Wednesday - October 21, 2009

Drat That Pesky Document!

Does the Constitution allow Obama to accept the Nobel Prize?




Um, I’d say no. And even if he gives the money away, it still has to pass through his fingers in order for him to do that. Therefore he will be taking the money. Big no-no, that one.

Apart from the question of whether President Obama deserves the Nobel Prize — a matter that we’ve suggested is the purview of the Norwegians — the newspapers are starting to crackle with the question of whether the Constitution permits Mr. Obama to accept it. The Nobel, after all, is worth more than $1 million, and Article I, Second 9 of the United States Constitution states in plain language that “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States” and that “no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign state.”

Josh Gerstein, formerly national correspondent of the Sun, reports on Politico that the White House is rejecting as “flat out wrong” the notion that the Nobel Prize would be covered by the proscriptions in the Constitution. “The Constitution talks about kings and princes and foreign states,” Mr. Gerstein quotes a White House aide as asserting. “Here, Alfred Nobel, a private citizen, set up a private foundation — the Nobel Foundation — that awards the money.” The aide wouldn’t be named, Mr. Gerstein said, quoting him as also pointing out that Mr. Obama “has already indicated that he does not intend to keep the money.”

Mr. Gerstein sprang on the issue on the day the prize was announced, as did J.P. Freire, associate commentary editor of the Washington Examiner. Mr. Freire quoted Title 5 of the United States code, under which Congress has laid down the law on gifts that can be accepted by a federal employee. It provides congressional consent to gifts in certain situations but sets a limit that, at the moment, is, according to the Justice Department Web site, $335. The law covers both the president and vice president as well as all other federal employees, including congressmen. So even were the Constitutional question to be vague, the statute seems to be clear.

Read the rest in The NY Sun.

In a similar vein

Remember those “Fortunately, Unfortunately” books from early grade school? I thought of them today when I linked over to Theodore’s World; the post reminded me so much of Phyllis Schlafly’s post from the other day. Like a bad recycler, here are both of them at the same time, co-mingled. Visit Phyllis’ page to get all the links.

• If Barack Obama had campaigned on what he has actually done in his first 300 days in office, would he have been elected? That’s the question so many are asking today.


• If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how he inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?


• If Obama had told us he would appoint 34 Czars, reporting only to himself and not vetted or confirmed in the constitutional way, building a powerful unitary executive branch of government, would he have been elected? What if he had told us that his Green Jobs Czar had been a Communist, that the Science Czar wrote in a college textbook that compulsory “green abortions” are an acceptable way to control population growth, and that the Diversity Czar has spoken publicly of getting white media executives to “step down” in favor of minorities?


• If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?


• If Obama had told us he would take over the automobile industry faster than any socialist dictator ever nationalized an industry, fire the CEO of General Motors and replace him with a Democratic Party campaign contributor, would Obama have been elected? If Obama had campaigned on closing down thousands of profitable car dealers, nearly all Republicans, would we have believed that this vindictive financial retaliation against those who didn’t vote for Obama could happen in America?


• If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan’s holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?


• If Hugo Chavez, the Communist who nationalized most of Venezuela’s industries, had said before the election that “Comrade Obama” would nationalize the U.S. automobile industry and “end up to his right,” would anybody have believed it? If talk shows had warned against such a socialist takeover, would the Obama-loving media have accused them of McCarthyism?


• If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?


• If Obama had told us he would spend $3 billion in a Cash for Clunkers program that would use taxpayers’ funds to buy mostly foreign cars and grind up the used American cars traded in to make them unusable, would he have been elected?


• If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVD’s, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?


• If Obama had told us that his Stimulus package is a sham because it does not create private-sector jobs (as a tax cut would do), so that the unemployment rate has risen to nearly 10 percent, with 15 million Americans unemployed plus another 11 million underemployed, could he have been elected?


• If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?


• If Obama had told us his Supreme Court pick would be a woman who said repeatedly that a “Latina woman” would make better decisions than “a white male,” that his pick for chief State Department lawyer would be a transnationalist who wants to integrate foreign law into law binding on U.S. citizens, and that his pick for Regulations Czar argues that animals are entitled to have lawyers to sue humans in court, would Obama have been elected?


• If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you have approved?


• If we had known that Obama would be totally incompetent as commander-in-chief of his chosen war in Afghanistan, and would not speak to the general in the field for 70 days, ignoring his dire report for six weeks, would Obama have been elected?


• If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent “Austrian language,” would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?


• If Obama had told us he would have the government guarantee 90 percent of all U.S. mortgages, imposing $5 trillion in off-budget debt on U.S. taxpayers who had faithfully made their own mortgage payments, would he have been elected? And what if Obama had told us he would have the taxpayers take over 80 percent of all student loans at a cost of $1 trillion over the next decade?


• If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?


• If Obama had told us that he would make the U.S. government a major shareholder in Citigroup (one of the world’s largest banks), would you have believed he could get away with this socialist takeover?


• If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to “Cinco de Cuatro” in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?


• If Obama had admitted that his health care plan would include the same provisions for which he ran negative TV ads against Hillary Clinton (a federal mandate requiring every American to buy health insurance) and against John McCain (a tax on high-cost employer-based plans), would Obama have been elected?


• If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word “advice” would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what a dunce he is?


• And what if Obama had told us that his federal health plan would pay for all abortions without regard to the Hyde Amendment, and provide full health care (including private doctor visits) to immigrants without requiring proof of legal residence?


• If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he’s a hypocrite?


• If Obama had campaigned on increasing federal spending and debt from a multi-billion-dollar level to multi-trillions, would he have been elected?


• If George W. Bush’s administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?


• And what if Obama had told us that his promise to “spread the wealth around” would balloon his first year’s budget deficit to $1.6 trillion?


• If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?


• If Obama had told us that his promise to “spread the wealth around” meant wiping out the Republican welfare reform of 1996 and increasing annual welfare spending by 39 percent to almost $1 trillion a year by the end of his first term, would he have been elected?


• If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America, would you have approved?


• If Obama had declared during his campaign that his first major speech abroad would be to the Muslim world, and that he would proclaim in Muslim Turkey that “one of the great strengths of the United States is . . . we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation,” would he have been elected?


• If George W Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?

While this is a rather long list, it isn’t by any means complete. It’s merely the tip of the iceberg. And we have another 3 1/2 years of this.

So, do you think any of those “52ers” are suffering from Buyer’s Remorse yet? Not that they’re actually “52ers”. More like “41ers” when you factor in the vote stealing and election rigging done by ACORN and their associated minions. I note that the latest Rasmussen polls have Chairman Mao Jr. Zero down to a “-13” rating, now for a record length of time. Which is NOT news, so please forget that I just said that.

A Rationalization:


This is art. An original. It hangs in the Tate Gallery in London:

L’escargot, by Henri Matisse


This is also art. And also an original. It presently hangs in the White House:

Watusi, by Alma Thomas

If turning a picture on it’s side and changing a few colors turns a total steal into an original, then interleaving two great posts together line by line exempts me from charges of plagiarism. If it’s good enough for the President of the United States, it’s more than good enough for me. Not that this is my plan for time saving in future, I’m just pointing out another layer of bullshit in our world.

   Tuesday - October 20, 2009

What a Turd

Obama Delays Troops To Afghanistan Until after Karzai Revote?


This is beyond stupid. We’re fighting a war over there, m’kay? Sure, sure, win those hearts and minds. After the fighting is over. Duh, even the SecDef agrees.

Gates: U.S. Cannot Wait for Afghan Election to Make Troop Decision

Defense Secretary Robert Gates tells reporters aboard his plane to Tokyo that the administration cannot “sit on our hands” with regard to troop levels in Afghanistan.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday that the Obama administration cannot wait for the Afghan election to be resolved before making a decision on troop levels, appearing to be at odds with White House officials who have tied a decision on U.S. strategy to the resolution of the election and political stability.

Gates suggested the election would not have an immediate impact on the overall situation in the country.

He told reporters aboard his plane to Tokyo that the administration cannot “sit on our hands.”

The comments come after Afghanistan’s election commission ordered a runoff Nov. 7, following an inquiry that found thousands of ballots were fraudulent. President Hamid Karzai accepted the decision.

But White House officials, as well as Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., have suggested that U.S. strategy toward Afghanistan is contingent on political stability.

“Quite frankly, I think any credible person in this country would make a case that all the troops in the world will not solve a problem without a partner that is there ultimately to help,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday. “None of this is going to work without credible partners.”

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said over the weekend that it would be “reckless” to make a decision on troop levels without doing a “thorough analysis” of whether the U.S. has a “true partner in governing.”

And Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, bluntly said it would be “irresponsible” to commit more troops before the election is resolved.

These comments drew widespread criticism from Democrats and Republicans in Congress Monday. They said a runoff is important, but that U.S. military strategy is not dependent on who’s leading the country.

If the Obama administration waits until Afghanistan settles its presidential election before deciding whether to send in more troops, it will be making a big mistake, members of Congress from both sides of the aisle said Monday.

After the White House and a top Democrat said over the weekend that it would be irresponsible to make a troop level decision before a credible government is in place, lawmakers argued that it would make no sense for the administration to wait before moving forward with its new strategy.

“It is immaterial to this process,” said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, saying it is “unbelievable” that the administration would wait for the dust to settle on Afghan politics.

“I don’t think we should delay one set of decisions because of another set of variables,” said Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., who sits on the House Armed Services and Intelligence Committees.

If John Kerry says do it one way, then it’s almost a guarantee that the best course of action is the complete opposite. Beats me why Taxatwoshits keeps electing this traitor to office, but he has all the military expertize of a sand flea. But he’s the “soldier” that the White House listens to. So Obama dithers even more as Rome Afghanistan burns.

Praise Allah that the Pakis are starting their own campaign against AQ and the Talis. and making some progress too.

Pakistan’s army claimed Sunday to have killed 60 militants on the first day of an operation against an Al Qaeda and Taliban sanctuary close to the Afghan border that residents said was meeting stiff resistance from insurgents.  The army said six soldiers had also been killed in the opening salvoes of the push into South Waziristan.

The operation in South Waziristan follows repeated requests from the U.S. to take on the jihadists behind soaring terrorist attacks in the nuclear-armed nation, as well as Al Qaeda and other extremists believed to be plotting strikes in the West.

It involves mostly poorly equipped Pakistani soldiers trained to fight conventional wars, not counterinsurgency operations, who have failed in three other campaigns in the mountainous region since 2004. Much of the region is under total Taliban control.

Accounts from residents and those fleeing Sunday suggested that the 30,000 troops were in for a bloodier time than in the Swat Valley, another northwestern region that the army successfully wrested away from insurgents earlier this year.

“Militants are offering very tough resistance to any movement of troops,” Ehsan Mahsud, a resident of Makeen, a town in the region, told The Associated Press in the town of Mir Ali, close to the battle zone. He and a friend arrived there early Sunday after traveling through the night.

Mahsud said the army appeared to be mostly relying on air strikes and artillery against militants occupying high ground. He said the insurgents were firing heavy machine guns at helicopter gunships, forcing the air force to use higher-flying jets.

The army is up against about 10,000 local militants and about 1,500 foreign fighters, most of them from Central Asia. They control roughly 1,275 square miles of territory, or about half of South Waziristan, in areas loyal to former militant chief Baitullah Mehsud, who was killed in a U.S. missile strike in August.

Officials have said they envisage the operation will last two months, when winter weather will make fighting difficult.

In Your Face

Hubris or arrogance? It doesn’t matter. The White House controls the media and they don’t even pretend otherwise. And since this administration seems to be in perpetual campaign mode, don’t think for a nanosecond that anything has changed. Not a jot.

Team Obama: Yeah, We Controlled The Media

White House Communist In Residence Communications Director Anita Dunn is seen in a video from January talking about how the Obama campaign exercised absolute “control” over media coverage. 

The Obama campaign’s press strategy leading up to his election last November focused on “making” the media cover what the campaign wanted and on exercising absolute “control” over coverage, White House Communications Director Anita Dunn told an overseas crowd early this year.

In a video of the event, Dunn is seen describing in detail the media strategy used by then-Sen. Barack Obama’s highly disciplined presidential campaign. The video is footage from a Jan. 12 forum hosted by the Global Foundation for Democracy and Development in the Dominican Republic.

“Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn’t absolutely control,” Dunn said, admitting that the strategy “did not always make us popular in the press.”

The video drew attention after Dunn kicked off a war of words with Fox News last Sunday, calling the network “opinion journalism masquerading as news.” The White House stopped providing guests to “Fox News Sunday” in August after host Chris Wallace fact-checked controversial assertions made by Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Dunn complained about the fact-checking last Sunday. In the January forum, she provided details about the lengths to which the Obama campaign went to control the media message.

She explained that the campaign favored live interviews so that Obama’s words could not be edited—“so that what the voters heard we determined, as opposed to some editor in a TV station.”

She said Campaign Manager David Plouffe put out Web videos so the campaign could avoid talking to reporters and focus the media message.

“Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it,” she said. “One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters. ... We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it.”

And it was easy for them because the press was slavishly devoted. And they still are. Dunn’s message is really just the tip of the iceberg. She doesn’t admit that their influence was far far deeper than just how they went about delivering sound bites or setting up predetermined marshmallow interviews. Not a word about how they managed to get almost every reporter and journalist in the country to avoid any and all hard questions and criticisms. How they could lie out of both sides of their mouth at the same time, day after day, changing their tune whenever necessary. And no one would call them on that, ever. And no one would do a single bit of fact checking, ever. Not against Team Teh Won!

This campaign was an abomination and the media was utterly complicit. This administration is an obamanation and the media is still utterly complicit. It’s disgusting. And at least half the country is asleep at the switch, still completely unaware of it. And they wouldn’t care anyway.

   Thursday - October 15, 2009

Another Commie in the White House

Caught this on Glen Beck this evening. Anita Dunn, White House Communications Director. Her greatest hero, the philosopher who inspires her all the time ... is Chairman Mao. Horry Clap.

Oh, Ms. Dunn gets inspired by Mother Theresa too. But apparently not enough to quote from her, or to even reference some act of hers.


How much room is left under that bus?

   Tuesday - October 13, 2009

Nobel BS

Nobel jury defends Obama decision


Defense consists of outright lies and a lot of shuffling papers

Members of the Norwegian committee that gave Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize are strongly defending their choice against a storm of criticism that the award was premature and a potential liability for the U.S. president.

Asked to comment on the uproar following Friday’s announcement, four members of the five-seat panel told The Associated Press that they had expected the decision to generate both surprise and criticism.

Three of them rejected the notion that Obama hadn’t accomplished anything to deserve the award, while the fourth declined to answer that question. A fifth member didn’t answer calls seeking comment.

“We simply disagree that he has done nothing,” committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland told the AP on Tuesday. “He got the prize for what he has done.”

Jagland singled out Obama’s efforts to heal the divide between the West and the Muslim world and scale down a Bush-era proposal for an anti-missile shield in Europe.

“Alfred Nobel wrote that the prize should go to the person who has contributed most to the development of peace in the previous year,” Jagland said. “Who has done more for that than Barack Obama?”

Aagot Valle, a left-wing Norwegian politician who joined the Nobel panel this year, also dismissed suggestions that the decision to award Obama was without merit.

“Don’t you think that comments like that patronize Obama? Where do these people come from?” Valle said by phone from the western coastal city of Bergen.

Michael S. Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, said naming Obama showed “how meaningless a once honorable and respected award has become.”

In a fundraising letter, Steele wrote that “the Democrats and their international leftist allies want America made subservient to the agenda of global redistribution and control. And truly patriotic Americans like you and our Republican Party are the only thing standing in their way.”

Columnist Thomas Friedman wrote in the New York Times that Obama “has not done anything yet on the scale that would normally merit such an award.”

Even in Europe, where Obama is hugely popular, many editorials and pundits questioned what he had done to deserve the award.

“Scrap the Nobel Peace Prize,” foreign affairs commentator Bronwen Maddox wrote in The Times of London. “It’s an embarrassment and even an impediment to peace. President Obama, in letting the committee award it to him, has made himself look vain, a fool and dangerously lost in his own mystique.”

   Sunday - October 11, 2009

Nice Rant

Today’s Day By Day cartoon

Link, as always, is over on the side bar. Does Chris Muir publish this thing in newspapers? Don’t I wish.

President John Bolton… I like it.

John Bolton is my best choice for President. Especially now, we need a President who is strong on national defense. I’ve read his book, Surrender is not an Option Put this man in the White House! At least he would defend us, unlike the current beta-male who ‘won’ the ACORN-tainted election.

Former UN Ambassador John Bolton on Øbama’s Nobelol prize:

In reality, I’m surprised at how ‘unnewsworthy’ Øbama’s Nobel award was. Nobody at work talked about it. I got the impression at work that, for or against Øbama, we were all ashamed. He doesn’t deserve it. And he’ll never deserve such a prize.

   Saturday - October 10, 2009

BØRED OF THE RINGS

Thank you Drew.

It’s your fault that I came up with this lame idiocy.

Too much Benzedrine and Hashberry, I guess.

There on the stoop were twenty-three lyre-strumming nymphs in gauzy pants-suits couched in a golden canoe borne on the cool mists of a hundred fire extinguishers and crewed by a dozen tipsy leprechauns uniformed in shimmering middy-blouses and fringed toreador pants. Facing Frito was a twelve-foot specter shrouded in red sateen, shod in bejeweled riding boots, and mounted on an obese, pale-blue unicorn. Around him fluttered winged frogs, miniature Valkyries, and an airborne caduceus. The tall figure offered Frito a six-fingered hand which held a curiously inscribed identification bracelet simply crawling with mysterious portents.

Frito banged the door shut in the specter’s surprised face, bolted, barred, and locked it, swallowing the key for good measure. Then he walked directly to his cozy fire and slumped in the chair. He began to muse upon the years of delicious boredom that lay ahead. Perhaps he would take up Scrabble.

I’m not sure which was a worse influence: HP Lovecraft, Robert A. Heinlein, or Bored of the Rings.

   Friday - October 09, 2009

Next Week’s Awards

I think Obama might be well on his way to actually earning these two:




Order of Lenin
For strengthening peace and for other meritorious services to the Soviet state



Hero of Soviet Labor
For exceptional achievements in national economy and culture




Sorry, the Nobel thing has just flattened me. I’m tempted to just hang it up like Steamboat did today, and say Fuggit. But ... never retreat, never surrender!

An Absolute Disgrace

Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize
Award Given Based Mainly On His Empty Campaign Promises



WTF people, WTFF?

The official citation:

“The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

“Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

“Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.

“For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world’s leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that “Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.”

Despite less than one year in office and leading two wars, President Obama snatched the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday, stunning the world one week after failing to win an Olympic bid for his adopted hometown.

The Nobel committee said its decision was motivated by Obama’s initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism.

Yet the choice was stunning given the nomination deadline of Feb.1, less than two weeks after the Obama presidency began.

Oh this is such bullshit that it’s nearly incomprehensible. It’s a BRIBE, m’kay? It isn’t an award for anything actually accomplished, it’s a come-on to steer this weak willed wiener in the direction that International Socialism wants him to go in: make America weak, and cave in to every tinpot dictator on the planet. Which is exactly what he’s been doing as far as I can see. Bow to the Saudis, dis our allies, obey his chicom masters, meet with and befriend every tyrant he can find ...

I know the Nobel Prize is a crock, that’s it’s nothing but politics and has been for ages. But this is the most disgusting implementation ever. Usually the prize committee can at least base their award on some kind of accomplishments. This one was given out based on expectations. And that’s beyond being a crock. It’s a bribe, straight up.

And you thought Obama was prideful and arrogant before this? Shit, I bet his swelled head just inflated another 3 hat sizes. We are so fuckin doomed it’s disgusting.

Go find your own links. I’m not linking to this BS.

   Thursday - October 08, 2009

He’s Nuckin Futs!

Obama Wants Political Partnership With The Taliban


Troop increase for Afghanistan? Only enough to keep Taliban at bay says Obama.
Victory? We doan need no steenkin victory!




And with one fell swoop President Dumbshit creates another Vietnam. Holy shit what a loser. Now watch reenlistment plummet even faster than his poll numbers.

President Obama is inclined to send only as many more U.S. troops to Afghanistan as are needed to keep Al Qaeda at bay, a senior administration official said.

The official, in an interview with The Associated Press, also added that the president is prepared to accept some Taliban involvement in Afghanistan’s political future, reiterating what Obama said in March.

The assessment comes from an official who has been involved in the president’s discussions with his war council about Afghanistan strategy.

Aides say the president’s final decision on Afghanistan strategy and troop levels is still at least two weeks away, but the emerging thinking suggests he would be unlikely to favor a large military ramp-up of the kind being advocated by his top commander in Afghanistan.

McChrystal’s troop request is said to include a range of options, from adding as few as 10,000 combat troops to—the general’s strong preference—as many as 40,000.

Obama’s developing strategy on the Taliban will “not tolerate their return to power,” the senior official said. But the U.S. would fight only to keep the Taliban from retaking control of Afghanistan’s central government—something it is now far from being capable of—and from giving renewed sanctuary in Afghanistan to Al-Qaeda, the official said.

Recognizing the U.S. can neither win in Afghanistan nor succeed more broadly against Al Qaeda without Pakistan’s cooperation, Obama’s war council is weighing a new role for Pakistan in the 8-year-old struggle in the region.

Oh bullshit.  What a total crock. The only reason we haven’t won in Afghanistan is because the ROE are so skewed that it’s almost impossible for our troops to fight. By adapting a “policy of containment” Obama just sentenced our serving men and women to a long drawn out death. No victory. No elimination of our enemy. No nothing. Just a bunch of pawns to be spent at random intervals.

Fuck that: bring them home now.

Which is exactly the sentiment he wants to encourage.

This tastes like treason.

Vice President Biden has argued against increasing the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, saying Pakistan poses the greater threat, but Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have both warned that the Taliban and Al Qaeda remain connected. If the Taliban were to regain control of large parts of Afghanistan, the country could serve as a sanctuary for Al Qaeda fighters, the have advisors said.

A State Department spokesman said Thursday that Clinton believes the Taliban and Al Qaeda are both a threat and the U.S. is fighting the whole idea of killing in the name of religious extremism.

In Pakistan, though, the government has shown new willingness to battle extremists, with most believed to be operating from the largely ungoverned terrain along the border with Afghanistan.

If the full force of our military was brought to bear on Afghanistan the war could be over in a matter of weeks, perhaps months. Without nukes or poison gas. Yes, there would be tens of thousands of collateral damage casualties. Who gives a shit? Kill them all, burn the whole country to the ground, paraquat the opium fields, push a wall of fire and death 150 miles into Pakistan and eliminate every last proto-human in the “ungovernable semi-autonomous zones”. And the world will breath a sigh of relief. Nobody cares.

But Obama and the Democrats will find a way to pull defeat from the jaws of victory. And just piss away your serving son’s and daughter’s lives. Because he despises the military and he despises America and he has no stomach for a real war.

General McChrystal wants another 40,000 troops. Send him 140,000. And then untie their hands and let them fight. It’s time to stop the soft approach; it doesn’t work. 

vainglory, hubris, and narcissism

Did “me me me” cost us us us the Olympics?


Odingus and the Klingon referred to themselves 76 times in 89 sentences while pitching Chicago to the IOC. No wonder they IOC thought they were pitching something else.




George Wills writes more at Real Clear Politics.

The Obamas’ Narcissism on Display

In the Niagara of words spoken and written about the Obamas’ trip to Copenhagen, too few have been devoted to the words they spoke there. Their separate speeches to the International Olympic Committee were so dreadful, and in such a characteristic way, that they might be symptomatic of something that has serious implications for American governance.

Both Obamas gave heartfelt speeches about ... themselves. Although the working of the committee’s mind is murky, it could reasonably have rejected Chicago’s bid for the 2016 games on aesthetic grounds—unless narcissism has suddenly become an Olympic sport.

In the 41 sentences of her remarks, Michelle Obama used some form of the personal pronouns “I” or “me” 44 times. Her husband was, comparatively, a shrinking violet, using those pronouns only 26 times in 48 sentences. Still, 70 times in 89 sentences was sufficient to convey the message that somehow their fascinating selves were what made, or should have made, Chicago’s case compelling.

[there ought to be software that could] delete the most egregious cliches sprinkled around by the tin-eared employees in the White House speechwriting shop. The president told the Olympic committee that: “At this defining moment,” a moment “when the fate of each nation is inextricably linked to the fate of all nations” in “this ever-shrinking world,” he aspires to “forge new partnerships with the nations and the peoples of the world.”

Good grief.

… meaningful sense is often absent from the gaseous rhetoric that makes it past White House editors—are there any?—and onto the president’s teleprompter.

Perhaps the premise of the otherwise inexplicable trip to Denmark was that there is no difficulty, foreign or domestic, that cannot be melted by the sunshine of the Obama persona. But in the contest between the world and any president’s charm, bet on the world.

Yup, I think The Magic Negro’s ass needs a reload. He seems fresh out of unicorns ready to come flying out on rainbows whenever he opens his mouth.

   Tuesday - October 06, 2009

Dickless Wonder

Barack Obama cuts meeting with Dalai Lama to please his Chinese masters



Utterly shameful. Can we get a do-over please, to get this red-assed baboon out of the White House?

President Barack Obama has refused to meet the Dalai Lama in Washington this week in a move to curry favour with the Chinese.

The decision came after China stepped up a campaign urging nations to shun the Tibetan spiritual leader.

It means Mr Obama will become the first president not to welcome the Nobel peace prize winner to the White House since the Dalai Lama began visiting Washington in 1991.

The Buddhist monk arrived in Washington on Monday for a week of meetings with Congressional leaders, celebrity supporters and interest groups, but the president will not see him until after he has made his first visit to China next month.

Samdhong Rinpoche, the Tibetan prime minister-in-exile, has accused the United States and other Western nations of “appeasement” toward China as its economic weight grows.

“Today, economic interests are much greater than other interests,” he said.

Mr Obama’s decision dismayed human rights and Tibetan support groups, who said he had made an unnecessary concession to the Chinese, who regard the Dalai Lama as a “splittist”, despite his calls for autonomy rather than independence for Tibet. The Chinese invaded in 1950, forcing the young leader to flee.

Sophie Richardson, Asia advocate for Human Rights Watch, said: “Presidents always meets the Dalai Lama and what happens? Absolutely nothing.

“This idea that if you are nice to the Chinese Communist Party up front you can cash in later is just wrong. If you lower the bar on human rights they will just move it lower and lower.”

“New Zen riddle: What is the sound of one hand smacking this uppity fucker upside the head?”

( The UK Telegraph editorializes: )
Good grief. You begin to wonder if the man has a list of Friendly Leaders I Still Need to Offend.

The Washington Post is reporting that the Dalai Lama went to Washington this week – apparently expecting to be received at the White House – only to find that his meeting with the president has been “postponed… until after Obama’s summit with his Chinese counterpart, Hu Jintao, scheduled for next month.” According to the Post, this is the “first time since 1991, the Tibetan spiritual leader will visit Washington this week and not meet with the president.” The snub could be a big set back. The Post says:

[I]t could make it more difficult for the Dalai Lama to meet with the heads of state of other countries. China has launched a worldwide effort to stop heads of state from hosting the Tibetan leader. The Dalai Lama is to travel to New Zealand and Australia later this year and has yet to secure a commitment from their leaders to meet. “A lot of smaller countries will have the best excuse,” he said. “They’ll say, ‘Give us a break. How about the big United States?’ ”

Finally, Tibetan officials worried about how Chinese authorities would portray the victory in China. “They would obviously tell the people of Tibet that His Holiness was rejected in Washington,” the Asian diplomat said.

Never fear, your Holiness: Obama administration officials have termed the new policy “strategic reassurance” – or “part of a strategy to improve ties with China that also includes soft-pedaling criticism of China’s human rights and financial policies as well as backing efforts to elevate China’s position in international institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund”.

I can think of other things to call it.

What a sellout. What a ZERO.

---

---

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner

GNU Terry Pratchett

Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.

---

Sponsor's Links

---

Newsfeeds

 RSS 2.0   Atom 

---

Other ways to BMEWS yourself

Most Recent Posts

• Once Again, The One And Only Post
• Gee, Oops
• The ‘Rona Song
• Follow Me !
• eye candy, high plains edition
• Flowers For Algernon?
• The Death Of NYC?
• Very Funny Officer
• Rhubarb !!!
• Fauci Gets One Right
• toldja so
• Of course she isn’t, but you’re uninformed and intellectually lazy so she’ll get away with it
• Walter White Moved To Holland?
• TLH? Typical Leftist Hypocrites
• Biden Picks Kamala Harris For VP
• Feral Child Killers
• Gohmert (R-TX) Much Improved
• Still Here
• A Dark Ending
• Ospreys are up, is Trump in town?

Humor

---

Donations & Stuff

Buy BMEWS High Quality Stuff!

---

Help Support BMEWS

---

PAYPAL donation button

---

Our Sponsors

Your Ad Here

---

Department Of Information

DAILY READS

• Broderland Beat
  
• Hot Air
  
• Gateway Pundit
  
• Michelle Malkin
  
• Right Wing NEws
  

CONSERVATIVE OPINION

• Neal Boortz
  
• Ann Coulter
  
• Hugh Hewitt
  
• Rush Limbaugh
  

NEWS

• Washington Times
  
• Best Of The Web Today
  
• Media Research Center
  
• Newsmax
  
• Townhall
  
• Weekly Standard
  
• WorldNetDaily
  

MILITARY & IRAQ

• US Central Command
  
• US Army
  
• US Air Force
  
• US Navy
  
• US Marine Corps
  
• US Coast Guard
  
• A Soldiers Blog
  
• Citizen Smash
  
• CPT Patti
  
• Front Line Voices
  
• Iraq 2.0
  
• Iraq The Model
  
• Sgt. Stryker
  

GOVERNMENT

• White House News
  
• White House Press
  
• Dept Of Defense
  
• Dept Of State
  
• Dept Of Homeland Security
  
• National Security Council
  
• CIA
  
• FBI
  
• NASA
  
• US Supreme Court
  
• US House
  
• US Senate
  
• US House Votes
  
• US Senate Votes
  
• RNC News
  
• DNC News
  
• On The Floor
  
• US Government Reference
  
• State Governments
  
• America's Job Bank
  

LINKS

• Inside Louisville

Search For It!

Web BMEWS

This Blog Is Rated

Required Reading

• FAQ For Barking Moonbats
• What Is A Moonbat?
• Why Do Moonbats Bark?
• Our Patron Saint

Acknowledgements

Categories

• Abortion - (17)
• Adventure - (22)
• Advertising - (0)
• Advertising - (9)
• Africa - (102)
• Amazing Science and Discoveries - (121)
• Animals - (249)
  • Cat Blogging - (14)
• Archeology / Anthropology - (83)
• Architecture - (41)
• Art-Photography - (339)
• Awards - (77)
• Battling Brits - (23)
• Big Brother - (53)
• Big Business - (53)
• BIRTHDAY - (7)
• Blog Stuff - (270)
• Border Security - (27)
• Bowling Blogging - (187)
• Bread - (19)
• Bridges - (50)
• Canada - (14)
• Celebrities - (125)
• CHESS - (67)
• CHINA in the news - (45)
• Climate-Weather - (442)
• Colleges-Professors - (70)
• Commies - (212)
• Computers and Cyberspace - (80)
• Crime - (1093)
• CULTURE IN DECLINE - (416)
• Daily Life - (730)
• Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists - (1830)
• Passing on, Death and Disaster - (18)
• Disasters - (7)
• Economics - (362)
• DIVERSITY BS - (119)
• Editorials - (318)
• Education - (342)
• Egypt, Then and Now - (0)
• Environment - (209)
• EUro-peons - (310)
• Eye-Candy - (903)
• Fake News - (1)
• Finance and Investing - (36)
• Family - (38)
• Fine-Dining - (168)
• Food - (15)
• FRANCE - (116)
• Fun-Stuff - (838)
• FREEDOM - (121)
• gardening - (1)
• Gardens and plants - (3)
• Gay Gay Gay! - (56)
• Genocide - (12)
• Government - (395)
• Corruption and Greed - (144)
• Guns and Gun Control - (528)
• Health and Safety - (67)
• Health-Medicine - (320)
• Heroes - (72)
• High Tech - (33)
• Hildabeast - (77)
• History - (345)
• Holidays - (63)
  • Christmas - (15)
• Hollywood - (184)
• Homeland-Security - (41)
• Humor - (1876)
• Illegal-Aliens and Immigration - (502)
• Inflation and High Prices - (16)
• Insanity - (252)
• International - (396)
• Iran - (62)
• Iraq - (175)
• Israel - (81)
• Jack Booted Thugs - (124)
• Judges-Courts-Lawyers - (480)
• Justice - LACK OF - (123)
• Latin-America - (19)
• Literature - (32)
• Love-Marriage - (27)
• Media-Bias - (428)
• Medical - (48)
• Mexico - (11)
• Middle-East - (140)
• Military - (596)
• Miscellaneous - (2383)
• Moonbat Award to: - (15)
• Motorvators - (122)
• MOVIES - (29)
• Music - (117)
• muslims - (364)
• Nanny State - (149)
• Nature - (34)
• New Jersey - (3)
• Neat Inventions - (15)
• News-Briefs - (335)
• No Shit, Sherlock - (47)
• North-Korea - (20)
• NOSTALGIA - (10)
• Obama, The One - (431)
• OBITITUARIES - (48)
• Odd-Strange - (244)
• Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices - (126)
• Oppression - (34)
• Outrageous - (453)
• Outsourcing - (8)
• OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT - (39)
• pandemic and epidemic diseases - (61)
  • The New Normal - (4)
• Pandemic Pandemonium - (63)
• Paleswine - (74)
• PAT CONDELL - (43)
• Patriotism - (151)
• Personal - (436)
• Philosophy - (70)
• Pirates, aarrgh! - (158)
• planes, trains, tanks, ships, machines, automobiles - (179)
• Politically Correct B.S. - (147)
• Politically-Incorrect - (117)
• Politics - (860)
• Porkbusters - (11)
• Product Safety - (5)
• Racism and race relations - (283)
• REALLY WORTHLESS and PUTRID PEOPLE - (145)
• Religion - (187)
• Republicans - (132)
• RoPMA - (684)
• Russia - (5)
• Sarah Palin - (16)
• Satire - (64)
• Scary Stuff - (76)
• Science-Technology - (257)
• Self-Defense - (35)
• Sex - (106)
• Sharia law - (10)
• Social-Security - (41)
• Space - (41)
• SPOOKS - (9)
• Sports - (170)
• STFU - (0)
• Stoopid-People - (1015)
• Success Stories - (7)
• Super Seniors - (0)
• Talented Ppl. - (22)
• Taxes - (66)
• Television - (55)
• Terrorists - (715)
• The New Conservatives - (45)
• Travelers/Gypsies/Squatters - (130)
• TURD WORLD - (27)
• Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind - (36)
• Tyrants and Dictators - (94)
• UK - (1715)
• Unions-Labor - (54)
• United-Nations - (136)
• USA - (277)
• War On Terror - (365)
• War-Stories - (218)
• weird stuff - (37)
• work and the workplace - (143)

Monthly Archives

• May 2024
• August 2020
• July 2020
• June 2020
• May 2020
• April 2020
• March 2020
• February 2020
• January 2020
• December 2019
• November 2019
• August 2016
• July 2016
• June 2016
• May 2016
• April 2016
• March 2016
• February 2016
• January 2016
• December 2015
• November 2015
• October 2015
• September 2015
• August 2015
• July 2015
• June 2015
• May 2015
• April 2015
• March 2015
• February 2015
• January 2015
• December 2014
• November 2014
• October 2014
• September 2014
• August 2014
• July 2014
• June 2014
• May 2014
• April 2014
• March 2014
• February 2014
• January 2014
• December 2013
• November 2013
• October 2013
• September 2013
• August 2013
• July 2013
• June 2013
• May 2013
• April 2013
• March 2013
• February 2013
• January 2013
• December 2012
• November 2012
• October 2012
• September 2012
• August 2012
• July 2012
• June 2012
• May 2012
• April 2012
• March 2012
• February 2012
• January 2012
• December 2011
• November 2011
• October 2011
• September 2011
• August 2011
• July 2011
• June 2011
• May 2011
• April 2011
• March 2011
• February 2011
• January 2011
• December 2010
• November 2010
• October 2010
• September 2010
• August 2010
• July 2010
• June 2010
• May 2010
• April 2010
• March 2010
• February 2010
• January 2010
• December 2009
• November 2009
• October 2009
• September 2009
• August 2009
• July 2009
• June 2009
• May 2009
• April 2009
• March 2009
• February 2009
• January 2009
• December 2008
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• December 2007
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006
• May 2006
• April 2006
• March 2006
• February 2006
• January 2006
• December 2005
• November 2005
• October 2005
• September 2005
• August 2005
• July 2005
• June 2005
• May 2005
• April 2005
• March 2005
• February 2005
• January 2005
• December 2004
• November 2004
• October 2004
• September 2004
• August 2004
• July 2004
• June 2004
• January 2004
• Complete Archives
• Category Archives

The Stat Monster

---

---

---

Copyright

All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

You may freely use anything for non-commercial purposes as long as you attribute the source. All non-original content must be attributed to the original source. Play fair.

Fair Use

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner or may be authorized or licensed for publication at this site only. Permission to copy, republish or reproduce such material must be obtained from the original copyright owner.

We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc.

We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

GNU Terry Pratchett