Shoe-Shining David Shuster: It's 'Absolutely Crazy' to Question Obama's Libya Triumph
On Tuesday's edition of the Stephanie Miller radio show, she welcomed the one she called "Dreamy News Man," the former MSNBC anchor David Shuster, now just picking up anchoring scraps from that flailing show with the terminally arrogant former sportscaster on Current TV. Predictably, Shuster pleased the persistently Obama-cheerleading Miller by suggesting the Republicans were in "Crazy-land en masse" on Libya. It's apparently "absolutely crazy" to question the patience, the firmness, the wisdom of Team Obama's foreign policy:
This just goes to show what Republicans are really after. I mean they will try and destroy and smear President Obama using anything they possibly can even if it’s completely and totally illogical. As it turns out, I mean, the President has been following the right strategy for all these many months. He’s been patient when a lot of other people haven’t. He’s been firm when a lot of other people suggested that we have no business being there. And it turned out that this has worked.
I mean, the strategy of the Obama administration and others around the world pursued of sort of helping the rebels, arming them and giving them the time and pace to sort of make their move, it’s worked. And anyone who says otherwise, anybody who says 'Oh the President was too slow' or 'Why didn’t the President move faster' is absolutely crazy!
Miller complained that the Republicans weren't giving Obama enough credit, and gave Bush credit when Osama bin Laden was killed. Shuster said the Republicans are trying really hard to "resuscitate George W. Bush," to the extent that they're considering Gov. Rick Perry, which he called "frightening." Shuster said this shows the dire state of the GOP: "They're so unhinged, they're so off the deep end, that even someone completely insane like Rick Perry can possibly get the nomination."
He suggested all the Republican candidates are losing their marbles:
We’re getting into the silly season where the press releases are going to get increasingly bizarre. It’s so clear that the Republicans, no matter who the winner is, are going to be [for] who can ever be the craziest, who can ever be the most irrational, and illogical, and cynical about the American people, that the American people are so stupid that they might believe some of this nonsense that they’re spewing.
- Tim Graham's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
We threw away a billion
Submitted by rbosque on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 11:32pm.
We threw away a billion dollars for what? To have Lybia replaced with a Sharia-compliant nation? And where's the usual mindless anti-war crowd? No marching?
Looks to me like Obama is building his new world order one nation at a time.
For an incompetent fool, look
Submitted by milootoole on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 4:30pm.
For an incompetent fool, look how much damage he has inflicted as our Congress sits with thumbs up butts and , sometimes does not raise a peep about the issues.
I predict before he leaves office we will have Sharia law in 6 -9 states. Of course, Illinois will be one and Michigan another.
Drilling, energy issue s will be buried in legal issue that will take decades to straighten out.
Huntsman will do well because he speaks Chinese, so he can address our new bosses.
Delaware and Maryland will secede and become part of Aztlan. Most of the Confederate states will load up and patiently watch.
Luis Gutierrez will be Cabinet member in charge of teaching all Americans to speak Spanish as the language of America.
And you and I will not be able to come here and publicly criticize whoever the Marxists get in the White House.
Obama the imperalist and his
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 11:33pm.
Obama the imperalist and his radical leftwing running dog lackey war mongers must be stopped. Time for code pink to swing into action.
We are still talking about President Bush years later?
Submitted by The Vet on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 11:38pm.
As it turns out, I mean, the President has been following the right strategy for all these many months. He’s been patient when a lot of other people haven’t. He’s been firm when a lot of other people suggested that we have no business being there. And it turned out that this has worked.
And President Bush was afforded this respect in the dark days of Iraq? I certainly don't recall it.
I"ve listened to Stephanie
Submitted by killa37 on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 11:49pm.
I"ve listened to Stephanie Miller quite a few times........I think she has Attention Deficit Disorder - lefty style. It's kind of like listening to a ping-pong ball inside a clothes dryer. And this guy Shuster - when I read his last remark in the article, I swear he was talking about the whacky loony lefties!!!
As far as Libya goes..........I'm not sure what Barama can crow about, except that he will anyway...........'I was doin' bin Laden, aaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnndddd.......then I was doin' Khadaffi'!!! He sent support, and said he didn't need any Congressional OK, and then he said it WASN'T really a 'war', and then he's avoided the subject for months...........waiting to see what happens. (Well, I actually doubt that..........he's been golfing, but somebody will tell him what happens). And now that -apparantly - some result HAS happened, he'll be up there taking credit for it. And Libya will go from bad to worse..................
Great word Killa
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 12:01am.
Crow, whether dishing or eating, or flying as
Guess as an islander this means squat?
You mean 'squawk', Boudin???
Submitted by killa37 on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 12:18am.
You mean 'squawk', Boudin??? Yeah.........something like that. Actually, I know a guy over here who's nickname is 'Crow'....although he spells it 'Kro'.........and he sounds like one!!! And he's a total hypocritical lib........although he's fairly likeable. I have a lot of fun jiving him............he doesn't get too riled up, like most of these uppity libs I know over here. Plus, he always wants me to show him things on the ukulele..........so he knows which side of the bread is buttered!!! Hahahahaha!!!
Ah, me as a Landlubber
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 12:26am.
Figured there weren't any Crows out there, oh well?
Guess I will assume you got Rats and Pretty Women too?
Well, aside from the guy I
Submitted by killa37 on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 12:44am.
Well, aside from the guy I just mentioned, there aren't any crows over here.........although some of the seabirds do make a squawking noise.
This is off-topic, but I was just reading about Mooooooooooooochelle's vacation addiction, and her penchant for pricey vodka and wine,and her never-ending shopping habits!! It appears that Boy Barry isn't happy with her 'out-of-control' spending - although for the life of me, I can't figure out why!!! I guess it's their OWN money (sometimes) that Moooooooooochelle is spending!!! And that doesn't fly with Barry!!!
Oh yeah............I see a lot of dead rats - I have a voracious little female cat who is fearless. And Pretty Women...........U NO DAT!!!!
Huh? Deposing the leader is the easy part
Submitted by merly1 on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 11:52pm.
Winning the peace, not so easy. See Iraq, Afghan, Egypt, etc
We might see far worse rise to power in this country........
welfare / warfare state
Submitted by Hog_Flambe on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 12:08am.
David...poor bastard can't get his story straight.
NOBEE...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1yxkuzgvgc
Crazy???
Submitted by Joe W. on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 12:12am.
I don't know about y'all, but I'm getting real tired of liberals telling me that I'm crazy...unhinged...wacko...illogical...bizarre...not to mention unpatriotic and a terrorist. Just because I disagree with Kaptain KickAss. Well, Mr. Schyster.......up yours, you sorry assed punk.
Now We Know!
Submitted by Avitar on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 1:13am.
We know who they invented the term 'bootlicker' for.
Bootlicker, shoe shiner and
Submitted by buddyc on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 10:14am.
Bootlicker, shoe shiner and knob polisher all fit Schuster.
Mission Accomplished?
Submitted by Kuso Jiji on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 1:22am.
Libya is won? Really?
I see Obama taking credit again.
I see mobs doing what mobs do.
I don't see a free country.
I don't see a new democracy.
banner
Submitted by Agnostic on Fri, 08/26/2011 - 8:32am.
but there is no banner proclaiming a mission victory so everything is okay for the President to interrupt his golf game and take credit.
Has anyone heard much from Egypt lately?
Submitted by bigdaddy on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 1:31am.
I guess they are so happy with the military rule overseeing their country that they have nothing to say.
No worries Big D
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 1:33am.
I am sure Mr O has that under thumb!
sickening
Submitted by scarletandgold on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 2:10am.
its gut wrenching to watch 2 guilty white progressive slaves crow about thier massa,,,my god are these people brain dead or what ...when sharia is in thier ugly faces then they will all be running for the nearest tea party,,but we wont want them..
Libya will be Obama's
Submitted by dscott on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 2:33am.
Libya will be Obama's "Mission Accomplished" moment.
Egypt is not turning out so hot and there is no reason to believe Libya will turn out any differently given the incompetent handling of the situation. What Obama did here was to light the fuse and run away from the bomb he placed in the Middle East like a mischeivous youth lighting an M-80. It doesn't take a tactical genius to create a mess, it takes planning and coordination to insure an outcome that is beneficial. Crossing one's fingers hoping for a good outcome is a failed strategy. Hope is NOT a strategy.
Obama broke Egypt and Libya and now he owns it. He did exactly what Jimmy Carter to Iran and the results will be the same. I sincerely hope I am wrong in this prediction but as Einstein is reputed to say, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result." If I were a liberal I would be very careful to distance myself from Obama at this point because the type of meddling Obama did in both countries will forever place egg on the Democrat Party where foreign policy is concerned. You can count on the GOP campaign slogan every time a Democrat runs for POTUS, a Democrat's idea of Foreign Policy is Hope and Change: Iran, Egypt and Libya.
The contrast between the GOP and Democrat foreign policy solutions couldn't be more clear. The GOP team chooses an outcome, finds the people who will fit that outcome and then supports them every step of the way to achieve the outcome. (Gulf War, Iraq and Afghanistan) The Democrat team blathers Hope and Change, let's anyone who claims to support that change participate and then blindly throws money, equipment and bombs until something happens. When all is done, the Democrats either fall silent and pretend nothing ever happened (like in Iran) or proclaim Mission Accomplished and then promptly run away from the consequences of their actions (Somalia).
You mean like Karzai [you know, the guy who has insisted on
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 4:04am.
the ROE which are condemned here just about every day]? Or Hamas--the terrorist organization the Bush administration helped install in power to represent the Palestinians? Or Ahmed Chalabi who thoroughly bamboozled the neocons and caused enormously humiliating policy screw-ups in Iraq? Or the Bush policy of actively undermining Mubarek in Egypt?
The record of "choosing an outcome" and then making an ungodly mess of it is painfully obvious and well-documented. I'm afraid your role as the official hagiographer for the previous administration has clouded your judgment.
Jer
Pfffft---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 4:15am.
but your liberal stance is clear eyed and pure, eh?
Good Lord.
MD
Oh, Jer, that was a big swing
Submitted by dscott on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 4:28am.
Oh, Jer, that was a big swing and a miss.
Karzi was ELECTED by the Afghan people AFTER we defeated the Taliban, we did not choose him, we chose to work with the NORTHERN ALLIANCE, we put people on the ground to create alliances. Of course you can go off on a tangent to claim the election was less than perfect with accusations of vote rigging, but that doesn't change the point that our deal was with the Northern Alliance and NOT Karzi himself. In fact you failed to remember Dr. Abdullah Abdullah who was more favored by most and closest link to Northern Alliance founder, Ahmad Shah Massoud. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Islamic_Front_for_the_Salvation_of_A...
WE EMPHATICALLY DID NOT CHOSE HAMAS. We allied ourselves with the Palestinian Authority, HAMAS was ELECTED by the group of nitwits in the Gaza Strip.
Are you insane? Who undermined Mubarek? THAT WAS OBAMA. Yes, the Bush Admin. quietly worked behind the scenes for an eventually transition to a more democratic governement, however, you have seem to forgotten the it was OBAMA who cancelled the funding on that program at the BEGINNING of his reign of incompetence and instead chose to court the Muslim Brotherhood.
As far as Chalabi is concerned you might possibly be correct, he did turn out to be dud, you can't win them all.
dscott...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 4:38am.
I'll take another whack tomorrow.
G'night...
Jer
Is your conduit
Submitted by ConservaSerb on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 9:57am.
At the newly formed DemoLiboCommunist Committee unavailable?
A wise & frugal government, which shall leave men free 2 regulate their own pursuits of industry & improvement, & shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. T. Jefferson
Don't lose any sleep on my
Submitted by dscott on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 4:17pm.
Don't lose any sleep on my account, but consider for a moment that strategically you are making a huge mistake by blindly supporting Obama when it is so obvious he is incompetent. The 2012 election is going to be a referendum on the competence of Obama, do you really want that to turn into a referendum on the liberal Democrat Party like 2010? You have a choice, either toss Obama under the bus (as he was so fond of doing to others) or a significant portion of the Democrat Party is going down in 2012. It will take years to rebuild and what of your agenda in the meantime?
I'd be pleased as punch if you and the rest of the libs bind yourselves to him and fall with him but that reckoning is over a year away meaning more damage to the US both foreign and domestically. I am conflicted over this, I would like nothing more than to see him go down in flames, watching the sad faces of liberals and their cultish rationalizations of how stupid the electorate is, it amuses me greatly. On the other hand, millions of Americans are unemployed and we are sinking deeper into debt every day wasting the money on useless things paying off campaign contributors. Not to mention all the Mexicans who got killed over the incompetent handling of Fast and Furious. The national and world good should come before my amusement at Obama's eventual fall. Unless libs like you start slapping Obama around for his incompetence, he will never learn and far worse things will occur to everyone.
dscott...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 08/26/2011 - 1:25am.
I don't blindly support anyone. In fact, my criticism of the Obama administration's failures of anticipation and lack of preparedness in the Mideast has been clear and unambiguous. While it's highly unlikely you intentionally misrepresent my positions, it is extremely frustrating when you comment based on naked supposition rather than actual knowledge of the facts. I don't expect you to read or remember even a fraction of what I post, but when your conclusions are grounded on mere assumptions the more prudent course would be to keep your conjecture to yourself--or first authenticate your accusations--rather than publishing lousy guesses.
With respect to the substantive issues which have been raised, your assertions mostly miss the mark. While it is true Karzai was the elected leader of Afghanistan, it is likewise true that he was the candidate of choice of the Bush administration which supported him both publicly and privately to a far greater extent than any of his rivals. Furthermore, it is not even subject to debate that the previous administration pushed hard for elections in Palestine and suffered the humiliation of witnessing a terrorist organization being put in power as a result. That doesn't speak very well for the ability to "choose an outcome". Finally, despite the bumbling by Obama in Egypt, the irrefutable reality is that his administration was more openly supportive of Mubarek than was his predecessor. Indeed, it was Bush that pressed for elections in 2004 which resulted in the Muslim Brotherhood gaining 20% of the seats in the Egyptian government, and it continued to work behind the scenes to force democratic reforms that produced the perhaps unintended consequences of undermining Mubarek's political prospects. The evidence is overwhelming that Obama attempted to initially refortify Mubarek. Now, it certainly can be argued that Bush's vision and policy was the correct, more morally justifiable, and ultimately the superior approach for the future of Egypt. That verdict has yet to be rendered. Nevertheless, it was his antecedent decisions which doomed Mubarek.
Jer
Jer, so, dscott should "authenticate" his ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 08/26/2011 - 1:51am.
'accusations' rather than publish lousy guesses; but your criticisms have been "clear and unambiguous".
With respect to the 'substantive' issues, dscott's assertions "mostly miss the mark", but YOUR assertions state that "the evidence is overwhelming" in support of YOUR contentions.
You funny guy; but you do argue like a liberal.
MD
First off Jer, I don't seem
Submitted by dscott on Fri, 08/26/2011 - 4:06am.
First off Jer, I don't seem to remember you anywhere on NB criticizing Obama for being incompetent in handling anything. In virtually every discussion we have been involved you have steadfastly defended Obama. But you are welcome to prove me wrong by linking a couple of instances where you criticized his incompetent handling of something. I can't recall any case where you did so which is why I tarred you with blindly following. I would be more than happy to retract that broad brush if you provide the links where you, Jer, criticized Obama handling something wrong on foreign policy which is the subject of this thread.
Secondly, what proof do you have that Karzi was our preferred candidate? I was under the impression if we had our druthers it was Dr. Abdullah Abdullah but then it was official US policy NOT to side with any candidate was it not? Provide proof that the US as you assert chose Karzi over Abdullah.
Obama was more supportive of Mubarack than Bush, I don't think so... Unlike Democrats, GOP POTUS don't have a track record of undermining our allies to topple them. We did not install Mubarack and it was NOT the Bush admin policy to topple Mubarak but to lay the ground work for Mubarack's eventual retirement for a peaceful transition of power when he, Mubarack would step down by his own choice and he agreed to it btw that's why he, Mubarack allowed those elections to even occur. So now you are complaining that the US was wrong in getting Mubarack to see it was in the interest of his country to create a peaceful transition of power? Or are you complaining that we stuck a gun to Mubarack's head and forced him to hold elections? Obama was the one who figuratively stuck the gun to Mubarack's head by publicly telling him to leave thus undermining his government.
Finally, the implication by you that the elections in Egypt leading to a 20% holding of seats by the Muslim Brotherhood was the fault of the Bush Admin betrays the liberal penchant against self governance. So your complaint really is that Bush didn't rig the Egyptian elections. Wow Jer your not putting the liberal position in a good light there. Again, this is all contortions on your part to defend Obama. You just made my case.
For pete's sake, dscott...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 08/26/2011 - 3:06pm.
I may as well be doodling in the sand on a deserted island rather than posting on a public message board given the degree to which explicit statements of mine are simply ignored, denied, or glossed over. Quickly, off the top of my head I recall posting criticisms of the aforementioned Mideast missteps, his political naivete and that of his advisers, his ill-advised complaints after the Cambridge police incident, his "clinging to guns and religion" remarks, his picking a fight with FOX News, his failure to act as a racial healer, his ceding to Reid and Pelosi total responsibility for writing the stimulus legislation, and his reported refusal to contact Mitch McConnell a single time during the first year and a half of his administration.
I'm sure there are others, but some including several of the foregoing occurred prior to the site redesign and the resultant loss of archived comments. Also, please note that NONE of these are criticisms 'from the left' which Obama is frequently and increasingly targeted by, especially in recent months [such as continuation of Bush/Cheney anti-terror policies, failure to shut down Gitmo, extension of Patriot Act, Wall Street coziness, Afghanistan escalation, failure to fight for tax hikes on wealthy, etc.]
Now, are you really going to make me hunt all of these down? I give you my word that what I have related above is true, but I will search for the links if you insist. A response to the rest of your post will have to wait.
Jer
Update on Fast and Furious,
Submitted by dscott on Wed, 09/07/2011 - 1:44am.
Update on Fast and Furious, the body count now is up to 1,100 people murdered using the guns the Obama regime arranged to have sent to the Mexican Cartels and various criminals:
In other words, after 2,500 guns were bought with illegal intent, transferred to various criminals of one type or another, and used to kill well over 1,100 people to date, the Department of Justice announces that they’re going to deal firmly with three people who were involved in the operation by reassigning them and/or accepting their resignations.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45978
Proof positive that to liberals running this country Mexican citizens aren't of equal human value worth saving. No liberal will be going to jail or losing their job over the instigation of murder. Complete silence so far from the liberal MSM regarding this incompetence, no criticism of Obama, nor of Attorney General Holder, etc. Silence is condoning and the failure to criticize such incompetence means either deep seated shame on the part of liberals or full approval. Where are the liberals? No voices of condemnation for the murders of over 1,100 human beings in Mexico caused by the weapons sold under the direct complicity of the Obama regime? Where are the cries of outrage? Where are the liberals verbally slapping this regime for their incompetence?
First of all, CBS has been reporting extensively on the
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 09/07/2011 - 4:06am.
controversy--warts and all.
Second, what became of the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument? Do you think the victims wouldn't have been targeted except for Operation Fast and Furious? Do you believe firearms would not have been obtained from other sources? Knives and machetes are deadly weapons, too.
Look, it was an ill-advised, badly executed plan by the ATF. I certainly don't condone it and believe it should be fully investigated and any malfeasance appropriately dealt with. But your slimy allegation that liberals think Mexicans aren't of equal human value is a preposterous slander. It is analogous to a similarly ludicrous [hypothetical] assertion that conservatives don't care about the lives and safety of National Guardsmen because they support the sale of AK-47s of the type used to murder three Guardsmen at a Nevada IHOP just yesterday.
Jer
Yes, I'm sure all your
Submitted by dscott on Wed, 09/07/2011 - 2:57pm.
Yes, I'm sure all your criticisms are valid for grenades as well.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405311190364820457655251106740941...
Supplying grenades to the cartels were "ill-advised," I'm sure those who got blown up could quibble with the "plan's execution." But it's a slimy allegation for pointing out that an incompetent liberal regime running the federal government were oh so willing to let Mexicans be killed literally by the hundreds just so they could bolster a pretext for their gun grabbing agenda in the US. Slimy, yeap, that pretty much describes the attitude of human life means less when it's a foreigner doing the dying to advance the social agenda for the good of the nation. It's all for the children you know.
You just keep minimizing Obama's incompetence as each time you condone or minimize you more firmly attach liberalism at the hip to Obama. If I were you I'd be demanding a divorce from this ill-advised moron. The failure to slap down Obama over this issue and others makes the Democrat Party look really bad. You just can't help yourselves and I'm counting on it.
dscott...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 09/07/2011 - 4:11pm.
When all the facts are known, and to the extent they may show Obama had a role in the operation, I will unhesitatingly slap him down.
If there is one thing you should know by now, I have no qualms about slamming Democrats.
Jer
Careful what you ask for
Submitted by dscott on Fri, 09/09/2011 - 2:31am.
Careful what you ask for because you just might get it!
"The Law: Operation Gunwalker, the rogue ATF operation to arm Mexico's cartels, extends now to three White House officials. A bell goes off with the one named Dan Restrepo...
...That blows apart White House claims that it had no idea the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives was encouraging frontmen for Mexico's cartels to buy weapons from U.S. gun dealers — to "trace" them afterward."
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/584023/201109071801/A-W...
So the WH was caught in another lie, i.e. denial of knowing about Fast and Furious just as Attorney General Holder himself was caught in that same lie. Both the DOJ and WH collectively knew. The worm is slowly turning on this one, with 3 White House officials KNOWING Fast and Furious was on the books, we are now only a couple of people away from Obama himself, the plausible deniability claim is unraveling.
Unlike Ronald Reagan in Iran-Contra my reading of Obama is that he will not take responsibility for Fast and Furious. His track record of tossing people under the bus to save himself is well documented, my prediction: Holder will resign to save Obama by claiming he kept Obama in the dark because he didn't feel it was necessary to inform Obama of every jot and tiddle the DOJ and it's subsidiaries were doing. Holder will acknowledge this as poor judgment on his part as the reason for his resignation. IF Holder doesn't resign he knows articles of impeachment will be forthcoming against him and he doesn't want to loose the election for Obama with a scandal.
Now the FBI involved, what
Submitted by dscott on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 4:05pm.
Now the FBI involved, what did they do? Gave $70,000 to buy those guns!
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/gunwalker-explodes-fbi-hid-weapon-tax-dolla...
"Patino, according to sources, received $70,000 in “seed money” from the FBI informant late in 2009 to buy guns for the cartel."
Your tax dollars at work. So let's get this straight so far we know the FBI gave a Cartel "informant" $70k, the ATF helped the Cartel get the guns via straw purchases, the ATF made sure the straw purchases could be done by circumventing the mandatory back ground checks, the guns were used to kill 2 Border Patrol agents, murder 200 Mexican Law Enforcement officials of various kinds, murder 1,100 Mexican civilians...all with the knowledge of the DOJ (and Attorney General Holder), the WH (3 confirmed lower level functionaries).
So what's next?
Thanks, dscott...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 4:45pm.
for the right-wing editorials. I'll see what I can dredge up from dKos.
Jer
"Guns don't kill people,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Wed, 09/07/2011 - 9:15pm.
people kill people", as a statement, Jer, is still staring you right in the face.
If 'people' provide other 'people' with guns, and those guns are then used to kill other people, then the original 'people' have had a hand in the killing of people.
MD
correction matthewdean, if I may
Submitted by Agnostic on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 11:44am.
If 'people' provide 'known killers' with guns with full knowledge and forethought, and those guns are then used to kill other people, then the original 'people' are accessories to murder/man slaughter.
Agnostic---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 09/09/2011 - 12:34am.
Indeed.
An important clarification.
Thank you.
MD
Agreed, Agnostic...that is an important point
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 09/09/2011 - 4:45pm.
and distinction.
Jer
Thanks Jer,
Submitted by Agnostic on Fri, 09/09/2011 - 4:50pm.
I knew if I babbled on long enough I would get something right.
Off topic Uncle Jer. But it came up again.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 08/26/2011 - 8:07am.
I have asked this a few times and it has still not been answered. What did he mean?
Of course, unlike Mr. Westen, we villainous conservatives do not see Mr. Obama as conciliatory or as "a president who either does not know what he believes or is willing to take whatever position he thinks will lead to his re-election." On the contrary, we see him as a president who knows all too well what he believes. Furthermore, what Mr. Westen regards as an opportunistic appeal to the center we interpret as a tactic calculated to obfuscate his unshakable strategic objective, which is to turn this country into a European-style social democracy while diminishing the leading role it has played in the world since the end of World War II. The Democrats have persistently denied that these are Mr. Obama's goals, but they have only been able to do so by ignoring or dismissing what Mr. Obama himself, in a rare moment of candor, promised at the tail end of his run for the presidency: "We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America."
What did he mean when he said he was gonna fundamentally transform this country?
Neocons, Jer?
Submitted by UpNorth on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 10:40am.
Have you taken up the mantle from Incestmo, now?
As far as the "Bush policy of actively undermining Mubarek in Egypt", correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Mubarek still the President of Egypt, up until this year, 2 years and 4 months or so, after your guy took over?
You mean the "terrorist"
Submitted by buddyc on Fri, 08/26/2011 - 10:08am.
You mean the "terrorist" organization, Hamas, that endorsed Obama?
W has been out of office for 3 years. O has been president for 3 years. Are you better off today than you were January 21, 2009? If you are you are one of a very few.
Obama did nothing as usual.
Submitted by Order270 on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 2:53am.
If something good happens, he takes credit; if something bad happens, he blames someone else.
Davis Shuster is a hack
Submitted by John21 on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 8:20am.
Let me see, we are to credit Mr. Obama for his great victory in Libya.
The president and all his merry men have told us that they are only providing support for NATO and are NOT actively involved in the fighting. He used the above to get around the "War Powers Act" and the gutless in Washington and the media faied to call him on it. Now that France lead NATO has proven to be successful, the hacks think that Obama should get credit.
OK, Give him the credit, than inpeach him for breaking the "War Powers Act"
Let me put itin a way the hack would (maybe, he is not very bright) understand. You wrote a breaking story and it is wonderfu (not a chance) would you say give credit to the IT guy who managerd to keep your computer operating instead of yourself?
I didn't think so
The President himself said this triumph is the Libyan people's
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 8:45am.
Give it a year. If Libya is making relatively peaceful progress toward a stable, secular central government, Obama can take some share of the credit.
But if Libya is splintering among competing tribes and it is necessary to insert a NATO peacekeeping force at our expense, Obama shares the blame.
In the meanwhile, impeachment hearings are in order to determine whether or not Obama violated the War Powers Resolution (I believe he did).
Come on, Galvanic
Submitted by ConservaSerb on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 9:59am.
Don't you know that ShitStreamMedia like Shyster can see the future? They already know Libya is going to turn out like . . . ummmmm . . . Philadelphia . . . or Dearborn . . . or maybe Milwaukee!
And who cares about the WMD's that are floating around in Libya?
What I'd like for Shyster to do is set out, in as complete detail as possible, EXACTLY what Soetoro did to "win" Libya?
A wise & frugal government, which shall leave men free 2 regulate their own pursuits of industry & improvement, & shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. T. Jefferson
If I didn't know better...
Submitted by Dave. on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 9:05am.
...I'd say that Obama is looking to spread the sharia law of the true-believing Jihadists throughout the region.
Note: Part of that was sarcasm, and part of it wasn't.
I'll leave it up to you to decide which is which.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
How the times have changed
Submitted by CobraMan on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 9:14am.
"I mean, the strategy of the Obama administration and others around the world pursued of sort of helping the rebels, arming them and giving them the time and pace to sort of make their move, it’s worked. "
You know, not that long ago (especally during the Reagan Administration), the liberals used to HATE these types of "covert wars." Now, apparently, they love them.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Exactly
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 9:15am.
But to the Left, the contras were fascist boogey men bent on destroying Daniel Ortega and the Sandinistas, whom many on the Left romanticized as revolutionary heroes, much the way Penn and Stone idolize Hugo Chavez.
Yeah............well maybe
Submitted by killa37 on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 1:06pm.
Yeah............well maybe they ought to have a talk with my younger brother's wife, who WAS from Nicauragua - along with the rest of her family. They were 'wealthy' farmers and business people, and the Sandanistas stole everything that they had, forcing them to flee to the USA. I guess the upside to that story is that my brother met his wife...............and don't EVER try talking any anti-American BS to her, because she'll lay you to waste - I've seen her do it to my lib brother!!!
Oh, I forgot to mention that brother was born in Tripoli, Libya.............so I'm waiting for him to make good on his promise to go back 'home' and take his rightful place at the head of power!!!
Shyster's right
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 10:09am.
The Shyster's correct, it is absolutely crazy to question Soetoro's libya triumph. How does one triumph over something that doesn't exist? But then again, he triumphs over a lot of things that don't exist anyway.
Global warming, raising taxes to solve all problems(you can't, just not possible), give money away, printing money as if it were the ends to a means, and so on.....
-Jon
Shuster is correct when he says, ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 10:20am.
... "As it turns out, I mean, the President has been following the right strategy for all these many months."
I have no doubt that Bambi has gotten the situation in the Arab world exactly like He wants it; total frigging chaos!
Every action He has taken has been to totally destabilize the entire region so that the Islamist elements can come to power.
Yeah, I gotta hand it to Him. The boy has accomplished one hell of a lot in just two short years. In two more, no telling what else He can accomplish! Just think what He can do with a second term!
But we conservatives have to be careful and not elect a whacko candidate? Exactly how bad would ANY candidate have to be to be worse than the A$$hole we have now?
I think I've figured out why China has speeded up their military buildup. They see where we are headed and figure that in the next 20 or 30 years the USSA could be an Islamic state. The last time I read a history book (or the NYT for that matter) the PRC ain't really fond of Muslims or Islamists. They've been at war with them for centuries, and plan to continue, I have a feeling.
To paraphrase Reagan's famous "strategy" statement; Obama's strategy is, "I win. The USA loses."
China's military buildup
Submitted by Agnostic on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 10:32am.
China has century long plans while the US is just trying to make it to the next election -
The US is and has been a great nation for many, many years but the socialization of the country coupled with the political divide that has advanced since the late 50s has left us with the inability to commit to solutions to our problems that last longer then the next election. Even tax cuts have to be temporary because the socialist in our government know they can't keep control by voting for tax increases so they have invented long lists of ways to create taxes without "increasing taxes".
Yeah, bubba...........I can't
Submitted by killa37 on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 11:13am.
Yeah, bubba...........I can't say that I've ever heard mention of China being worried about 'insulting' Islam, or giving the Mooooooooooooolems any kind of special treatment. And, unless I'm totally wrong, I believe China also keeps a tight eye on their borders - I don't think they have too much of an 'illegal alien' (can I use that term??) problem...........maybe some activity over near North Korea.
At least they finally admit Obama's intentions
Submitted by CobraMan on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 10:52am.
It's taken several months, but, finally, the Liberal media has admitted what Obama's intentions were all along: the overthrow of the Libyan government. After all, they're calling it Obama's Victory, correct?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
I hope his eyebrows and widow's peak meet in the middle of
Submitted by Lipton on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 11:50am.
his forehead.
Shuster is the most grating of all the lib puppets.
Shuster says: "The President
Submitted by ThePickle on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 1:19pm.
Shuster says: "The President has been following the right strategy for all these many months. He’s been patient when a lot of other people haven’t. He’s been firm when a lot of other people suggested that we have no business being there. And it turned out that this has worked."
This is classic case of Liberal Speak for "The End's Justify The Means".
shoepolish
Submitted by D'saredumbpeople on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 4:51pm.
probably brown as in being in someone's ass
Last I heard Shuster was
Submitted by Barack Must Go on Thu, 08/25/2011 - 5:20pm.
Last I heard Shuster was launching his own " For A Good Time Call " franchise business in Lowes and Home Depot mens rooms throughout the greater DC area.
The Shyster's correct, it is
Submitted by bagtree on Thu, 03/29/2012 - 3:52am.
The Shyster's correct, it is absolutely crazy to question Soetoro's libya triumph. How does one triumph over something that doesn't exist? But then again, he triumphs over a lot of things that don't exist anyway.
Global warming, raising taxes to solve all problems(you can't, just not possible), give money away, printing money as if it were the ends to a means, and so on.....
wholesale handbags, women handbags, wholesale purses