the blood flows, and do the same to your penis, the chance of blood /blood contact rises. If your general immune level is wretched because of the horrid water supply and insufficient food, that will increase your likelihood of contracting AIDS. If you have multiple immune lowering diseases (TB, for example), that will raise your risk of AIDS.

The two populations (Middle class America and sub Saharan Africa) really are not comparable, DRed. Good thought, though.

Under normal US cinditions, the chance of contracting HIV through normal penile vaginal contact for a man, provided there are no sores for the man and the female is non-Mensal although HIV positive, is 1 per 200 contacts.

ARF ARF| 3.24.11 @ 5:52PM

"Liberals in your day complained about it, worked to get pollution lessened-and lo, we have less pollution." This is fiction, right up there with "Bambi", but without the quality animation. Liberals complained loudly and publicly and garnered ego-boosting attention. In the meantime, moderate and conservative legislators looked at the problem empirically and came up with programs based on actual numbers and science, not rank emotionalism or petty politics. The liberals of the day merely strutted and crowed like peacocks and accomplished nothing. The only true "accomplishment" for a liberal is to get the credit, not actually do something constructive.

Anthony| 3.24.11 @ 7:12PM

My one brief attempt at troll education, before I settle down for NCAA basketball.
DRed, learn yourself something, there boy, pick up a copy of "And the Band Played On".
It is one of the few objective books written by a leftist in decades. Randy Shilts was a gay man and a reporter for the S.F.Examiner. The history and epidemology of AIDS will astound you.
Unfortunately, Mr. Shilts died of AIDS in the early '90s, I think. Probably the last of the 10 honest lefties left on this planet.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:13PM

Chomsky has very few ideas on Jews different from Hitler. Yes, I know he''s a Jew, and a genius in his field. So was Bobby Fischer.

Paul McGrath| 3.24.11 @ 4:06PM

Jeez, Mr. Grzmylk. I used to just respect you. You have now become my hero. God bless you.

Grzmlyk| 3.24.11 @ 4:40PM

Thanks, Paul.

Good old DRed is good little liberal. Which means he's one of three things: A fool, a crook or a pawn.

I'm going to go with crook.

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 5:54PM

Gentlemen, I've got to get back to work. But I'll be around later on tonight if you've got some more accusations to toss my way-I don't want you to think I'm ducking you.

Truth to Power| 3.24.11 @ 7:14PM

I would have guessed fool/pawn. Grzmlyk is pretty smart so I am curious why he thought crook. The left would like it if their pawns were a little brighter but we have lots of data showing us that the local trolls have a difficult time even repeating talking points. Obama demonstrates that a crook isn't necessarily all that bright but quite a bit brighter than any of our pet trolls. What kind of person would hang out at a conservative website that he thinks has no merit? A fool. I am sure Grz can convince me otherwise but I don't get it now.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:14PM

Mr. G,

I also bask in your awesomeness.

W| 3.24.11 @ 8:29PM

After today's posts, it is Sir Grzmylk. well done

beebop| 3.25.11 @ 5:45AM

Is that all you've got?

" .... oh, come now. There were no death threats during the whole brew-ha-ha over 'Obamacare'?"

I thought you and yours are the "smarter ones?"

Thanks for clearing that up for me. A long thoughtful and well written post basically gets "and you did it too" from you? And. By the way, with no credible evidence of "death threats" during 0bamacare ....

Free Legal Music Downloads | 3.25.11 @ 12:40AM

LOL!

kai| 3.24.11 @ 6:22PM

For my own edification; what is the "brutality of the bloodthirsty leftists" you speak of? Thanks.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:38PM

Leftist Brutality, examples of:

See: Stalin and the Kulaks. See Mao and the Great Leap Forward. See: Kim Jong Il. See: Stalinistic tactics and strategy, WWII. See: The Killing Fields. See:....

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 11:02PM

Occam-let's say you're right. Those are all examples of leftist violence. So what? Does it really follow if that I, say, believe the highest marginal tax rate should be increased 2% that I supported the holodomor? That's like saying because I support a strong military than I believe in killing the gypsies.

Occam's Tool| 3.25.11 @ 6:41PM

No. Quite frankly, you don't bother me much at all, DRed, on a personal level. You know who my bete noir is.

However, the problem is gradualistic chipping at our freedoms.

Regarding heterosexual AIDS transmission---Africa has a huge use of prostitutes among married men:

"Epidemiology. 1993 Jan;4(1):63-72.

AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa: the epidemiology of heterosexual transmission and the prospects for prevention.
Hunter DJ.

Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115.

Abstract
As the epidemic of the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) in sub-Saharan Africa enters its second decade, much has been learned about the distribution and determinants of the disease and its causative agent, the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Over 6 million people, or 2.5% of the adult population, are thought to be infected with HIV. The distribution of HIV is largely determined by sexual behavior; as for other sexually transmitted diseases, the characteristics of sexual networks determine the extent and rate of spread of HIV. Female sex workers and their male clients are at high risk for HIV and have been important in initiating the epidemic in many African countries. The dynamics of HIV in the rest of the population are complex; men with multiple sexual partners are largely responsible for transmission of HIV to women in the general population. Other sexually transmitted diseases and lack of male circumcision may increase the probability of transmission of HIV during sexual intercourse and probably are partially responsible for the rapid diffusion of HIV in Africa. Interventions among high-risk groups are needed, but they must be accompanied by attempts to induce behavior change among men and women in the general population. Epidemiologic studies of the determinants of sexual behavior and sexual contact patterns, as well the design and evaluation of interventions, are urgently needed. Key areas for development are the study of behavioral exposures and outcomes, the evaluation of interventions, developing new methods for conducting interventions in resource-poor environments, and increasing the number of African scientists with the skills and resources to conduct epidemiologic studies.

PIP: A great deal has been learned over the past 2 decades about the distribution and determinants of AIDS and HIV in sub Saharan Africa. An estimated 6 million people, 2.5% of the adult population, are infected with HIV in the region. A World Health Organization model estimates 10 million will be infected in the region by 1994, and that Africa South of the Sahara, in which less than 9% of the world's population resides, will account for 60% of the global prevalence of HIV. This increase is projected despite recently observed increases in HIV prevalence in some parts of India and Thailand. The demographic, economic, and social impact of this widespread and growing infection will be staggering. Great variation in prevalence exists between countries and regions in Africa. It may be said, however, that the epidemic is mostly concentrated in large towns and cities, except for Uganda and western Tanzania where HIV is more disseminated. Peak HIV prevalence is found among those aged 15-45 years, with prevalence being comparatively higher among women. HIV has been transmitted in 80% of cases as a result of heterosexual activity; perinatal and blood transfusions each account for about 10% of cases. The characteristics of sexual networks especially determine the extent and rate of spread. Specifically, female sex workers and male clients are at high risk for infection and have been instrumental in starting the AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa. These men with multiple sex partners then transmit HIV to women in the general population. The presence of other sexually transmitted diseases and the lack of male circumcision may increase the probability of HIV transmission during sex and are probably partially responsible for the rapid diffusion of HIV in the region. Preventive interventions are needed among high risk groups and within the general population. Epidemiologic, behavioral, operational, and evaluation research are needed in order to design and implement programs which are most appropriate and effective in changing behavior."

In the US, the risk is not all that high among heterosexual non-substance abusing men and women.

ENOUGH ROPE| 3.24.11 @ 2:35PM

Obama does what Soros tells him to do--wreck America.

Alky| 3.24.11 @ 2:58PM

Chuck... what makes you so sure there will be elections in two years? He already has his shadow government in place with un-elected whackos making laws, his IRS army is building as we speak. Remember during the election he wanted a para-military civilian security force... think SS. But you say it can't happen here?... Good luck with the elections.

ENOUGH ROPE| 3.24.11 @ 7:40AM

Obama is a saboteur whose ideological background is anti-colonialist, Marxist, and radical. His background is documented in best selling books. His actions and inactions are understandable if one accepts his being a saboteur. He wants to make America weak without his being suspected of treason. His cause is aided by leftist elites and beneficiaries. We need a leader on the right, like Ronald Reagan, who will name Obama as the leader of the evil Marxist fifth column within the United States. Obama was groomed as a ONE MAN SLEEPER CELL who is a stooge and mouthpiece for the fifth column. Obama is a SMILING LIAR.

Redstateboy| 3.24.11 @ 8:35AM

I've been calling Hussein: "the Manchurian Candidate" for years.

No one can be This incompetent - he must be out to destroy the Nation on purpose.

Alan Brooks| 3.24.11 @ 10:08AM

Obama ought to do what the mayor of Chicago, Emmett Tyrrell, wants him to do.
BTW, I'm not interested in one world government, I "just" want you to pay a whopping amount in defense tax. There are hidden costs for defense, and someday someone is going to foot the bill-- your grandkids will.

Steve A| 3.24.11 @ 11:46AM

Yeah my grandkids probably will pay the bills as they will grow up & actually get a freakin job & not leech off the govurnment like your pals.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.24.11 @ 11:17AM

I disagree. He's not "CRAZY" at all.
Isn't it WIERD, how all this weird stuff is going on, all at once, since this THING was elected?
Let's see where we are: We've got a guy, in the Oval Office, who was BORN to a Muslim/Marxist, and an Atheist Communist. His Maternal Grandparents were Communists. His Step Father was Muslim. He grew up in Kenya and Indonesia, until he came to this Country, at the age of 11.
Being BORN to a Muslim Father, made him a Muslim. He attended Muslim Schools, in Indonesia. Those are the schools that "Teach" the children; "Barack! Look out! There's a JEW behind that rock! KILL HIM!" Those are the schools that teach that the INFIDEL must be KILLED.
He attended MOSQUE, where he learned all of the "DEATH TO AMERICA" and "DEATH TO ISRAEL" stuff. He knelt on his Prayer Rug, facing MECCA, and prayed to a God of BLOOD and DEATH and MISERY and SUBJUGATION, 5 times a day.
He has said in his books that:"If the sh*t ever hits the fan, between the Arabs and the Jews? I am coming down on the side of the ARABS."
HAMAS is selling MUGS with Obama's face on them. He has a Muslim Hat on, and is wearing the traditional Muslim Dish Towel, around his neck. HAMAS believes that HE is their DELIVORER. Sent by ALLAH. They have even given him the name: ABU HUSSAIN.
And, SOMEHOW, he is President. The MUSLIM BOY, from Indonesia, sits on the Throne of the most Powerful Christian Nation on Earth. (You can't make it up.)
And see what is going on. The ARAB WORLD is on the move. Every Arab Country, even remotely friendly to US, is under assault. And our young Boy King dithers. And he dithers, on purpose. This is not a problem for him. Muslims, coming together, to form a GREAT MUSLIM NATION? these countries have been around for HOW LONG? The hatreds and the mistrusts, between SUNNI and SHIIYR, and ARAB and PERSIAN, have been around, HOW LONG?
Am I the only one looking at this, this way?
Are you telling me that this is all just a great big COINCIDENCE?
THE WORLD IS ON FIRE. Evil is on the March.
And, with each passing day, this THING, in our White House, makes us WEAKER.
Who would want to WEAKEN the only Nation POWERFUL enough, to block Evil's path?
"And I saw the BEAST rise from the Sea. And he was given a MOUTH, to speak Haughty and Blasphemous words. And he was allowed to exercise authority for forty two Months." REVELATION 13-5.
Like I said: You can't make it up.

Appleby| 3.24.11 @ 7:10AM

Obama is one of those dotcom kids who took all the venture capital and used it to build posh *campuses* and decorate their offices, and then found out that the purpose of a company is to actually make some product and sell it -- but by then the money was all gone.

He is the kid who spends his whole paycheque on running shoes and games, and then discovers that toilet paper and groceries do not grow in the cupboards.

He is divorced from reality.

Red Ryder| 3.24.11 @ 7:19AM

Barack Obama is equal parts Jimmy Carter, Neville Chamberlain and Eugene Debs. That's a recipe for political disaster.

Anthony| 3.24.11 @ 9:56AM

I like your analogy except Chamberlain was a gentleman and a patriot, who happened to be nieve and weak. Obozo is neither.
I suggest another nieve whimp, say, Mike Dukakis?

grant1863| 3.24.11 @ 10:32AM

At least Chamberlain admitted he was wrong at the end, I agree at heart he was a gentleman and a patriot.

Mike D.| 3.24.11 @ 11:14AM

Chamberlain found out why its says "Don't feed the animals" in the world zoo and learned his lesson.

wbheff| 3.24.11 @ 10:19AM

Add in that the major component is Alfred E. Neuman!

Mike D.| 3.24.11 @ 7:40AM

The predators of the world look at this weakling like a starving convict looks at a piece of prime rib. I have lived through Dwight D. til now and this present occupant of the White House is a national disgrace. You authorize bombings of a foreign country and then go on a vacation to Rio while its going on? If you want to play wargames with US lives you get your ass over to Europe and talk to your allies face to face and determine who the hell is leading the whole thing. I rise every morning and still wonder at how that much stupidity and ignorance could be mobilized to get this leftist teleprompter reading weakling elected.
My God, we have Barney Fife running the Mayberry Sheriffs Department and Andy gave him the bullets for his gun before he left town. To the leftist trolls, spare the Bush did this and that routine. It ain't 1991, 2002, 2004 anymore. You elected this feckless "intellectual hopee/changee" jackass and he's done the opposite of everything he's promised.

saleboter| 3.24.11 @ 7:49AM

"President Obama does not really know what is happening. "

Ya think!

martin j smith| 3.24.11 @ 7:54AM

The main benefit of Obama's conduct is to demonstrate at the very least that he ACTS LIKE AN INCOMPETENT BOOB. Notice I use the word ACTS. The reason is I think his entire Presidency and his previous experience is a very sick joke. Now more people can see it much more clearly than ever. I have and continue to feel that this guy is a Chavez-Castro wanna be and behaves like on all the time. But, as happens sooner or later with such people they eventually go too far and become overwhelmed and its over their heads. Obama is in that right now. Lets keep him in that mode and hit him with valid criticism daily 24/7. And never forget, though I am not at all a grand supporter of GWB they did this to him so--whats good for the goose --and its even more valid now. Going from worse to worser.
I suspect the best polciy would have been either a very early no-fly zone or simply moral support for the PEOPLE and thats it. This too late and not at all thought out apparently.
Then what about IRAN ? Its ok for the Mullash to hang their opposition ? What say Barak and his supporters ?

Mike D.| 3.24.11 @ 8:01AM

As far as the Nobel Prize goes. Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, Yassar Arafat, Obama. Nuff said!

JFGalt| 3.24.11 @ 8:07AM

You guys don't get it do you. America doesn't see it. They are blind and too busy watch America's Biggest Loser or American Idol. They don't care. They don't understand what is happening and they don't want to know. Some people are waking up but slowly and then who do they support? Some RINO that is just another corporate stooge that is in it for the money and doesn't give a damn about this country or its future. The hypocrasy of the media is blantant in this case. Where is the outcry or even the snide comments about the president ordering a bombing campaign and then going on yet another holiday. There is no way in hell that Bush would have gotten away with that one. Besides, I think everyone is probably missing that George Soros probably is the one that ordered it anyway.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.24.11 @ 9:00AM

Galt! We've been looking for you!

Cuffs| 3.24.11 @ 9:19AM

Thank you, JFGalt!
You are right on the money.
Obama will get a second term, no doubt.
The Soros, et al gang has come too far not to
bring global government in for a landing.
Four more years should do it.
Obama is their mouthpiece, a sheer con man.

wbheff| 3.24.11 @ 11:53AM

I do not believe that we could survive another term by Obama the traitor.

davelnaf| 3.24.11 @ 8:13AM

Indeed, it took luck for America to be spared its late forties version of Obama. The communist Henry Wallace was not able to exploit the Democratic Party and use it as a platform to the presidency. We were not so lucky this time around. Our current clueless utopian leftist said all the right things to make college professors and students swoon and third-rate media types declare him a “god.” But have they noticed, at the very least, that he doesn’t possess the commonsense to avoid too many golf outings or go on foreign vacations at inappropriate times? Obama became president in no small part because he was able to exploit a Democratic Party that is far removed from Franklin Roosevelt’s Democratic Party and it shows.

Redstateboy| 3.24.11 @ 8:38AM

I can't see how Hussein can survive reelection..
Gas prices, food prices, jobs or lack of, housing, debt - you name it. The bulk of the American people aren't that stupid! Are they?

Teaghan| 3.24.11 @ 10:27AM

Yes.

Mike D.| 3.24.11 @ 11:03AM

Oh YES they are! 40-45% of the voters will vote for this clown no matter what. Again, NO MATTER WHAT he does. All it takes is for another 3-5% of the suckers(and there are plenty) and he's in for another 4 years. Another 4 years of this guy and his party and its over baby. This is the last stand for the marxist utopian nutjobs, they will go all out to hold power by whatever means neccesary. This next election will be one of the most brutal and potentially violent in american history. They are not going down without a fight. What you saw in Wisconsin is a dry run.

Mike D.| 3.24.11 @ 11:07AM

The non-repairable split in this country will become a chasm in two years. Most of these leftist organiztions and individuals were born in a violent birth and they will resort to it if they are threatened with permanent minority status or extinction.

George True| 3.24.11 @ 1:10PM

I'll tell you exactly how he will survive, Red. As things are going right now, with gas prices headed to a fin, and the prices of everything else going up, by mid-2012 we are looking at the mother of all double-dip depressions. Obama's name will be mud.

But....they won't let that happen. Geithner and Bernanke will print money 24/7/365 from now till November 2012. They will do QE-3, QE-4, and even QE-5 and 6 if they have to. Whatever it takes to postpone the inevitable until just after 11/2012. Then the entire economy can crash and burn for all they care.

That combined with massive voter fraud (we KNOW it is coming) and the terminal stupidity of at least 40% of the electorate will likely be enough to put him over the top once more.

I hate to sound so fatalistic, but I am not much encouraged when I still see the Republicans afraid of their own shadow, and afraid to unabashedly elucidate core Republican principles.

davelnaf| 3.24.11 @ 3:43PM

If not for what happened last year in November I would agree with you. But, friend, that was a seismic tremor of an impending political super quake that will begin the break up the dim party and tsunami the O out of the WH for a very deserved premature retirement and very underserved pension. Anybody have a thought or two on Trump questioning O’s legitimacy as president? I thought that one was laid to rest. But hope springs eternal.

Intelligent Design| 3.24.11 @ 8:48AM

We should stay out of Libya, get out of Afghanistan and Iraq, and stay out of all Islamic (Muslim) countries. This would save thousands of American lives and limbs, and save hundreds of billions of dollars. If Muslims want to kill each other, let them. They have been doing it for 1,400 years, and they will continue.

But we should defend Israel, cut off aid we are giving to the "Palestinians" (which includes money going to the terrorist organization Hamas both directly and via the UN), and continue to bomb terrorist camps. We should put 25,000 troops along the Mexican border in AZ, CA, NM, and TX. Among the millions infiltrating the U.S. by walking in from Mexico are at least several hundred Muslim terrorists. They are here planning new attacks on American citizens, while Obama and Holder fight the efforts of AZ and other states to eject illegals. The Obama administration is treacherous.

DaPicayune| 3.24.11 @ 2:15PM

Good ideas on the ME, but why not save 95% of the cost of our troops on our Southern border - just mine the thing, in between fences, with sensory monitors to alert violations (kabooms) then send out the blackhawk choppers to drop more antipersonnel mines. Tell our Southern neighbors to enter legally through the entry ports and get work authorization/visitation cards- or take your chances. However, this highly effective method will prevent the Dems from recruiting enough "voters" to dilute our American culture and our voting pools. What say?

The Bruce| 3.24.11 @ 11:46PM

I love this idea.

Two fences, 500 yards apart, with millions of landmines in between, and a machine gun tower every 500 yards.

If someone manages to get through, they're awarded with a green card and $1M in cash. In fact, we need to arm these towers with cameras and televise it.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:36PM

ID, when are you going to run? Please.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.24.11 @ 8:59AM

Obama is a walking disaster. It would all be funny if it didn't affect us.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:15PM

Indeed, Phil. Now, if he had only had his dream job---like Party chairman of the USSR....

Who Knows?| 3.24.11 @ 9:23AM

As I remember, when in Vietnam in 1967-68, one song on the wonderful armed services radio station became THE theme song for all of us---

“We gotta get out of this place, if it’s the last thing we ever do!

Girl, there’s a better life for me and you”

Why, I “have” this song, to this day!

When arriving back on US soil, on hearing those words, my feelings went from the yearning in the heart as I served in Nam, to ecstasy that I’d MADE IT out alive.

Well, who knew that this song would ever be appropriate for practically everything political, in America, since I first got back?

Just think of the presidents we’ve had to “get out of this place”---

LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Clinton!

And, the remaining people’s choices, sans Reagan, were mostly lousy, as well.

Just as demography is (mostly) destiny, history is (mostly) prolog.

Therefore, who, in their right minds, knowing full well the dastardly and dire direction of American politics, at the federal level especially, to date, could be anything but cynical?

We all “love” Charles Krauthammer, given his year’s of service applying his psychiatry larnin’ to the standing out pols.

Well, isn’t it just sickening to not only have to endure the diktats from an Obama and his little big men and women helpers, but most cringe-inducing to be flooded by the tsunami of words by Krauthammer wanabes all trying to explain their motives, their upbringing, their history, etc etc etc?

We’re STILL shat upon, regularly, by all things to do with Jimmy Carter, for hell’s sake!

No wonder most citizens ignore politics.

Perhaps Americans are, in their political DNA, programmed to actually live as free individuals, by and large. And, so, parsimony demands eschewing attending to such slave masters as BHO.

I admit to being, at least heretofore, addicted to playing the political races “card”, for quite a long time. Where else can one find such real world human comedy? It sure is FUN to deconstruct the top shooting political “stars”!

PS---here’s another tidbit that indicates how Americans continue to slosh down the toilet bowl:

On ABC a couple of nights ago, they ran a special on the most popular movies of “all time”, as voted by living Americans. These types of “polls” are always edifying, at least to me, as they have to take into account the to-date movies, or whatever, and thus necessarily relegate to the ash heap of history what used to be considered one of the best by newer models.

Consider the best musical movie category---

The lightweight parody of the 50’s movie, “Grease”, was number 3, or so!

And, “My Fair Lady” didn’t make the top five!

I dare anyone to name ANY song from “Grease” that comes anywhere close to being as great as the worst one in “My Fair Lady”.

Dumbing down strikes again!

And, again, again, and again!

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:17PM

Well, Dr. K still believes Obama's a Tool, I believe. And not one of Occam's.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.24.11 @ 9:24AM

Hey guys check out Sarah's take on stuff, just returning from Israel.
Heh, if you don't like her voice, simply mute the video and read the transcript.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/.....039-run-20

Vern Crisler | 3.24.11 @ 9:35AM

She's the one who called for a no-fly zone a month ago. What's she's criticizing is the way Obama has proceeded, not THAT he has proceeded to enact a no-fly zone.

Teaghan| 3.24.11 @ 10:31AM

Would Sarah have gone to the UN and asked for permission? Can our president even do ANYTHING any more without the blessing of that "international community" body?
Just askin'.

Vern Crisler | 3.24.11 @ 9:31AM

Again, the President has the authority to engage in military action in emergencies that affect our national interest. Even the unconstitutional war powers act seemed to recognize that and tried to codify it (badly).

I oppose just about everything Obama does, but I think conservatives are wrong on this. Now it is up to Congress either to ratify Obama's actions with respect to Libya, or to censure him, defund him, or impeach him.

Ask yourself, if this were Lincoln or Reagan, would your response be different? I'm talking to conservatives here, not crazy Lew Rockwell types.

Prester John| 3.24.11 @ 9:59AM

While I agree with your comments on what Congress should do, I must disagree with BHO taking this action.

There was no imminent threat to US forces or citizens so I do not call this an "emergency" requiring the immediate use of our armed forces.

A blind man should've seen what Qadhaffi was going to do weeks ago. BHO and Hillary could've gone to Congress and the UN (IN THAT ORDER) to get this thing approved, and spent a few days talking to our allies to figure out this little command and control glitch that popped up.

Gates and Mullen should've demanded all of the above or resigned.

Teaghan| 3.24.11 @ 10:32AM

Here Here!!!

W| 3.24.11 @ 10:56AM

If this was a true emergency involving the welfare of the US, then Obama should not have been vacationing in south america, and delegating decisions to Hillary. His golf game and basketball
picks could have waited if there was an emergency.
Lincoln did not go on vacation after shots were fired on Fort Sumter.
You sound semi-sane for a lefty, do you really believe the Libyan war was an emergency, or threat to the US? Quadaffi has been dictator for forty years, four more days to discuss this in the Congress to get approval would not have mattered.
The principle of "emergency" is not the issue, the issue is that there was and is no emergency to the US.
If the plan is to kill Quadaffi, then state it, and do it, after congressional approval.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:18PM

But he STILL hasn't asked Congress, Vern. I mean, what the heck?

Anthony| 3.24.11 @ 9:50AM

A great point Bob, one often overlooked by conservative historians. Not enough attention has been paid to the fact that Roosevelt indeed had a pure Woodrow Wilson progressive as his Veep. Roosevelt managed to jettion Wallace just in time.
Roosevelt's hubris, ego, and leftist tilt, almost led to an American calamity decades before Obozo.
Our magnificant country has dodged a few bullets in its time, until Obozo. That one we got right between the eyes. We can only hope for another miracle.

Harry the Horrible| 3.24.11 @ 9:59AM

He should have let them kill each other. Only fools intervene when their enemies are fighting one another.

The Big E| 3.24.11 @ 12:41PM

Amen! The only action we should have even considered taking in Libya was supplying weapons for a price. To both sides.

It's certainly true that Gaddafi is a beast who hates our guts and has spent many years and countless dollars (many earned by selling us oil) supporting terrorists. But I suspect that if the rebels succeed in ousting him, we will find that they hate us no less than Gaddafi (regardless of what we do to help them - Islamic countries are rarely appreciative to those who help them), and are a whole hell of a lot more dangerous.

Even assuming Obama had gone about things the right way - in other words, gone to congress first, got their approval, established who was in charge, etc. Exactly what would the mission be? What is the achievable military goal? The achievable political goal? The exit strategy? And most importantly, WHAT INTEREST OF OUR'S IS ADVANCED?

Set the emotion of the situation aside ("Oh! Isn't it just HORRIBLE what that beast Gaddafi is doing to those poor, helpless civilians!), apply some reason and common sense to the situation, and then explain to me PLEASE, why ANY military action on our part in Libya advances our interests in any way.

hamilton lucas| 3.24.11 @ 12:50PM

I've been under the impression that ever since the fear of communism spreading - the domino effect - we've been doing what we can to intervene and stop that. It's my understanding that the idea is that if a nation is democratic, this helps to stop the spread of communism.

The Big E| 3.24.11 @ 2:40PM

The threat of communism by conquest collapsed when the Soviet Union did.

Also, what makes you think the rebels we're supporting are democrats? Democracy, in all forms, is antithetical to the teachings of Islam. Our leadership in this country, both left and right, either lack the intelligence to understand that, or the courage to admit it. If Gadaffi falls, he will not be replaced with a democracy. The same fate will ultimately befall other ME regimes which fall in this wave of revolution, and yes, the same fate will befall Iraq once we leave it.

The only predominant Islamic country which is truly democratic is Turkey, and that democracy is tenuous, at best.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:35PM

Communism isn't doing so well. Islamism---well, that's another kettle of fish. And they love to grab power in elections---once. (See: Hamas)

da monk| 3.24.11 @ 10:41AM

PLEASE, ALL OF YOU COMPLAINERS ABOUT OBAMA'S "GOING INTO" LYBIA: IF YOU WERE PRESIDENT WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE IF YOU HAD THE RESPONSIBITY OF MAKING THE DECISION? IT'S EASY TO COMPLAIN WHEN YOU HAVE NO RESPONSIBILITY

Ned| 3.24.11 @ 10:54AM

"It's easy to complain when you have no responsibility" - yes, I think that perfectly sums up President Zero's political experience prior to usurping the White House. And now that he's nominally "in charge", I think he's become aware of that... and not handling it well at all, either.

da monk| 3.24.11 @ 11:04AM

WELL, NED YOU DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION, I ASKED, "WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF YOU WERE PRESIDENT?"

Steve A| 3.24.11 @ 11:55AM

Answer: I would have sat back & watched. I don't much like Quadafi & I think I like the Al Qaeda rebels less. I would root for as much destruction as possible. Probably gone to play golf & maybe scheduled an Aretha Franklin party at the White House or something.

da monk| 3.24.11 @ 11:04AM

WELL, NED YOU DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION, I ASKED, "WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF YOU WERE PRESIDENT?"

The Big E| 3.24.11 @ 12:43PM

I'd have popped some popcorn, turned on the news, and sat back and watched them kill each other. Then patted myself on the back for making such a wise foreign policy decision.

Anthony| 3.24.11 @ 2:52PM

Exactly what Obozo did, I'd have asked Hillary Clinton.
P.S. Hey da monk, ease off the Cap lock button, will ya? You just might blow a gasket there boy.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:34PM

If I were President, I would have done as Harry Truman would have done with the Nazis and Communists in 1941, before Pearl harbor---supply both sides. Both sides deserve death.

Mike D.| 3.24.11 @ 11:25AM

Well, I'll tell you what I would do. First off I would not have waited days to react. Second I would have consulted congress before ANY action. Third, I would have skipped my Rio vacation, got on a plane and met with my allies face to face to figure out who is leading this operation, who is in, who is out and what the parameters of the operation are. Then I would have the nuts to organize a news conference and answer some tough questions. Thats just for starters. Maybe he could schedule that news conference or message to the nation between a couple of golf rounds.

Prester John| 3.24.11 @ 11:28AM

How about nothing other than wishing the French and British good luck?

Harry the Horrible| 3.24.11 @ 11:33AM

Hmm. A crazy dictator vs. Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Popped popcorn and put the satellite and recon images on the big screen?

The Big E| 3.24.11 @ 12:44PM

Dang, Harry. I should have read your reply before I wrote mine. Then I could have come up with some other smartass way to say, "not a damn thing!"

Harry the Horrible| 3.24.11 @ 4:15PM

Well you COULD televise it for the "war porn" fans.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:19PM

I always like mine with extra butter, Harry. have you got a projection TV?

Dustoff| 3.24.11 @ 12:06PM

Ahhhh Monk.

Back in 2008 Senator O-bummer said we should NEVER send our Armed Forces into a country fighting a civil war.

Enjoy them words.

Prester John| 3.24.11 @ 12:51PM

But, but, but, it's a humanitarian operation using kinetic military actions.

LOL

Anthony| 3.24.11 @ 3:13PM

They had me going there for a while, I though Hillary was using kinky military action.
I might watch that one with ole Slick Willie.

Prester John| 3.24.11 @ 3:58PM

Ooops, sorry, now the WH is calling it a "time-limited, scope-limited military action".

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap.....73420.html

Lord have mercy.

Michael L. Hauschild| 3.24.11 @ 11:14AM

All this Monday morning quarterbacking or lamenting about closing the barn door after the horses escaped is accomplishing zero. The angst you suffer is falling on deaf ears in both the Halls of Congress and the White House, they are not listening. Save your breath for the campaign, save your dollars for the election coffers of Tea Party candidates.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.24.11 @ 11:18AM

Isn't it WIERD, how all this weird stuff is going on, all at once, since this THING was elected?
Let's see where we are: We've got a guy, in the Oval Office, who was BORN to a Muslim/Marxist, and an Atheist Communist. His Maternal Grandparents were Communists. His Step Father was Muslim. He grew up in Kenya and Indonesia, until he came to this Country, at the age of 11.
Being BORN to a Muslim Father, made him a Muslim. He attended Muslim Schools, in Indonesia. Those are the schools that "Teach" the children; "Barack! Look out! There's a JEW behind that rock! KILL HIM!" Those are the schools that teach that the INFIDEL must be KILLED.
He attended MOSQUE, where he learned all of the "DEATH TO AMERICA" and "DEATH TO ISRAEL" stuff. He knelt on his Prayer Rug, facing MECCA, and prayed to a God of BLOOD and DEATH and MISERY and SUBJUGATION, 5 times a day.
He has said in his books that:"If the sh*t ever hits the fan, between the Arabs and the Jews? I am coming down on the side of the ARABS."
HAMAS is selling MUGS with Obama's face on them. He has a Muslim Hat on, and is wearing the traditional Muslim Dish Towel, around his neck. HAMAS believes that HE is their DELIVORER. Sent by ALLAH. They have even given him the name: ABU HUSSAIN.
And, SOMEHOW, he is President. The MUSLIM BOY, from Indonesia, sits on the Throne of the most Powerful Christian Nation on Earth. (You can't make it up.)
And see what is going on. The ARAB WORLD is on the move. Every Arab Country, even remotely friendly to US, is under assault. And our young Boy King dithers. And he dithers, on purpose. This is not a problem for him. Muslims, coming together, to form a GREAT MUSLIM NATION? These countries have been around for HOW LONG? The hatreds and the mistrusts, between SUNNI and SHIIYR, and ARAB and PERSIAN, have been around, HOW LONG?
Am I the only one looking at this, this way?
Are you telling me that this is all just a great big COINCIDENCE?
THE WORLD IS ON FIRE. Evil is on the March.
And, with each passing day, this THING, in our White House, makes us WEAKER.
Who would want to WEAKEN the only Nation POWERFUL enough, to block Evil's path?
"And I saw the BEAST rise from the Sea. And he was given a MOUTH, to speak Haughty and Blasphemous words. And he was allowed to exercise authority for forty two Months." REVELATION 13-5.
Like I said: You can't make it up.

DRed| 3.24.11 @ 11:50AM

You actually did make a lot of that up, so it would appear your closing sentence is in error.

hamilton lucas| 3.24.11 @ 12:47PM

This THING got in the office the same way every other president did.

Being anti-president is, to me, the same as being anti-patriotic.

Disagreeing with policy is one thing. I disagreed with G.W. on a lot of policy decisions. However, I recognized myself as an American citizen and realize that despite my disagreements, we're all on the "same team" so to speak.

I will support our president and our congress, even if I disagree with their decisions, and I can only implore others to do the same. We're all citizens in this "one nation, under God" so let's start acting like it.

wbheff| 3.24.11 @ 1:25PM

By writing, "Being anti-president is, to me, the same as being anti-patriotic." you reveal your lack of understanding of our political system. Also, for the first time in our history, we have an occupant of the office of President of the United States who was raised to, and who does, hate our country.

hamilton lucas| 3.24.11 @ 1:41PM

I don't see how you draw the conclusion about my statement revealing a lack of understanding. Could you please expound upon your comment?

To state as fact that our president hates our country, is in fact, not patriotic.

The Big E| 3.24.11 @ 3:37PM

In the United States, the President is not, and is not supposed to, a King. He is NOT the State, he's merely a citizen like any other who has been elected to be the chief executive for four years. That's all. There is nothing un-patriotic about criticizing the President, the Congress, the Supreme Court, or any other part of the US or any State government. It is every American's right, and arguably, his or her responsibility, to complain when he or she doesn't like the way things are being run.

As for claiming that the current President hates the country, based upon his previous statements, and specifically, statements he made PRIOR to running for President about the Constitution's limitations on Federal power, and more recently about envying the Power that the leader of China has; and based upon the writings, statements and actions of the adults who raised him during his formative years; and the statements of those with whom he has chosen to associate with and learn from throughout his life (Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Michelle Obama, just to name a few) the conclusion that the current President hates this country is not only a rational one, in some respects, it may be the ONLY rational one.

There is nothing unpatriotic about being rational.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:32PM

Not if he does, in truth. Then it is the highest form of patriotism.

hamilton lucas| 3.24.11 @ 1:54PM

Also, I'd like you to back up your statement about how he hates America - otherwise it's just an opinion I'll have to disagree with.

I'm not a mind reader, but I have a really hard time believing that the president hates the country that he leads.

wbheff| 3.24.11 @ 2:23PM

He was raised by a mother who hated America, to hate America. When she was in Indonesia, working for an American company, her Indonesian husband said he wanted to meet "her people," meaning her American co-workers, and she replied "Those aren't my people."
He was raised by a pair of grandparents who hated America, communists that they were, and his grandfather had him "mentored" by Frank Marshall Davis, another America hating communist.
We know he has said that in college he gravitated to the company of "marxist" professors and students. His buddies in Chicago were Ayers and Dohrn, a pair of America hating terrorists who should have been executed for treason years ago. He spent more than twenty years in the congregation of America hating racist Jeremiah Wright. What more do you want?
Furthermore, I strongly suspect that you wouldn't know real patriotism if it slapped you along side the head.
Just because you have annoyed me, I will sign this in a way I usually do not.
W. B. Heffernan, U.S. Army, Retired.

hamilton lucas| 3.24.11 @ 4:11PM

Thanks for your response. I feel like now I have some factual basis on which to agree with you.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:28PM

Thank you, sir.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:31PM

HL, have you not eyes, sir? Can you not put data together? See my post below. Nice guy and all you seem to be, but honestly, enter with facts before disputation. Negation is not an argumentation tactic on its own, and the facts that HBHeff displayed have been a matter of public record, PROMINENT public record, for years.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:31PM

Sorry, WB Heff.

BackToBasics| 3.24.11 @ 6:16PM

We hear often that as citizens we should respect the office of the president even if we do not respect the man who occupies that office. In other words, show the man at least some respect even if we disagree with him.

But I say it's about time Obam showed respect for the office of the president!

One of the first things he could do to show more respect is produce a legitimate full-length birth certificate. If he's not a citizen, then he should step down, voluntarily.

I'd have some respect for him if he did this, but I certainly don't expect him to.

Many here, including me, do not use his real or full name because he has not shown respect for his office, the American people, or America as a nation, foreign though it is to him.

Habu| 3.24.11 @ 11:24AM

duh monk
Yeah we get your sentiment and the group has debated the WPA etc for three days but obama was to say at least imprudent in going into Libya.

He may or may not have had the Executive authority but one thing he certainly lacks in abundance is good judgement.

There is little doubt in many minds that he is Islam-centric in his zeitgeist and at minimum a socialist if not following in the wake of his self professed mentor Franklin M Davis who was a full blown commie.
He has displayed this in his entire agenda, both foreign and domestic, there's no escaping that and he has in place at the FED men who are attempting to do what NO nation on this Earth have ever done....print more money to get out of debt.....no one has succeeded with that approach.

In his totality he is NOT an American in the sense that he was not influenced at what psychologist call the most important years 0-7 by the American culture but by a Marxist anti colonial father who desertered the family and Islamic schools in Indonesia. Nothing American was taught to the child during those most formative years.

Then he choose to follow a path that continued to place him in the socialist/communist camp. he simply learned ghetto smoove along the way, is marginally intelligent and can read a speach off of a telelprompter.
The child is a clear and present danger to this country and we rid ourselves of him in 2012 and hopefully drive him back to Indonesia of Africa.

NJK| 3.24.11 @ 11:36AM

He shouldn't have released the Lockerbie Bomber.

Habu| 3.24.11 @ 12:19PM

If we're doing should haves....he should have stayed in Africa with Granny or Indonesia with Anmpounanuanuuua.
Either place he might have contracted some exotic disease and spared us his "wisdom"

hamilton lucas| 3.24.11 @ 12:42PM

I get the impression that had he done nothing, he'd be chastised for his pacifism.

The Big E| 3.24.11 @ 12:52PM

Undoubtedly, there are some who would have criticized that decision simply because it was Obama who made the decision, just as there are so many - including Obama himself - who criticized George Bush's decisions regarding Iraq and/or Afghanistan simply because it was George Bush who made those.

Either way, making a decision, or failing to make one, based on the fact that people who don't like you anyway are going to criticize it is not responsible leadership. That is true whether you're in politics, business, or any other endeavor.

However, dithering around and making a decision too late to do any good even if it had been the right decision, and then executing the decision in a manner which calls into question its legitimacy, is even WORSE leadership.

hamilton lucas| 3.24.11 @ 12:58PM

Agreed :)

Steve A| 3.24.11 @ 12:58PM

h l, You are absolutely correct about that.

ONTIME| 3.24.11 @ 12:43PM

Does Kinetic War mean Knee Jerk Reaction?

Is Odessy Dawn the name of one of Lawrence Taylors prosititutes?

Why must the American public, taxpayers and voters be subjected to the constant, expensive, embarrasment of this administrations inept Tom Foolery?

hamilton lucas| 3.24.11 @ 12:48PM

Because you exercised your right to vote, and so did others. Majority rules. You're bound to it.

The Big E| 3.24.11 @ 12:59PM

I may be bound by "majority rules" when it comes to Obama, but it's obvious he doesn't think he's bound by "majority rules," otherwise he would have complied with law and consulted with Congress BEFORE launching 162 Tomahawk missiles into Libya to assist Al Qaeda.

Donald Sensing | 3.24.11 @ 12:48PM

Regardless of how Libya turns out on the ground, I would argue that Obama and Ms. Clinton think they have accomplished their mission with this intervention.

This administration has placed American military employment subservient to the United Nations and, most particularly, the Gulf States. Although some US critics have called the Libya intervention a "cowboy" action no different from the (presumed) cowboy actions of G.W. Bush, it's more than obvious that Obama does not see it that way.

Community organizer that he is at heart, this president believes that only the "international community" (of which there is no such thing, but let that pass) can authenticate or authorize military actions by the United States. Since in this case the target is an Arab country, the endorsement of the Persian Gulf states was required. Since the Congress represents neither the "international community" nor the Arab states, then not only is Congress's authorization not needed, it would actually be counter-productive by maintaining the unjust position that America's national self-interest is predominant. This compulsion to subordinate US military operations to the "international community" also explains why the president has vowed to hand operational control of American forces over to a European authority (just who is yet to be determined).

By at least conceptually placing America's interests and the use of its military second or third to the "international community's," Secretary Clinton and President Obama likely believe that their main purpose in this intervention has already been accomplished, no matter the outcome on the ground in Libya.

Wayne | 3.24.11 @ 1:49PM

You have a point. I have little doubt that a vital role of Obama in the mind of Soros is to deliver the US military to the UN.

DaPicayune| 3.24.11 @ 2:49PM

All too true, DS, plus, it's also BOgus campaigning for his new job as UN Sec General, where he'll be President of the World. His career is replete with winning an office only to dither in it's duties, so he can then run for the next position. Remember his bazaar '08 Campaign rally in Berlin, "I am a Citizen of the World?" Who was he campaigning to there, the world?

That's why BOgus applied to the UN SC first for authority, then lobbied the Arab League - making friends, don't you know. His actions to date are as illegal as they are wreckless and dangerous, but in view of his UN Sec Gen campaign efforts, it matters not to BOgus.

BO: "Hey Staff,..... no I am doing any Press Conferences on Libya today, so stop asking,... now what's my Tee Time, I want to be back in time for the NCAA hoops tonight? How bout my brackets? And they say I can't make decisions,....... Winning!"

fsilber| 3.24.11 @ 1:00PM

Obama should have done absolutely nothing about Libya from the beginning. He should not even have taken sides. When asked for his opinion he should have said:

"Shooting protesters is not the American way, but Libya is not America and we have no influence there. KhaDaffy was never an ally of ours and in any case, oppression in Arab countries seems to be the rule rather than the exception. How do people think he obtained and maintained power all these years? We tried to help in Iraq and was hated world-wide for it; nor do the people we saved in Afghanistan from communism appreciate us. We saved the Bosnian Serbs from genocide, and one of the Muslims from that region who received asylum in Germany just murdered several of our soldiers. This time we'll let America's critics handle the situation."

The Big E| 3.24.11 @ 3:45PM

BINGO! When we aid ANY COUNTRY in the Islamic world, we are, as a nation, giving aid and comfort to our enemies.

Frankly, I think it's about high time that some of the so-called Republican Candidates for President come out and take a stand on this as well. REALITY: Islam is at war with us, whether we like it or not. It has been at war with civilization since its founding, and by its own teachings, will be at war with civilization till one or the other is eradicated.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:27PM

Like the ship, Big E---magnificent.

obadiah| 3.24.11 @ 1:00PM

Ho Ho Ho. According to R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., Obama should have lied to Congress and the American people like George W. Bush. Following that model, he should lie about the cost and keep it off the books too. And then he should fire and smear anyone who disagrees.

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. is pursuing the single-minded goal of the Republican party and its organs that was declared at the outset: make Obama fail. So, he's a failure. Now, please tell us who is going to make things right. Newt? Haley? Mitt? Mike? Sarah? Tim? Mitch? And do you think that the ones you smeared and sabotaged are going to help?

George True| 3.24.11 @ 1:29PM

Did you read the same article I did? I didn't read anything that suggested that Obama should lie to congress. Regarding your inference that Bush lied to congress, he didn't. He shared with congress the same intelligence that he had from CIA, DIA, NSA, and MI-6. Even before that, our current Secretary of State publicly stated that the world (ie-a coalition) needed to remove Saddaam from power. Next time get your facts straight.

The Republicans don't have to lift a finger to make Obama fail. He is doing a remarkably good job of failing all by himself. Any of the names you mentioned would be an order of magnitude better than Obama. In fact, just about anybody picked at random from the phone book would probably be a better president than Obama.

Steve A| 3.24.11 @ 1:03PM

Any on that list you mention would ba a vast improvement over the current imbecile.

Ed Darrell | 3.24.11 @ 1:08PM

Had FDR died six months earlier, we'd have had Henry Wallace as president for five weeks, then Harry Truman for four months longer than we had him. Not sure you're clear on how presidential succession works.

Wayne | 3.24.11 @ 1:44PM

Obama made a huge tactical mistake, in fact it seems he has made several. First, by ignoring Congress he has garnered NO buy-in. He would have had it. Now even the Dems can abandon him and the war at the first opportunity. Second, but not have the US lead, he is putting American military in the hands of foreign leaders with no experience. They will make major mistakes alienating our own military. Third- despite taking a hands-off approach, the blame will still end up with Obama. He can not escape it or shift it to Bush as in the past. As Truman would say, the buck stops with him. 4th, it is not wildly popular, as he probably thought it would be. Only 38 percent of independents support his action. These are the people he needs to win in 2012.

The only person he seems to have won over is O'Reilly.

Paul McGrath| 3.24.11 @ 4:20PM

"The only person he seems to have won over is O'Reilly."

Very, very funny. And very, very true.

Richard Baker| 3.24.11 @ 1:49PM

The Kenyan IS a mistake. This man-child has no interest in acting like the President, he's happy to BE President. When I hear folks refer to him as disconnected/distracted I have to laugh because it's neither of those or anything else. He disinterested, instead. His focus is on the trappings of the Office and not the responsibilities. Looking forward to kicking his skinny butt out next year. C'mon, 2012!

Agent Rose| 3.24.11 @ 2:13PM

You said, President Obama does not really know what is happening. " I think, unfortunately, he knows EXACTLY what is happening!Total confusion and the United Nations dictating to our country and or military. This is even more serious than all the other unconstitutional actions this president has taken.

What is so earth-shattering and disgusting is that it took John Boehner--5 days--was it to ask/plea to know more about the mission. Why the hell didn't he know? And was that the STRONGEST message he could send? God help us.

As was posted on this site several months ago--we are slowly coming to the realization that there is ONLY ONE PARTY--THE RULING CLASS. The liberal, socialist, communist class--and they are not all on the democratic side.

Will the Republican ruling class when they march into Congress as they marched into the capital in Wisconsin?

BackToBasics| 3.24.11 @ 2:13PM

Obam was locked out of the White House today. Too bad the lock-out could not be made permanent. This war shows his admin's amatuerish handling of foreign policy. He and they are operating at an even lower level of competence than they did a few months back.

Obam had a key to get into the White House but it was a key made by a Kenyan company so it didn't work.

Agent Rose| 3.24.11 @ 2:15PM

You said, "President Obama does not really know what is happening. " I think, unfortunately, he knows EXACTLY what is happening! Total confusion--anarchy-- and the United Nations dictating to our country and or military. This is even more serious than all the other unconstitutional actions this president has taken.

Will the Republican ruling class wake up when they march into Congress as they marched into the capital in Wisconsin?

BackToBasics| 3.24.11 @ 11:48PM

I was wrong about Boehner. I've said on AS that he cried to show Dems he was a compassionate conservative. I now think he cried to pull the heart strings of Tea Party types to lull them to sleep. He knew instinctively that he would not fight Obam or the Dems so he tried to assuage conservatives beforehand.

RWinks| 3.24.11 @ 2:30PM

Only one caveat. BO didn't go "over" Congress to the UN. He went under.

martin j smith| 3.24.11 @ 2:40PM

I am one of those who leans to the theory that Obama is not incompetent but is purposely doing all he can do to bring this country down and he is doing as much as possible till the election of 2012.
But as in the case of any delusion megalomaniac--which Obama is--they eventually outsmart themselves and do stupid things which I see happening as we speak. Lets help them and talk in all medias 24/7 about how Obama basically does not deserve even now to be in office.
Ignore anyone who talks about "civil discourse"
To hell with them especially after all they have done.

Louis Jenkins| 3.24.11 @ 2:45PM

First, Obama made a huge mistake going into Libya even though it is an air war only. Second mistake, regardless of whether or not we agree with this move, was not consulting congress. Third mistake, letting the UN, at least Britain and France, dictate an action by the US. Germany is out, next France will be out, and in a couple of months, Britain too. They've already used up most of their air ordinance. The US is the only one with deep, debt ridden pockets.

"Amr Moussa, the head of the Arab League, at first was for enforcing a "no-fly zone" over Libya... The next thing you know he will be on Gaddafi's side. World opinion can be volatile."

What will happen is the Arab opinion will shift drastically against the US if not already. The US cannot win this conflict, and Obama has no intention of winning. Obama is playing his part. The part of a good, polite Muslim.

Dustoff| 3.24.11 @ 2:56PM

I wonder, what if the people over throw Daffy duck and then they start killing all the people loyal to him.

What shall the UN & O-bummer do?

The Big E| 3.24.11 @ 3:50PM

Such actions on their part would, of course, be keeping with a long tradition of governmental transition in the Middle East, where if you DON'T kill all the left over opposition when you take power, they may kill you and take it back.

davelnaf| 3.24.11 @ 3:41PM

Paul McGrath| 3.24.11 @ 4:29PM

What bothers me more than anything is that I really don't know what to think. Yes, I know Khaddafy is a bastard, and I really don't mind using our forces to blow him to smithereens, but is the alternative going to be any better? If not, wouldn't it be better to let them fight it out? Even if Khaddafy wins, he will be considerably weakened.

The point is, Obama never made his case to the American people. Both Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. did. Both enlisted dozens of allies, both got approval from Congress, and both repeatedly made their case on prime time TV. So that when we invaded Iraq I knew exactly what they were thinking and why they were doing it. Both, by the way, gave Saddam repeated warnings to desist.

But in this case, no. We are bombing an independent country. We are killing their citizens. We are endangering American lives.

Goddamnit. WHY?

shipley130| 3.24.11 @ 6:12PM

Middle East countries have to be wondering why Ghadaffi ever gave up his nuclear program. He gave it up and then America attacks. Why would Iran ever give up their program now? They won't, and Obama just cemented their unwillingness. Good job Obama, I wouldn't expect anything less stupid from you.

Logic| 3.24.11 @ 6:36PM

Hey Paul McGrath--For the invasions of Grenada and Panama and for the bombing of Libya in 1986, Presidents George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan did not go before Congress/ask permission. So there is precedent here. Its just now a Democrat is doing it and all the hawkish Repubs have their panties in a bunch.

To shipley130: Not sure why I'm even bothering, but your comment wreaks of laziness. I guess that's why I bother. Try reading. Try Ron Suskind's 'One Percent Doctrine'. Libya gave up its nuke program because we caught Gaddafi's hand in the A.Q. Khan nuclear procurement cookie jar and offered him a deal: Come clean or you're finished. Obama's actions now have nothing to do with the deal he made in 2003.

Paul McGrath| 3.24.11 @ 7:16PM

Mr. Logic,

In short, my panties are not in a wad. Indeed, I do not wear panties. My question, specifically, is: why are we attacking Libya? Do you know? It has not been explained to us by our president.

As to Grenada, Panama, Iraq I and Iraq II, I understand why we invaded them. I understood it then, and I understand it now.

Perhaps you have some secret input from our president of which I am unaware. Again, what is the purpose of our attack on Libya?

Habu| 3.24.11 @ 6:59PM

Well now that obama is back on US terra firma the real criticism from the Congress can get into high gear. Until the Clinton Klan from Arkansas there was the unwritten rule that while the president was abroad you didn’t criticize him. They didn’t care, they had a beat down on President Bush no matter where he was. The Republicans, a more civil group, have adhered to the time honored tradition. But now, but now, let the beat down begin. There is one problem.
The obama-o bunker has been stocked with whatever psychotropic drug he is on and he most likely won’t answer the phone, hold a news conference, or respond in any way. He’s our first mulatto-chia head-in-a-coma president. The first commie too says the chicken entrails I consulted this morning.

As much as anyone on this blog I despise the man. My comments defending his actions I would have said of any president since each branch must retain it prerogatives. If you read the Yale University piece I offered yesterday it will clarify what I am talking about. If you missed it here it is again and it is definitely worth the read……. http://tinyurl.com/6khpbol

Going forward it should be interesting to see how the House handles this rapscallion. He deserves the absolute full animus of every American, but the blacks will hunker down and start to yell racism.

Did you folks know that every member of the Congressional Black Caucus is also a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, a communist front group? Nancy Pelosi and several other prominent democrats belonged to it too but when Nancy became Speaker she resigned so she wouldn’t get bad publicity….like the press would have brought it up. Here’s the site: http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html

As I’ve said on other blogs for two years. The islamic idiot is a clear and present danger to this country and must be voted out, or impeached.

Kingofthenet| 3.24.11 @ 7:08PM

Maybe Obama should have lied and said Gadhafi had secret nuclear and Bio Weapons programs. Then (according to the NeoCon playbook) he could have sent Hillary to the UN to make a fool out of herself. Than the President could go on TV and talk about the 'Mushroom Clouds' as the first proof. nah, I like it more this way.

Paul McGrath| 3.24.11 @ 7:38PM

Dear King of the Net,

The "Bush Lied" canard is old and tiresome and has been refuted so many times, yet it keeps coming up because those on the left such as yourself really don't believe in truth or honesty. They are fed lies, they believe the lies, and they repeat the lies. I really don't know why. Either they are dishonest or they are stupid, but they must be one or the other.

President Bush was told by the CIA that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. French intelligence and British intelligence concurred. Then-president Clinton and vice president Gore stated on numerous occasions that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, so they were convinced of this as well.

It was entirely believable in that Saddam had used nerve gas on his own citizens previously, he used gas against Iran during his war with them, and he continually refused to cooperate in any meaningful way with U. N. inspectors. And aside from the WMD issue, he was not in compliance with numerous U. N. sanctions imposed on him following Iraq I.

So, you may argue that President Bush was mistaken, but you can't argue that he lied. He did not lie. He acted on faulty intelligence. All of this information, by the way, is easily accessible just about everywhere.

And it wasn't just Bush. 40 nations, including Great Britain, Australia, Spain, Italy and Poland, sent troops to Iraq and suffered fatalities. (Spain withdrew shortly thereafter.)

In all sincerity, it would behoove you to learn facts, rather than spout slogans and propaganda. "Bush lied, people died." What a simplistic, moronic statement. I doubt that you are this dull in real life.

Kingofthenet| 3.24.11 @ 8:39PM

Lied or was Mistaken is distinction without a difference. IF the goal was to find the TRUTH, it wouldn't have been hard to discredit 'Curveball', but what REALLY happened was that ANY info. putting the justifications for war in doubt was ignored. Saddam WAS working with the inspection teams, no he wasn't 100% forthcoming but he wasn't stonewalling either.Look if Bush just said he wanted 'Regime Change' because Saddam was a evil man or tried to kill his Father, I might disagree, but at least it's a Honest reason.

Paul McGrath| 3.24.11 @ 10:01PM

Hello Mr. King,

Hmm. If it is a "distinction without a difference" perhaps next time you will use the term "mistaken" rather than the word "lied." No difference. Right?

You then go on to say that the justifications for war that were in doubt were "ignored." Like, what? What "doubts" were ignored? The reality is that all of these "doubts" were considered. In a lot of people's opinion, these "doubts" were considered for too goddamn long.

But please enlighten: what doubts do you perceive were ignorned?

Jonathon| 3.25.11 @ 6:15AM

He did lie.

I find it interesting that conservatives have no problem citing UN resolutions when it coincides with their position, but they are the first to discount the UN when it does not. If failure to comply with UN resolutions is justification for war and occupation, I guess we should be invading Israel soon...

Logic| 3.24.11 @ 7:14PM

Habu--I'm white...and your comments easily pin you as a passive-aggressive, only on the net racist.

Kingofthenet--well played.

Occam's Tool| 3.24.11 @ 10:25PM

Unfortunately, HL, he may actually hate our country---and have simply been improperly vetted. You seem like a nice guy, Hamilton. So, answer these questions:

Would you have started your political career in the home of a Weatherman? (The terrorist organization of the 60s, not a meteorologist) His career started at a meet and greet at Bill Ayers' home.

Would you have sat in the pews of a known terrorist supporter and antisemite's church? (Reverend Wright)

Would you have appointed a known Communist to your administration (Van Jones---a Communist by HIS OWN PUBLIC ADMISSION)? I can go on...look at Susan Rice's record---but I'll stop here. Please verify my comments on your own, and reply.

That's where we begin to worry.

Yosemeti Sam| 3.24.11 @ 11:40PM

Once the Waffler in chief just wanted to eat his waffles.

Could it be that too much of a good thing - waffles - can turn a guy into a Waffler?

LOL.

Jonathon| 3.25.11 @ 6:11AM

True that Obama did not consult Congress or the American people in any way before getting us into yet another war. But if you argue he should have had a declaration of war, it sure seems worth mentioning that Bush never pursued a declaration of War before sending tens of thousands of ground troops into Iraq. And his justifications were all shown to be lies. You can accuse the Democrats and the liberal media of being one sided all you want, and you are correct, but the Republicans and the conservative media are just as one sided. You're all full of it in my opinion.

Carla Lamothe| 3.25.11 @ 8:01AM

The Massive Assault the Conservatives would've laid on Him- after Qaddafi had slaughtered Thousands of his rebellious Countrymen, and Obama had done Nothing.
http://pastaboatreview.net/

C Smith| 3.26.11 @ 10:52AM

Our president so time ago affirmed that he is " a Christian by choice" and that his public service is part of an effort to express that "faith," but how can we know if his unilateral decision to initiate war with Libya is of God?

There is a very disturbing video circulating on YouTube, of a nature I cannot bring myself to watch. Reportedly, it graphically displays our Libyan "allies" committing atrocities against Gadhafi regulars clothed in dark green standard issue. War is war, but this savaging of Islamic brother by Islamic brother is something far more barbaric than war.

So, how can we know if Our president's unilateral decision to initiate war with Libya is of God? Mathew chapter seven provides the litmus test:

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits.... every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.... Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity" (Mathew 7:15-23).

"... wisdom is justified of her children" (Mathew 11:19 ).

weddingdress | 7.15.11 @ 5:28AM

Let's see where we are: We've got a guy, in the Oval Office, who was BORN to a Muslim/Marxist, and an Atheist Communist. His Maternal Grandparents were Communists. His Step Father was Muslim. He grew up in Kenya and Indonesia, until he came to this Country, at the age of 11.

Creative Recreation | 8.10.11 @ 11:27PM

is good

Latest Headlines

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn|111 comments

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple|124 comments

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg|61 comments

Soros Funds Anti-‘Torture’ Report

Mark Tooley|112 comments

Treasure State Treasury

Bill Croke|3 comments

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy|69 comments

The View From the Other Side

George H. Wittman|17 comments

USPS: Radical Surgery Needed

Peter Hannaford|19 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real

Quin Hillyer | 4:15PM

Good New Book: ‘Precipice’

Quin Hillyer | 3:07PM

The Spectator’s Spectacular: Most Read Stories, May 12-May 19

Patrick Ryan | 12:41PM

Elijah Harper, R.I.P.

Aaron Goldstein | 5.18.13

If Only the Tsar Knew!

F.H. Buckley | 5.18.13

Low-Level IRS Staffer: No, We Didn’t Mastermind This Entire Thing

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

UPDATED: IRS Acting Chief Apologizes, But Defends His Actions

Kaylin Bugos | 5.17.13

Voter Fraud Affected Election Results in Missouri