The American Spectator

Captain America| 11.27.08 @ 3:02PM

After Obamessiah's Thanksgiving greeting that "better days are coming" I am more convinced than ever that this guy is out of his league.

I'm thinking dunce cap material here.

Dave| 11.27.08 @ 3:09PM

Those who railed against the third Bush term are about to be subjected to the third Carter term. Hold on to your wallet!

Quartermaster| 11.28.08 @ 10:17AM

The messiah is an empty suit. Don't expect him to make any announcement with the hated Bush.

Jeremiah| 11.28.08 @ 10:26AM

Mr Tabin et al --

Obama is NOT the president. Are you people nuts?

The PRESIDENT should be issuing statements and coordinating with our allies.

Obama made the statement appropriate to his current position.

Quartermaster --

Instead of parroting Rush Limbaugh jokes (Obama is an empty suit) why don't you make some kind of argument that is composed of rational claims and some kind of explanation of your reasoning?

You respond to terrorism with the yuck yucks of a radio dj?

danny| 11.28.08 @ 1:01PM

dave, that would be the second carter term, but you are correct about holding on to your wallet.

task| 11.28.08 @ 1:42PM

I hate to say this but some nation that is less constitutional and paralyzed by individual rights protection will figure out that to take out this brand of disciplined fanatic jihadist that their achilles heal is their own families. When family members are captured in retaliation the price for terrorism will stunningly and immediately become too expensive. This price they are not prepared to pay.

Think this is too severe? Wait until thousands of innocent children become victims and that scenario is just a bomb or two away. They are not constrained nor will they hesitate.

WendyG| 11.28.08 @ 1:59PM

task - that is what Israel does, or at least did. Bomb our innocents, we will bulldoze your house. And of course Israel is roundly criticized for such responses.

I hope the Mossad or some other Israeli agency will avenge the deaths of the innocents at the Chabad House. The subhumans only understand a strong and deadly response.

I very much doubt Obama, the smooth Billy Dee Williams of the White House, will have the inner fortitude to protect us as aggressively as George Bush did. God help us all.

task| 11.28.08 @ 2:24PM

I believe Golda Meir stated: “it affects us when you kill our children but it affects us even more when you compel us to kill yours.”

WendyG| 11.28.08 @ 2:51PM

"We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours. "

Golda Meir

task| 11.28.08 @ 3:03PM

WendyG,

Thanks

Jeremiah| 11.28.08 @ 5:14PM

task and Wendy G

Thanks for sharing your goofy and sentimental little collection of Golda Meir quotes. Nothing could have persuaded me more that you are both clueless when it comes to the Middle East and wouldn't know Golda Meir from one of the Golden Girls.

As for thanking George W Bush for protecting us from terrorists, I think it's a bit soon to be forgetting your history.

It wasn't under Clinton or Carter or Johnson or Kennedy that 9.11 happened. One would be reluctant to make such a point, but because people like yourselves are happy to forecast terrorist attacks as a result of what you perceive to be Obama's weakness, it makes doing so much easier. The responsibility for this country's safety is in fact the president's, and Bush and his national security advisors (who refused to listen to intelligence reports warning of an attack) failed us.

Now why don't the two of you go get yourselves a good book about the Arab Israeli conflict and educate yourselves a little.

Advocating the murder of children or bull dozing of houses just makes you sound foolish, weak, cruel, and desperate. Thank God the likes of you aren't running this country anymore.

But happy Thanksgiving. I hope someday one of you actually meets an Arab person and gets to know him, so at least you'll have some idea of the sort of person whose violent death you so gleefully advocate. And with such courage! Posting on the internet! How noble and brave.

g1234| 11.28.08 @ 9:05PM

Jerry,

Thanks for sharing your bitterness. I am pleased that you guys who cling to your hate positions on Bush and Israel haven't lost a step in spite of the election results. Don't ever let those know nothings like task and Wendy G even begin to think that they have a clue about anything. What could they have been thinking?

Jeremiah| 11.28.08 @ 10:57PM

g1234 --

I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say I'm "sharing" my "bitterness," nor do I understand what you mean when you accuse me of "clinging" to my "hate positions."

I don't "hate" Bush or Israel. I'm a firm supporter of Israel and believe that country to be our friend and ally in the region.

However, I did not learn all I know about the Middle East listening to Sean Hannity, as you and your friends have.

I do not celebrate killing people -- even Arab people -- nor do I relish the idea of bulldozing people's homes.

How you can construe my discomfort with that kind of foolish rhetoric as a "hate position" I do not know.

Not that you'll respond or explain your reasoning.

The know-nothings in your crowd have gotten a bit uppity for my taste. It used to be that people were ashamed of being uneducated, and it used to be the Americans worked to better themselves and learn about issues before they publicly aired their opinions about them.

Now, we have Bush and Palin bragging that they don't read, and a whole mob of morons who despise education, science, journalism -- indeed, anything whatsoever that brings us information about the outside world and menaces the crumbling boarders of their ideology.

Reality's breaking through, folks. I don't expect it's going to be comfortable for you.

ruth| 11.28.08 @ 10:58PM

Jeremiah, did you get hold of some bad turkey yesterday (or tofu turkey, since you are a liberal)? You are even nastier than ususal--and that's saying something. By the way, Bin Laden was offered to your boy, Clinton, fornicator-in-chief, when he was president in the 90's, and Clinton rejected all of the offers. Billy was responsible for 9/11, that's why Sandy Burglar stuffed all those papers in his pants. To protect Bill's 'legacy'. Either you are a liar or stupid, perhaps both.

Jeremiah| 11.28.08 @ 11:00PM

g1234 --

Reread what you wrote. What is wrong with you people?

You only understand blind, brainless loyalty or bitter hatred.

You have no concept of civil discourse or exchanging ideas.

You're not a political movement. You're a mob. Just because the miracle of technology allows you to broadcast your dumb chants and shibboleth, it doesn't mean you're anything other than a mob.

Jeremiah| 11.28.08 @ 11:05PM

Ruth --

If 9.11 is Clinton's fault, I suppose the bombing of the Marine barracks under Reagan was Carter's fault?

You people talk about accountability and personal responsibility, but when it comes to assigning responsibility to your man in office -- the buck never stops there.

Your president has presided over the most catastrophically irresponsible governance this nation has seen in modern times.

At the end of Clinton's term we had hundreds of billions in surplus, low unemployment, peace, and prosperity.

What does W leave behind? War, corruption, cronyism, collapsed financial markets, bottomless approval ratings, mass cynicism, broken promises, and an economy that's swirling in the bowl.

But it's all Clinton's fault, if someone were fool enough to ask Ruth.

ruth| 11.28.08 @ 11:12PM

Jeremiah, go take some alka-seltzer for that bad tofu turkey you ate yesterday. So angry. Yeah, at the end of Clinton's term we also had Bin Laden locked and loaded and ready to hit New York. Thanks, Billy.

ruth| 11.28.08 @ 11:22PM

Thank God George Bush has protected us from more terroism after he got stuck with Clinton's mess on 9/11. I just hope that we don't get nuked when Obama is in office because of his weakness.

Jeremiah| 11.29.08 @ 12:13AM

So....the logic is that when we were hit on Bush's watch it was Clinton's fault, but since we haven't been hit after that, Bush get's the credit.

Why isn't it Clinton's doing that we haven't been hit since?

Either Bush was president on 9.11 or not. I just don't know why you want to worm around about it. Conservatives are supposed to have more guts than that.

And by the way? Last I heard Osama bin Laden's still out there. The dimwit from Texas didn't do anything about that.

ruth| 11.29.08 @ 12:29AM

Sorry, dude, it doesn't work that way. Clinton is responsible for his own gutless negligence regarding Bin Laden. If he had been doing his job and not fooling around with interns, Bin Laden would have been locked up. We haven't been hit since 9/11 because of Bushitler's tyrranical security measures you toads on the left have been screaming about for years. Can you put two and two together and see that you ungrateful fools have also been protected by that 'dimwit'? Gutless worms; no better words for liberals. Let's see how Obama and his liberal morons protect the country in the ensuing years. I hope he pays more attention than that feckless whore, Clinton.

WendyG| 11.29.08 @ 10:16AM

>>>Thanks for sharing your goofy and sentimental little collection of Golda Meir quotes. Nothing could have persuaded me more that you are both clueless when it comes to the Middle East and wouldn't know Golda Meir from one of the Golden Girls.

How wrong you are Jeremiah. I know a great deal about ME politics. And putting aside what I know from a lifetime of learning about the issue from the standpoint of an American, I actually lived in Israel for a summer. In addition, one of my dearest friends is an Israeli - an Israeli who ran for Knesset in fact.

>>>>It wasn't under Clinton or Carter or Johnson or Kennedy that 9.11 happened.

Ture enough - Carter and Clinton only seeded the ground and *ensured* 9-11 would happen. Who was in power when the mad Muslim mullahs of Iran came to power? Jimmy Carter. Who allowed American hostages to languish in Iran, and could only mount a feeble helicopter rescue that painted America as a weak paper tiger?? Carter. And why were the hostages finally freed? Because the mad mullahs FEARED Ronald Reagan. And who has run around the world demonizing Israel and elevating Hamas? Jimmy Carter.

And who was getting bj's in the Oval Office while Bin Laden was ramping up his plans for 9-11? Bill Clinton. Whose State Dept. ordered a muted response to the bombing of the UUS Cole, so as not to offend the Palestinians?? Clinton. Don't believe me? Google it.

Bush inherited the mess Carter and Clinton made vis a vis terrorism. 9-11 was years in the making. Clinton years.

Oh well. At least Clinton got plenty of sex during his stay at the WH, while Bin Laden's accolytes were in the US taking flying lessons, and Clinton's people (Jaime Goirelick) were putting up barriers to intelligence gathering.

You need a read few history books Jeremiah. Daily Kos is really not the place to gather facts.

Jeremiah| 11.29.08 @ 12:42PM

Wendy G

If Carter made such a huge mess of things, why did 8 years of REAGAN followed by four years of Bush Sr. not give Republicans ample time to fix the problem?

And where were the Republicans in the 90s with respect to terrorism?

There was a study of the 2000 election done not so long ago. As it turns out, neither presidential candidate gave a major speech or interview on the subject of islamic terrorism. Candidate Bush did not once publicly use the word "terrorism."

Clinton, on the other hand, had the CIA draw up plans for the invasion of Afghanistan and maintained that Al Quaeda was the number one security threat facing the US. You're right. Clinton has much to answer for, and the affair with Lewinski was a disgrace. However, Clinton personally discussed Osama bin Laden with George W Bush, who chose to focus on other matters (deals for oil companies) during the first months of his presidency.

Let's remember. Bush was president for NINE MONTHS before 9.11. There were intelligence warnings about terrorist attacks all summer, and Bush did NOTHING. This is public record, folks. Blaming Clinton for 9.11 is lame, weak, and historically wrong.

Sometimes you just have to face reality.

As for blaming Carter for the Iranian hostages, following your logic we'd have to blame NIXON -- the president who came before.

And ironically, you'd be right, in a sense, to blame Republicans, who were the chief supporters of installing the Shaw in power and overthrowing a democratically elected government in the early fifties. That is what resulted in the revolution and the taking of hostages. But who's counting?

Jeremiah| 11.29.08 @ 12:49PM

Nixon or Ford, that is. Take your pick. I'd go with Nixon because he's pre-tainted.

Now, during the 90s there were some people in Washington who were very concerned about terrorism. No elected officials were interested in the issue -- Republican or Democrat.

Who was?

As it turns out, the person who made the biggest fuss about terrorism throughout the 90s -- to no avail -- was DEMOCRAT Gary Hart. Bob Kerrey was another person who seems to have seen this coming. Richard Clarke, now demonized by Sean Hannity and his moron followers, even though he was appointed by Republicans repeatedly, was very insistent that we needed to pay more attention to Al Quaeda. The fact is, NO ONE was listening--- least of all George Bush and Dick Cheney.

If you want some actual information about the history of Al Quaeda and the people in the government who actually did take the threat seriously, you should read The Looming Tower -- probably the best book about 9.11 and terrorism out there.

This recommendation assumes you're not a Palinite who views reading as a communist conspiracy -- maybe I'm going too far.

ruth| 11.29.08 @ 6:10PM

It's been documented that Clinton refused to take custody of Bin Laden several times when he had the chance. He was afraid for his 'legacy'. Bush was only in office 7 months when 9/11 happened, compared to Clinton's 8 years (which included the first Trade Tower attack in 1993, on Clinton's watch.) Remember, Jeremiah? Of course 9/11 is Clinton's fault--why else did Sandy Burglar steal those documents from the National Security Archives? To cover Clinton's egregious negligence. Come on, Jeremiah, admit 9/11 is Clinton's fault and stop obfuscating. Take responsibility for something--liberals don't do National Security, and you know it.

ruth| 11.29.08 @ 6:17PM

Bush was in office 7 months before 9/11. Feb. thru Aug. = 7 months, not 9. Too bad your boys in the Clinton administration didn't "have their hair on fire", during those eight years they were offered Bin Laden. You are a joke.

Jeremiah| 11.29.08 @ 8:38PM

Ruth,

I may be a "joke," Ruth, but 7 months or 9 months, Bush was president. There can be no disputing it.

And George Tenet's "hair was on fire" during that summer -- in fact, that's the origin of that expression. Tenet testified that he was running around Washington during that August (when Bush was vacationing in Crawford) with his "hair on fire."

This is NOT when Clinton was in office, my darling dear. Again, you really should read The Looming Tower. It doesn't let Clinton or Bush off the hook, but it certainly does NOT lay the blame squarely on Clinton. If you're not afraid of having your Hannity induced ideology challenged by reality based reporting, you should check it out.

Jeremiah| 11.29.08 @ 8:40PM

By the way, Ruth --

Bush was briefed about Al Quaeda first in October of 2ooo, 11 months before the attacks. Then, he was repeatedly briefed about the threat they posed throughout the transition. He wasn't interested. The only thing that caught his attention were some HUGE contracts to be given to some of his father's friends on Star Wars.

WendyG| 11.29.08 @ 9:43PM

Jeremiah, you spew all the talking points from the idiot sites like smirking chimp and the like. Fact is there was no specific threat when Bush was elected. There were general warnings. But when Carter was in office there was an inciting event (taking of American hostages) and the wimp Carter did NOTHING about it. And there were many terrorist attacks during Clinton's years, and he too did jack. Bush at least took action, and has kept us safe since 9-11.

ruth| 11.29.08 @ 11:07PM

No, Jeremiah, it wasn't Tenet's 'hair on fire', it was Richard Clark's 'hair on fire'. Too bad for 3,000 of our fellow citizens incinerated on 9/11, your boy, Clinton, only had his 'pants on fire' during his 8 long years in office. Stupid as a stump.

Jeremiah| 11.29.08 @ 11:14PM

Ruth

Not that it makes a big difference. But the origin of the phrase "hair on fire," which in the year after 9.11 became an overused cliche, was George Tenet -- he said it in reference to his attempt to get someone, anyone, in the BUSH administration to do something about an attack he (correctly) believed was imminent. But you're right, Clarke too was trying to call attention to the issue. We all know the result, and it was Bush that was president when it happened, not Clinton.

ruth| 11.30.08 @ 12:10AM

Jeremiah, you hold President Bush more responsible for 9/11 than Clinton and you even bring up (dubious) threat briefings Bush received before he took office. Yet, you dismiss Clinton's dereliction of duty as president during his 8 long years in office. He deliberately ignored his national security responsibilities and left us vulnerable: He kicked the can down the road for the next president. All I know is that we haven't been attacked since 9/11 largely due to this president's policies. He hasn't kicked the can down the road for Obama, and he has borne the left's predictable, vicious attacks with grace. President George Bush has his faults but he is a true patriot who has won my admiration, I cannot say the same for Bill Clinton.

ruth| 11.30.08 @ 12:15AM

I am not interested in 'gotcha' arguments. You know damn well that al Quaeda takes a long time to plan attacks; a lot longer than 7 months. Clinton was a weak weasel, and 3,000 Americans paid the price. Thank God for the heroism of George Bush. I just pray that Obama isn't as big a coward as Clinton.

Jeremiah| 11.30.08 @ 12:19AM

Actually, Ruth, I believe that in every posting I've made on this topic I've acknowledged that Clinton bears responsibility for 9.11.

However, Clinton was not president on 9.11. That was George Bush, and he deserves considerable responsibility himself.

At exactly what point in your view did Bush become responsible for this country's safety?

Was it only in October 0f 01?

Do you hold Bush responsible for anything?

As for "kicking the can," I think Bush has done his share.

He leaves our military embroiled in two wars, one of which is spiraling out of control (Afghanistan).

He leaves us with an international reputation in tatters. Countries no longer even fear us, let alone respect us.

He leaves us with financial markets frozen and the economy crumbling. We're losing jobs at a rate of 300,000 a month.

Our federal agencies have been operating for two years in the midst of a serious brain drain caused by Bush's extreme politicization of the government, which caused career people -- experts -- to flee their positions, fearful that their careers and reputations would be ruined by working with senseless ideologues.

Obama has a big mess to clean up. Figures they wouldn't give the job to a black man until it was so bad no sane white man would want it.

But America did the right thing and sent adults back to Washington. I think you'll see the difference.

ruth| 11.30.08 @ 1:50AM

Yes, I just hope it isn't the same difference we had with Clinton which lead to 9/11, liberal weakness.

Jeremiah| 11.30.08 @ 3:40AM

Re: "liberal weakness"

Ruth --

Is there a cliche you still haven't used you'd like to offer now?

What was Bush's strength? Talking tough? Bring 'em on?

Darling, you don't know what strength is.

ruth| 11.30.08 @ 3:45PM

What a joke you are, you and your cliche king, the Obamassiah. CHANGE. Obama is a cliche. Liberal weakness--redundant.