Pajamas Media

129 Comments

1. Tony:

Don’t worry about the professional victims – they’ll come up with plenty of things to whine and cry about. It’s what they do.

The only real question is how long it will be before Obama – once he has assumed office and is forced to make some difficult and compromising decisions – is declared an “Uncle Tom” by the parasites you have listed thereby becoming a legitimate target for the same sort of nonsense we had to listen to about George W Bush?

Remember these aren’t real adults, they are perpetual babies screaming for attention.

Nov 11, 2008 - 2:07 am 2. Ed Wallis:

“What will they do?”

While the naive “52-to-48″ Leftists are busy saying “we’ll listen to you”…

…the viral Leftists are busy ensuring (through “Fairness [sic] Doctrine”) that the Right is limited in its ability to speak.

Nov 11, 2008 - 2:51 am 3. William Briggs:

Clearly, you underestimate the power of the Left to blame. They will not lack targets nor opportunity for whining, carping, or sniveling.

For example, at the office of my wife, a standard lefty is already passing on a rumor—no doubt gleaned from the usual sources—that Bush is at the moment we speak putting into place secret legislation that will block and deter Obama from His Path. Laws and regulations that He will not discover until it is, in many cases, too late.

Thus, when Obama eventually stumbles, as we all must do, it will still be the Right that gets the blame.

Nov 11, 2008 - 3:12 am 4. David Thomson:

“Remember these aren’t real adults, they are perpetual babies screaming for attention.”

Amen. There will be no rest for the weary. The leftist establishment will not be content until it has turned the United States into a politically correct dictatorship. Barack Obama will do everything possible to help them achieve this nefarious goal. He is truly a left-wing radical. Nobody sits in a church pew for roughly twenty years listening to the sermons of a racist pastor unless they also share those views. May God help us.

Nov 11, 2008 - 3:25 am 5. RE:

In their quest to regain power, the Left has burned all the bridges.

Nov 11, 2008 - 3:26 am 6. Brian H:

Disclaimer: I have zero faith in astrology. But I find myself re-re-reading this comment on another blog:
XXXXXX 11.04.08 at 10:40 pm

DO NOT DISPAIR!!!!!!
DO NOT BELIEVE WHAT YOU HEAR FROM THE MEDIA TONIGHT.
1st they are reporting from exit polls and not the vote count.
2nd there are as much as 30% absentee ballots that for some states are not even counted or due for 10-15days yet.

And here you are as I always do I release my astro report on the night of elections:
Do not be surprised if you go to sleep believing Obama won and wake up in the next 2 weeks with John McCain as the next President….The Dewey/Truman effect of over zealous media.
If Obama is declared a large winner tonight he DEFINITELY was born in Africa and not Hawaii…..his African chart shows much greater success and happiness tonight than the HI chart.
The charts show Happiness that is short lived and dilusional illusionary for Obama with GREAT losses and troubles and separations and restrictions to come…..it is showing that Jan 20th is not a happy day for him and that there is the possibility of being locked up/incarcerated within the next year. There will be great change in fortune and happiness in the days and months to come for Obama.
There will be much legal issues to come and much deception from and surrounding Obama.
It shows that we will most likely have a “Dewey beats Truman” with the legal uncertainties of the 2000 election combined by morning and will go on for the next month or more. It does show that he may never see Jan 20th through many causes but his health is not good. It shows that his happiness will be taken from him and great strife and immense troubles will surround him and all happiness will disappear.
For John McCain today start a great period of happiness and it is even so much GREATER on Jan 20…..and the next 2 years ahead for McCain are great for his successes and public image. It does show that his happiness will be attempted to be suppress but all clouds will be replaced with bright sun within the next month and increasing throughout the next 2 years. He will experience difficulties due to resistance and deception. Though in the end McCain will be elated and great happiness though must weather some struggles which will be over come within the next month and will have luck and success.

SO beware of reports tonight and into the next month things will be changing for both to the negative and great negative for Obama and for the Great positive for McCain.
_________

But back in reality, there are 3 possible outcomes:

1) Challenges to his candidacy succeed, and he is removed triggering ????????

2) He actually takes office, attempts to govern (”Rule”?!?!) at least somewhat from the center, failing miserably because of deep incompetence in himself and his coterie;

3) He attempts to “Change” American into the Far Left Dream From His Fathers, and all Hell breaks loose.

Enjoy.

Nov 11, 2008 - 3:35 am 7. Emma:

From here on blaming Bush for anything will just make Obama look weak and ineffective, so good luck to them with that one.

But I’m sure they’ll find plenty to snivel about, because nature abhors a vacuum.

Nov 11, 2008 - 3:46 am 8. American Glob:

The only upside of the Obama presidency will be watching these idiots try to defend the White House for the first time in their lives.

Nov 11, 2008 - 4:04 am 9. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Mary Grabar, et al.
RE: What Next?

What will pony-tailed professors and expletive-spewing poets do with themselves when Obama replaces Bush? — Mary Grabar

I think there are good arguements that they will compound their victory by going after what remains of the evil Conservative Culture in this great land.

Witness:

• The venal bile of BLIP and others
• Senator Feinstein doesn’t like e-bay selling tickets. So she wants to pass a law outlawing private enterprise. [Note: And with Democrat control of the two law making/enforcing of the three branches of government....guess what.....]

I look for the following:

[1] A major attack on US soil by ‘terrorists’; their background yet to be determined. Most likely Islamic, i.e., ‘religious’, fundamentalists. But heck, to the atheists, one brand of religion is just as evil as any other.
[2] The call for and enactment of The One’s National Civilian Security Force (NCSF).
[3] The use of said NCSF to suppress anyone who threatens or even disparages The One.

Three guesses as to what follows…..

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. I also see as a key indicator the status of the Patriot Act.

During all these years, people on the Left have complained about it as a threat to civil liberties.

However….now that The One is going to be president, I doubt if they’ll be so concerned. AND, if they now SUPPORT that act, I see it as prima facia evidence that they are nothing more, nor anything less than the rank hypocrites we’ve always know them to be. That their only complaint about the Patriot Act was that they were afraid it would be used against THEM. But now that The One is here….they have a tool with which they can attack their REAL enemies….US.

Nov 11, 2008 - 4:06 am 10. Jarhead91:

Like Jimmy Carter did for my generation, Obama will help this generation of liberals put aside their childish beliefs. After 4 years of bumbling about trying to appease everyone special interest group except the American people, they will all have grown up considerably.

Nov 11, 2008 - 4:14 am 11. C Smith:

Can someone park a stake in the heart of the affirmative action vampire?

Nov 11, 2008 - 4:30 am 12. SAF:

Every Obama failure will be cast as a problem he inherited from Bush. That will be good for at least two years of carping.

When the Democrats start going after Bush and his minions to try and convict them of nefarious deeds while in power it will be interesting to see if Obama lets this go on or does the full pardon thing. If he allows it to go on one election will have turned the USA into a dictatorship in a way that 40+ years of cold war and 14+ years of terrorism had failed to do.

The left has become the Brown shirts of the 21st century.

Nov 11, 2008 - 4:46 am 13. SiouxLady:

Look for the return of the Black Hills of South Dakota to the Sioux/Lakota people as the BIG O promised my nephew.

Nov 11, 2008 - 4:49 am 14. Arizona Senora:

What will we be doing? Most likely indulging in three part choruses, perhaps of “nannie nannie boo boo”

C’mon off your sniveling, and push your cart toward something substantive.

Perhaps you might do an article of pertinent and timely punditry; what about treatises on environment, economy, energy et al?

Nov 11, 2008 - 4:58 am 15. Chuck Pelto:

TO: C Smith
RE: Cuidado

Can someone park a stake in the heart of the affirmative action vampire? — C Smith

Someone might think you’re referring to The One and set the Secret Service on you.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The most horrifying nine words in the English language are, "We're from the government and we're here to help". -- President Ronald Reagan]

Nov 11, 2008 - 5:03 am 16. Chuck Pelto:

TO: SAF, et al.
RE: The New Brown Shirts

The left has become the Brown shirts of the 21st century. — SAF

Actually….

….I like to think of them as the Blue Meanies that the Beetles prophesied.

Check out the character in the upper right-hand corner. The blue guy with the big fist.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Life follows art.]

Nov 11, 2008 - 5:11 am 17. mk:

Well, I’m hoping they’ll all shut the heck up about blaming Bush or the “right” for every single problem in the world.

The real question is if Obama prematurely removes the troops from Iraq, Iran invades Iraq and massacres millions of Iraqi people, who will these morons blame? It was Obama who removed the troop, after all….

Nov 11, 2008 - 5:20 am 18. SAF:

Chuck Pelto:

A much better analogy. Thanks

Nov 11, 2008 - 5:35 am 19. dan:

from the looks of every morning joe on msnbc since the election, it looks like they’re just going to keep wailing on palin. amazing: their One wins, a new administration begins, the near-miracle of peaceful transfer of power is enacted once again in this great republic, and – all they want to do is talk about palin.

i wonder whether we can start a movement to elect – online, low impact – new pundits in the media aristocracy. these people are 75% of the problem, and they must go. one way or another, we cannot allow the one un-checked constitutional power to ironically cripple the nation. that would be positively stupid.

Nov 11, 2008 - 5:51 am 20. cfbleachers:

I recall a story in which a grown man had come to the age where we start to lose our parents to the passage of time. His mother had been a warm and loving parent, caring for him deeply and with whom he had spent so many hours and days in tender moments with her.

But his father was another story. Mean, ill tempered, cold and indifferent…the son could hardly remember a nice moment between them. The relationship was a constant battle, vicious at times from the father, constantly disapproving and filled with anger and resentment.

When the mother finally passed away, he hardly spent a tear. Yet, when the father passed away, he wept uncontrollably. He was inconsolable. He could not for the life of him understand why he could not stop crying.

He sought the counsel of a dear friend who was trained in such matters, and the friend explained it to him. “Your mother provided for you, watched over you, cared for you, looked out for your interests. From her, you learned, as with virtually all members of the animal kingdom to make your way through the world. She taught you how to be a man.”

“Then why would I cry less for her than my father, who was cruel and cold?”

“From your father, you learned to hate. You learned only how to depend upon your anger to communicate. You learned how to be helpless, unable to resolve conflict, to wallow in self-pity and bitterness. When your mother died, she had left you the ability to be a man. When your father died, he left you in the stage of an arrested adolescent, unfulfilled and now, with no place for your anger, rage and resentment. You lost your entire life’s meaning…every ounce of your focus had been on hating him, now you have nobody to hate”

The son asked what should he do now. And his friend replied, “teach your son that focusing on hate is a waste of a lifetime. Then, perhaps, both of you can finally grow up and become men.”

Nov 11, 2008 - 5:58 am 21. elvis:

I teach at a college. Great article. It will be interesting to watch!
Elvis

Nov 11, 2008 - 6:00 am 22. misanthropicus:

Bingo, Mary – clearly, there is much business opportunity lost here for the professional oppressed.

And, like the olive twig-holding conservative I am, since I simply cannot stand the spectacle of this disenfranchised lot bemoaning the fact that America’s past and present crimes have been (time and again) successfully addressed, I hasten to appease their despondency over this bleak situation and point to the fact that America’s FUTURE crimes haven’t been un-masked and denounced yet – so there is hope, my liberal friends, artists, playwrights, fashion designers and stand-up comics! You can have a superb career barking at the monstrous tree of FUTURE AMERICAN CRIMES!

With a Department of Peace and a National Defense Guard as background, I can very well see universities having Future American Crimes Studies in curriculum.

Nov 11, 2008 - 6:30 am 23. BC:

Heysoos H. Christ: when will you blockheads figure out that Bush was/is widely despised — and certainly not just by “leftists” — because he was/is a friggin despicable, lying ass incompetent who caused an insane amount of damage, death and destruction during his term? It has nothing to do with “policy” per se or him being a Republican — he was just a really, really bad person and it’s just jaw dropping that he was never impeached. (And Pelosi is not going to be forgotten for that “Impeachment is off the table” bit when Democrats became the majority.)

But basically the overall feeling worldwide is relief. Bush is out and “Bush Lite” didn’t get elected, so even people like myself, who are not going to be happy to see Bush get off answering for his many misdeeds, are feeling pretty good about this country for the first time in years.

Some of you have been grousing about “astroturfers” popping by here — maybe if you took a break from slamming & insulting Obama (Rush Limbaugh, by the way, has really lost it completely over all this) and his smarter-than-you supporters, you’d be left alone more. Even the South Park guys realized that all this antagonistic bickering is stupid now. You guys look like you have enough things to deal with regarding the direction of your party, so just try putting a cork in your bottle of Snipe for at least the time being.

Nov 11, 2008 - 6:31 am 24. JKB:

I don’t think it has sunk in yet. When your life is defined by protest, what do you do when your object of protest is gone? They can’t all become Dread Pirate Roberts.

I suspect much of their energy will be turned on their allies or even those in their own group. Much as the gay/black confrontation that has started over Prop 8 or the Feminists who hate women who achieve through equality of opportunity, such as Sarah Palin.

I am reminded of a scene from the British comedy “Coupling”. Sally, a hardcore Labor memeber, is questioning how a gay man can be a Conservative being they are oppressive. He and Patrick, another main character, then point out to her that Labor and therefore she, having power, are the oppressors now. Sally finds it quite distressing to realize that she is no longer in the party of protest and defending the oppressed but rather the party in power and the oppressor.

Nov 11, 2008 - 6:59 am 25. Tomp:

The venom won’t stop. These buffoons are similar to acholics and are hooked on hate rather than booze.

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:05 am 26. mike:

It’s already happening – just witness the infantile riots over Prop 8. 70 percent of African-American voters voted for it, yet the leftists are protesting…the Mormon Church! What’s the matter, lefties – afraid to protest in South Central LA or Oakland?

It’s just amazing. Obama won the friggin’ election, and they’re already on to the next grievance! Surely there will be more over the next four years.

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:28 am 27. Ursa Major:

This sliming will never stop. These leftists (mostly anarchists) will clamor for his head because he hasn’t “changed” anything, save make the US more miserable for those still fortunate enough to have a job or own a home.

Be careful what you wish for.

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:36 am 28. misanthropicus:

RE Chuck(le)/ #9: [...] I also see as a key indicator the status of the Patriot Act. During all these years, people on the Left have complained about it as a threat to civil liberties. [...]”

Major point – total silence about this.

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:48 am 29. Pat:

I don’t expect these people to change their behavior at all. It’s not Bush they hate; it’s the United States of America. Obama will soon discover that he, too, can do nothing right as long as he is leader of the Great Satan.

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:56 am 30. lobogris:

I shouldn’t, but I will. Just because I can’t stand a contradiction.

If Bush “was/is a friggin despicable, lying ass incompetent who caused an insane amount of damage, death and destruction during his term”, what does that make all the countries who followed him into Iraq? And once again, just for you B.C., what does that make Congress and the rest of the politicians who also followed him? Is Bush as incompetent as he has been portrayed? Or is everyone? And don’t forget, the world did not come into being when Bush got elected. So you may actually have to do some research of the “World Before Bush”.

I wish I could say that I eagerly await your response(’cause I know it’s just going to be chock full of facts/proof), but I’m going to the store to stock up on popcorn so I can watch the show that is the Obamanation. You have a nice day and I really hope you get everything you voted for.

Nov 11, 2008 - 8:00 am 31. newton:

Their next step will probably be the expulsion of any conservative left on campus – student, faculty or staff. They will figure that, if they can’t change their minds, at least they can deny them their careers or jobs.

This should be the opportunity for like-minded faculty or staff to think of new ideas and establish new institutions of higher learning… apart from the P.C. infested islands of nonsense.

Nov 11, 2008 - 8:11 am 32. The Curmudgeon:

It seems that the right is so upset by the fact that the people chose a liberal–an intellectual, competent liberal at that–that conservatives resort to shrill attacks when they should be trying to redefine their ideology and helping to get the country back on track.

McCain got defeated because he threw out his principles and ran a campaign based on political expediency. Obama got elected because he represents an honest attempt to change the policies that got us into the horrid mess we’re in, and to change the viciously partisan atmosphere we’ve experienced for the past several years.

Obama is not perfect. He will be chided when he makes a mistake, as will the Congress. But one of the things he hopes to do is to put aside the shrill attacks your post decries (with equally shrill sarcasm), and which conservatives have launched on anybody who disagrees with them. I hope he will succeed.

Nov 11, 2008 - 8:12 am 33. MIke Reynolds:

So now that Obama has won, isn’t it time for the Left to ask itself the question:
“Maybe Bush wasn’t a fascist after all?” I mean, it’s a pretty darn milk-and-water sort of fascism that hands over power to its ideological opponents.

Really, maybe it just means that Bush was simply a sh*tkicker Texas politician who a lot of us disagreed with about many issues—but who a lot more Americans agreed with in 2000 and 2008. That doesn’t mean he didn’t make some really bad decisions. Clearly he did. But it does mean he didn’t subvert the democratic process, because if he had, Obama would not even have been nominated, much less won. (I know, I know, there’s still the theoretical possibility that something will “happen” between now and Inauguration Day to make me eat my words. But I’d be willing to bet very large sums of money, right now, that Obama will take the oath of office as scheduled. Any takers on the Left? )

If nothing else it’s a welcome reminder to all political aficionados, Left and Right, to beware of rhetorical excess. (Remember the 90s, when all the right-wing talk shows had “proof” that Bill and Hillary Clinton had murdered Vince Foster? Remember the 80s, when the Left knew of a certainty that Reagan was a lunatic who had already decided in favor of preemptive thermonuclear war?)

If we devalue the language of politics by excess, what words will remain with which to describe the for-real monsters, if and when they come along? So dammit, I want to hear Naomi Wolf et al admit that, no, Bush was not a fascist after all.

Nov 11, 2008 - 8:16 am 34. Will the Left Stop Yelling? « The Incompleat Curmudgeon:

[...] http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/silence-to-be-deafening-as-left-stops-yelling/2/ [...]

Nov 11, 2008 - 8:24 am 35. MIke Reynolds:

To my friends on the Right who are pessimistic: Let’s remember that Obama also wants to be re-elected. But of course he has raised this huge amount of expectation among the global Left. So when he fails to immediately surrender to the Taliban, apologize to al-Qaeda, kowtow to Hugo Chavez, and deliver up the Israelis on a platter, just watch how quickly the “Left” will turn on him (World Can’t Wait has already started; Ralph Nader just now called him an ‘Uncle Tom’). They will learn that their quarrel was not with that murderous fascist Bush (sarc) (who inexplicably handed over power to the opposition in a very wimpish display of fascism) but rather with us incurably arrogant, greedy, coarse, unilateralist, capitalist-imperialist America people themselves, darn them.

I even predict that the Islamic “press” will soon be calling Obama an apostate from Islam and a “black cowboy” or perhaps even (with their usual cultural sensitivity and savoir-faire) a “n____r cowboy.”
And that is approximately when—-feeling so cruelly let down by BHO—-al-Qaeda will hit us again (HT to Joe Biden).

Nov 11, 2008 - 8:28 am 36. The Historian:

OBAMA STARTS LIKE A ROOKIE

Team Obama has a long way to go in just over 70 days. Time to fasten our seat belts as noted here:

http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2008/11/obama-starts-like-rookie.html

Nov 11, 2008 - 8:43 am 37. penny:

It all depends on how much Obama hurts his lefty syncophants in their wallets. Trust me, America’s gullible young socialists will find out real fast that the only free cheese in found in a mousetrap.

A year from now after the honeymoon is over Obama and the Democrats own the economy, no more blaming Bush, it’s not going to be very pretty. They’ve already made some bad missteps in wanting to bail out failing car makers, a gift to their union base, on the taxpayer’s dime. Their policies like killing coal and drilling will make us as energy dependent as ever if not worse.

A lot of very naive little college kids are going to understand very clearly like their European counterpart that socialism brings low paying boring public sector jobs as the private sector is diminished.

I suspect this gadfly in four years will leave like Carter with not much more than a whimper from his liberal, financially poorer fans.

Nov 11, 2008 - 8:52 am 38. NahnCee:

Here in my office, the haters are still hating, loudly and at length. Just because Bush has gone away doesn’t mean that America suddently became worthy. I’m told that The United States of America makes the world’s worst cars, has the world’s worst manufacturing process, pollutes the most into the world’s atmosphere, and has the world’s worst farmers.

I think the only way to make the hate-spewing stop might be an amputation around the throat region.

Nov 11, 2008 - 9:18 am 39. TexEd:

Not to worry! The vicious, stupid left will find new targets and lots to rant about. We will all quickly find how lazy, unintelligent and inept Hussein actually is. It will be so bad that even the NYT, Reuters, the AP and MSNBC will be forced to mention it.
It is then when the left will again go berserk and begin to attack everyone who even hints at Chimpy’s failings. And then, there will be no more bad news.

Nov 11, 2008 - 9:19 am 40. Rotwang:

Throughout the years of the Bush II Administration, FreeRepublic and NRO and a thousand other right-wing sites were able to make a profitable cottage industry out of continuing slams against the left, and the vigorous defense of Bush policies.

I see no reason to think that the Left will have any problem keeping busy, as long as the scourge of Conservative exists…even in a somewhat attenuated, out-of-power sort of way.

Personally, I look forward to being the boot (instead of the throat) for a few years.

Nov 11, 2008 - 9:19 am 41. productive worker:

I think we need a Boston Tea Party/Freedom March movement from people that believe in limited government.

Here is what I have done and intend to do:

1. I am starting a business for the sole purpose of limiting my tax liability.
2. A group of us are looking to start a 501C to further restrict our taxes.
3. Cheating on my taxes. I really don’t care if I get audited because, per the IRS, the cost of collecting each $100 via an IRS audit was 52 cents! Besides Obama never paid taxes on the $300K bribe he received from Tony Rezko. This is the first step towards becoming a Messiah.
4. I have eliminated my Milwaukee Journal subscription and removed all lefty blogs from my favorites. Why should I be giving my $ to organizations that promote socialism?
5. I’ve begun working for cash or barter.
6. I am moving out of Wisconsin and to a low tax state.
7. I moved all my wealth out of the US 2 days before the election. Businesses here in the US are really only cash cows for the government or are government dependants. We have the second highest business taxes in the world.
8. I will no longer send $ to the Republicans. Only small government INDIVIDUALS will see my support.

This is the direction I believe limited government, pro-constitution workers should take. Can anyone add to this list? We must remember that it is conservatives that generate the wealth of this nation and act accordingly.

I’m looking for more ‘monkey wrench’ ideas….. more suggestions anyone?

Nov 11, 2008 - 9:23 am 42. Dave:

“Personally, I look forward to being the boot (instead of the throat) for a few years.”

Yep. That’s what we can expect from the infantile malevolent left. No worries. Once the empty rhetoric turns into either terrible policies or disillusionment or both, the adults will be around to clean up the mess…again.

Nov 11, 2008 - 10:10 am 43. fred:

The parasites will need something to feed off of. They’ll find another host. It won’t be enough to consume the businesses and taxpayers of this nation. Like their compatriots in the Paleosimian Territories, they’ll find something to complain about and demand the jizya.

Nov 11, 2008 - 10:16 am 44. Ms Attitude:

Does everyone really think that Bush II was that bad? I think history will come to show him as a great president who led this country through an attack on OUR soil. As for the war in Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction: How many people realize that 550 metric tons of “yellowcake” — the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment — was removed from Iraq in July 2008? It was found before the removal of Saddam, guarded by our troops and kept secret for our security! When was this reported? July 5th! I guess Bush could’ve let this information leak a long time ago, I’m sure it would’ve boosted his ratings and the support for the war but thank God, he was more concerned about the safety of our troops and us!!

Nov 11, 2008 - 10:19 am 45. John Lynch:

You don’t understand the sequence.

1) Build on all existing problems until they seem insurmountable. In some cases this is self fulfilling, such as crisis of confidence in the financial markets, housing markets, consumer confidence, etc. But this can also be done with foreign relations, trade, domestic poverty, gun violence, etc.

2) Call for “sacrifice” of the American people to give up something fundamental – more taxes, right to guns, private ownership, 401Ks, etc – just for the duration to fix the problem.

3) When that doesn’t work to solve the original problem(s) repeat 1) and 2).

Witness the sequence Chavez uses, Castro used as examples of how it is done.

Nov 11, 2008 - 10:20 am 46. KJB:

Emma said:
“From here on blaming Bush for anything will just make Obama look weak and ineffective,……..”
I would add, except when the media verifies it was Bush’s fault, which they will.

Nov 11, 2008 - 10:40 am 47. Bugs:

The cognitive dissonance is fascinating. After eight years of “BusHitler” and “Palin is a C**t,” leftists still see themselves as the reasonable, rational ones and conservatives as the haters. Apparently, superior intelligence does not require insight into your own motivations and weaknesses – even when they’re glaringly obvious to everyone around you.

I’m willing to give Obama a chance because we need a change and because he hasn’t actually done anything to harm the country. His followers, however, are proving just as despicable in victory as they were in defeat. The greatest failure of this election is that it gives people like them a fresh supply of political capital.

Nov 11, 2008 - 10:48 am 48. Ms Attitude:

Hey John Lynch:

Isn’t that part of the teachings of Saul Alinsky?

Nov 11, 2008 - 10:52 am 49. Tex Taylor:

Oh, this one is easy to answer…

How long before any condemnation of Obama’s empty promises, will we begin to hear it’s all because we are racist?

I’m already hearing the reasons I didn’t really vote for Obama is because he is black. Of course, being that I had already voted for somebody black not once but twice (they had an ‘R’ beside their name), I know their argument bogus.

But to the Obama rubes and American-loathing academia? No, it has to be because I’m upstanding member of the Klan.

Nov 11, 2008 - 11:16 am 50. MarkD:

John Lynch,

That works as long as there are compliant victims. The minute a bill to confiscate 401Ks is even discussed in Congress, mine will be emptied and beyond reach. Yeah, I’ll get hit with taxes. So what, something is better than nothing.

Guns, what guns? Maybe some people forgot what “never again” means. I’m not even Jewish, but I remember.

More taxes? I won’t even have a job, I won’t be paying taxes and where’s my check?

On the bright side, the historical legacies of Mondale, Carter, and Dukakis will not look as bad.

Nov 11, 2008 - 11:24 am 51. Anneke:

Over the past few months, I’ve noticed an increased criticism of religion (Christianity in particular) at my University. Much of the criticism was centered around Sarah Palin and her religious beliefs. Now that the Left doesn’t have Bush-Cheney-Rove to demonize, they’ll start in on the Church. Just look at the recent Prop. 8 protests in California. Those protesting the outcome of the election have gone straight for the jugular of the church (Mormons, Catholics, evangelicals) despite the fact that the Proposition was supported by non-religious groups and by non-churched voters.

Nov 11, 2008 - 11:30 am 52. Robert Hurley:

Chuck Pelto:

I would be interested to see if you will refuse your social security and medicare when you turn 65

Nov 11, 2008 - 11:44 am 53. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Anneke
RE: Indeed

Over the past few months, I’ve noticed an increased criticism of religion (Christianity in particular) at my University. Much of the criticism was centered around Sarah Palin and her religious beliefs. Now that the Left doesn’t have Bush-Cheney-Rove to demonize, they’ll start in on the Church. — Anneke

As I stated in item 9 (above) of this thread. We can expect that Christians will be the next major target. And, oddly enough, if it happens, it will be the fulfillment of prophecy written almost 2000 years ago. I think Christian theologians refer to it as The Great Apostasy.

We’ll see what happens….

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[A Christian relies on faith above everything else. A Wiccan relies on it only when nothing else is left.]

Nov 11, 2008 - 11:49 am 54. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Robert Hurley
RE: Social [In]Security and Medicare at 65

I would be interested to see if you will refuse your social security and medicare when you turn 65 — Robert Hurley

That should be VERY easy, as they won’t be around to help at that time. Or maybe I won’t be around, if the Obamanation that Maketh Desolation is truly the one we were warned about.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[An unjust man is an abomination to the just -- Proverbs]

Nov 11, 2008 - 11:52 am 55. Tom F.:

I suppose they will all be waiting for something to go wrong so they can
“blame it on the 8 years of the Bush administration”.

Nov 11, 2008 - 11:57 am 56. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Tom F.
RE: Indeed….

I suppose they will all be waiting for something to go wrong so they can
“blame it on the 8 years of the Bush administration” — Tom F.

….As they surly won’t be able to accept responsibility themselves.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. Look at the current financial situation. Despite McCain sounding alarms in 2005-2006, and the Democrat-controlled Congress turning a deaf ear to such warnings…..they’ll blame Bush. It’s their normal Modus Operandi.

Nov 11, 2008 - 12:04 pm 57. Robert Hurley:

Chuck Pelto:

Are you calling Obama an abomination? Is that what Christians do, call people names? Do you really believe that social security and medicare will not be around when you turn 65? I wonder how many people believe that

Nov 11, 2008 - 12:12 pm 58. LiberalEd:

Obama will never have to deliver on anything he said. And, he will have unlimited power to stop critics! How? His muslim buddies will attack again by mid-April. He’ll declare a national emergency and rule despotically. Well, not him personally; he’s not smart enough. It’ll be the the Bill Ayers of the country and their cadres who have been training for years. Then, they’ll get rid of Obama and set up a people’s republic where there are no landlords or middle-class.

Nov 11, 2008 - 12:40 pm 59. kelly k:

“Now that the Left doesn’t have Bush-Cheney-Rove to demonize, they’ll start in on the Church.” That’s what I’m thinking. I don’t belong to a church, but I think I’ll have to join so I can be there when the gay anarchists arrive. Church-goers have to learn to roar back and not just sit there like shocked victims.

Re the government, the leftists will still blame everything on Bush. How they overcame the dark ages will become their legend. 1960s daytripper radicals still talk about getting clubbed by Chicago cops in 1968. For their part, our leftists will weave glorious tales of the time they like totally wore a “Bush sucks” t-shirt to their film studies class.

And if something clearly is Obama’s fault and cannot be blamed on Bush, the media will clean it up, cover it up, recast it….

Nov 11, 2008 - 1:10 pm 60. liamascorcaigh:

Substitute ‘Palin’ for ‘Bush’; problem solved!

Nov 11, 2008 - 1:34 pm 61. Heartlander:

They will blame the Christians and the Church. The hard left will continue just as they did during the Clinton years to attack the Christians (and the observant Jews)

They will enhance their ability to control the outcome of elections. There are reasons why Soetoro keeps referring to 10 years in office.

As we are alredy beginning to see, the crime of maiestas will be punished under the thoughtcrime laws that will soon make their way out of Congress and be passed.

Nov 11, 2008 - 1:46 pm 62. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Robert Hurley
RE: The Obamanation

Are you calling Obama an abomination? Is that what Christians do, call people names? — Robert Hurley

I call em as I see em.

What do YOU do?

RE: Social [In]Security & Medicare

Do you really believe that social security and medicare will not be around when you turn 65? — Robert Hurley

Are you calling me a liar? Or are you just having trouble comprehending English today?

RE: What Others Think

I wonder how many people believe that — Robert Hurley

Why don’t you ask them?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. I see you STILL don’t care to answer questions……

Nov 11, 2008 - 1:53 pm 63. Chuck Pelto:

P.P.S. As I recall, I referred to your One as the Obamanation.

If you wish to think of him as an ‘abomination’, that’s up to you. Personally, I’ll wait until I have more information before declaring him as such…..

Nov 11, 2008 - 1:54 pm 64. blue7ga:

well, if you want to talk, about the left, or the right..your, all on some, other planet..thay are all, part of the [club]..the, one that..us the middled, or no loner a part, of…we need to take to the streets,..and take our country, back..in a few, years we will ..ALL..be standing in line, for food..in the best, country, that ever was…untill, just a few…thought, thay should,keep, it for themselfs

Nov 11, 2008 - 2:09 pm 65. Войска ПВО:

MarkD writes:

“John Lynch,

That works as long as there are compliant victims. The minute a bill to confiscate 401Ks is even discussed in Congress, mine will be emptied and beyond reach. Yeah, I’ll get hit with taxes. So what, something is better than nothing.”

..oh dear me. Do you realize that this will cause the stock market to tank and that will be blamed on those wicked and greedy thieves on Wall Street?

How can you be so self-centered and selfish as to want to keep your hard-earned retirement out of those who want to redistribute it to the less fortunate?

[/end sarcasm]

Nov 11, 2008 - 2:25 pm 66. Joseph Howard:

Thank you Mary for a humorous, positive look at
leftist craziness. Enjoyed it. I believe the looneys will still look for a target to blame and condemn. That target will be those lower down the food chain than Pres. Bush. It will include many of us. I was at an event over the weekend. A woman gleefully told me that many of us in America are having our standards of living lowered by the economic situation. She thought it a good and long-overdue neccesity. This woman is well-educated. I had no answer for her insanity.

Nov 11, 2008 - 3:06 pm 67. Someone75:

Nah, there will be no deafening silence because you guys are picking up where liberals left off. With the way you complain about liberal hand wringing, I’m shocked that there as so many howls of bitter defeat and cries of unfairness. Looks like both parties are sore losers. Why don’t we all grow up and having a rational discussion in the middle of the road?

Nov 11, 2008 - 3:43 pm 68. MarkJ:

“from the looks of every morning joe on msnbc since the election, it looks like they’re just going to keep wailing on palin. amazing: their One wins, a new administration begins, the near-miracle of peaceful transfer of power is enacted once again in this great republic, and – all they want to do is talk about palin.”

Actually, that may be precisely what Sarah Palin is hoping for. “I don’t care what you say about me as long as pronounce my name correctly.” This means that Palin won’t be leaving the public eye anytime soon and, after a few years of a miserable Obama presidency, many voters will start seriously thinking about “what might have been…and what could yet be.”

Know what I mean?

Nov 11, 2008 - 3:55 pm 69. MarkJ:

Someone75,

“Why don’t we all grow up and having a rational discussion in the middle of the road?”

Important safety tip: If you stand in the middle of the road…you’ll get run over.

Nov 11, 2008 - 3:57 pm 70. Sara:

I’ve been through this before: seen the far Left whip up the country into a frenzy of hate (Nixon) and then keep it up once they made him quit. The hate of the mob leaders was not appeased and they never stopped their exaggerated screech of blame, hate and fear. The Left not only hates America, they hate life itself. It does not matter in which country they reside.

However, for the normal American, it hurts to be filled with the far Left’s fear, rage and hate and most of the followers abandoned band wagon to return to their own nature and center. They just wanted to live in peace and enjoy life’s next group-think fad. The left raged even louder but considerably smaller without an object in which to focus the mob. Nixon was gone, but the raging kooks were still frothing.

When the preachers of hate and agitation would not leave the Nation alone and continued the insane screeching and demanding, always with new enemies and outrages, the followers joined normal people in pointing and laughing at the moonbats. It will become uncool to be an uncorked lefty. They had spent their moment of mob hate “leadership” for a few decades until Bush came along.

After the kooky messiah is in office, just point and laugh when they forget and screech about Bush. Obama and the democrats are responsible now and we all know the Left is never racist!

Nov 11, 2008 - 4:27 pm 71. Jason S:

The infantile left’s infamous venom will continue unabated no matter who is in office or what they stand for. When Obama becomes President they’ll simply spit fire at anyone who dares question him. Expect at least four years of being labeled a “racist” simply for disagreeing with Obama.

For the last 8 years liberals have repeated the mantra “dissent is patriotic.” Apparently if you don’t dissent, you’re unpatriotic. Everything the President does must be questioned. Every act of government must be scrutinized with a cynical eye and subject to intense conspiracy detection. There must be no benefit of the doubt. There is no such thing as “good intention” when it comes to government.

You can bet your ass they’ll forget about all of this during Obama’s presidency. There will be no dissent. Suddenly, dissent is unpatriotic. There will be no questioning. To question is to distrust, to lose faith. There will be no scrutiny. The scrutiny of a black Hopenchange President is racist. The benefit of the doubt will be given. Obama knows what’s best for us, even if it isn’t immediately apparent. He has the best of intentions.

If liberals express the slightest of doubts about Obama, if they criticize anything he does, if they dissent or resist in any way whatsoever, they will feel like they are betraying the communal love and hope they had for Obama during his campaign. They’ve just spent the last year marching through the streets chanting his name and telling everyone within earshot that he’s going to be the best President in the history of America. This is the moment when the oceans will cease to rise and the Earth will heal. This is the moment when the whole world will come together in peace, love and understanding. There will be no more wars. The terrorists will put down their weapons – they now have no reason to hate us.

It will not be forgotten that Obama’s supporters actually believed this bullsh*t. So when it comes to pass that Obama is none of these things, they’ll be too humiliated to admit they were wrong. And woe be tide everyone who tries to point this out. Fists will fly!

To everyone who’s using this thread as an opportunity to engage in one last feeble round of Bush-bashing: in no way was GW Bush our greatest President, but history will depict him in a far more objective light than the hysterically shrill left have over the last 8 years. The left does not understand geopolitics – they never have and they never will. They place their hopes in multilateralism and pointless, worthless institutions like the U.N. They have no idea of the concept that world peace will never be attained through a policy of appeasement or isolationism. They aren’t observant enough to realize that our only hope of peace is through the spread of liberal democracy and free trade. They’re too spiteful and blinded by rage to admit that Bush did a very good thing by planting the seeds of democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq. Hell, if they can’t even bring themselves to admit that he did more to help the people of Africa than any other President in U.S. history, how can we expect them to admit that they were maybe wrong about Iraq?

Liberals have lied through their teeth about Iraq – not Bush. For a devastating account of their lies and their attempts to sabotage the regime change in Iraq, read David Horowitz’s “The Party of Defeat.” I notice the challenge is still open to refute that book and not one liberal has yet managed it. For an excellent defense of Bush’s intent in the Middle East, read Robert Kaufman’s “In Defense of the Bush Doctrine.” The Bush administration may have made mistakes and errors of judgment in their execution of the operation to force regime change in Iraq (and THAT was the #1 reason why we went to war – not because of “WMD’s” as liberals still claim) – but the justification for the war was sound and the long term cost and consequence of leaving Saddam in power would have been far worse. The left will never admit this because they are blinded by the fog of rage.

Once Obama gets behind the Presidential wheel and is fully briefed on the basics of geopolitics and the real threats which face us, he won’t do a damn thing to undo the progress made by Bush. The left faces a dilemma. Either keep their traps shut as he goes back on every promise he made during his campaign, or throw a tantrum and betray their year long Obama love-fest. Hmmm, I wonder which it will be.

Nov 11, 2008 - 5:11 pm 72. Trialdog:

The radical left doesn’t quite realize it yet, and they may never, but with this election, they’ve lost one of their core fundamental beliefs. We’ve seen media stories about those who are overcome with emotion because a black man has been elected or stories about foreigners amazed a black man could be elected President. The interesting aspect of those stories is how they are so removed from what happened. Obama’s race did not hinder his election. While it may have helped, it didn’t play a large part. Obama’s election shows how color blind our society is. Those who express surprise or emotion can only do so if their core fundamental belief is that America has a racist lurking around every corner, waiting to do evil. Or that whites, secretly hold racist thoughts, conscious or unconscious, that would prevent a vote for Obama. These people have gone out before the world, to explain to foreigners, what a rotten racist population we have. They talk about “our tragic history” and believe it exists today, below the surface, uglier than ever. And just how utterly vacuous is this? Who are these people whose core understanding of the States is so utterly wrong? Why were they given a platform to expose their paranoid musings to the world? All the imagined sins our our racist society are now shown and proven wrong, brutally and sadly wrong. Our leftist academic elite have been preaching that America is an evil racist nation for years and years. It is their essence. Yet America broke free from racism long ago and those academics haven’t yet recognized how foolish they are and have been. Unfortunately, rather than feel shame or accept ridicule for their hysteria, the radical left will now move on to the next great thing they don’t understand. They will, as others have noted, feed their insatiable desire to hate America for something they imagine interferes with their comfortable narcissistic and boring lives. They will not stop. They have many many illogical and hateful core beliefs.

Nov 11, 2008 - 5:19 pm 73. Jason Sieckmann:

what strange sentiments you hold for the left; considering the neo-cons that you attract here. The truth of the matter is that you should be fighting for a government that doesn’t support Central Economic Planning. But you’re not, so I guess you should just keep pointing at the other side of the aisle and say ‘those guys.’ Go fight for Ron Paul, at least he’s wise for a religious crazy. More crazies here at http://mediacondom.com

Nov 11, 2008 - 5:52 pm 74. Scott E:

The Obama presidency will represent the generational requirement for disappointment in “the system” in one’s life. Reality. Perspective. Faith that, as a nation, our system works whether each individual feels empowered or not. Growing up to the fact that the world isn’t a pretty place and much of the world cares little for our ideals or philosophy. It’s a cycle that, if you have your eyes open, is a required function, much like a good bowel movement.

Nov 11, 2008 - 6:15 pm 75. Robert Hurley:

Chuck Peleto:
For a self described Christian, you do not seem to have much Christian love for your fellow man

Nov 11, 2008 - 6:18 pm 76. hp:

@Brian H. holy shenanigans, batman!

i’d lay heavy odds on incarceration. if not for him, at the very least for several top layers of (technical) supporters in his camp. if not here, in their own country where they normally operate.

RE: In their quest to regain power, the Left has burned all the bridges.

BIN-GO!

i’ve lost friends.

forever (maybe).

i’ve lost all respect.

for same said lost “friends”.

hopefully not so forever.

solely because of their newly exposed BY WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY vision of “justice” and….

“fairness” (gag).

they’re going to have to come back to me, though. they will now have to prove themselves.

here’s a hint: they won’t.

give their fraudulently “elected” (puh) king a few months in office. they’ll see.

will be taking the high road through it all. “i told you so” will never be something they hear from me.

p.s. have found new friends in recent weeks. politics shirley does make for strange bedfellows. )

Nov 11, 2008 - 6:44 pm 77. Jones:

I expect to spend a lot of time over the next 4 years saying to my liberal friends, “I know- I KNOW! But what can we do? He’s the President!”

Nov 11, 2008 - 6:50 pm 78. hp:

@Someone75 trust me. posts here are but a momentary distract for the lot.

we want it regularly reminded via centralized location that recent fraudulent activity will not soon be forgotten. that least some fool mistake our very busy elsewhere silence for ignorance or surrender cause’n that ain’t gonna happen.

period.

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:20 pm 79. fred:

Jason S @#71

I too have been reading Horowitz’ site and following the “progress” of the Left trying to refute his book. I haven’t bought the book yet – and I should, but I have a feeling that most of it I already know. Been very busy with Robert Spencer’s book about stealth jihad. And re-reading Aristotle’s “Nicomachean Ethics.” Over the holidays I’ll get something of Ayn Rand and Hayek.

The cynic in me understands perfectly well what the collectivists have been doing the last eight years. Of course they know that the excuse they give about their understanding of of patriotism and dissent is dissimulation. I never took them at their word, since I used to be on the Left years ago and I know their mettle.

I don’t trust those people as far as I can spit.

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:27 pm 80. Clausewitz:

To look into the future, google “The enabling laws of 1934″. Prepare to be ‘coordinated’. Remember the left has vowed to bring Repulicans before their tribunal, and I’m sure they will be doing this with glee.

From that point onwards its either the night of the “Long Knives”, or the “Cultural Revolution”. Power consolidation can be such a rush…..

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:32 pm 81. hp:

Robert Hurley: Chuck Peleto: [sic]

you, “sir”, have no class. you would not have gone out of your way to misspell his name as a cheap shot directly at him otherwise.

but you keep right on slinging that mud.

hey, dude, how much they payin’ ya for slinging, anyway? your fee part of the outstanding debt them dems are still attempting to defile their loyal followers of?:

Obama Camp Asks Supporters to Help Pay Down DNC Debt

what the heck happened to those record breaking $100, $200/pop contributions so gauchely flaunted mere weeks ago?

fraud.

fraud.

FRAUD.

uh-uh-uh.

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:41 pm 82. Roger Godby:

Robert Hurley, you’re boring and somewhat petty, no matter who or what Mr. Pelto is.

I’m 40. My parents will get SS, Medi-whatever, but I won’t, in two ways: (1) I’m an expat and have not paid US taxes–thank you, Foreign Earned Income Exclusion!–for years because I see the Ponzi scheme; I read the government’s own figures and projections. Accordingly, I put my trust mainly in dividend-paying stocks of big greedy multinationals that sell people what they want and need. (2) There’s no political will to reverse government spending, which means inflation. SS is already being forecast to pay about 3/4 of what’s promised, but inflation can render that meaningless. Oh, and Congress can decide simply to quit paying SS; you apparently don’t have a legal claim to the SS contributions you’ve made.

It’s Carter all over again, but like all sequels, it will be even worse.

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:48 pm 83. Chris:

If anyone thinks this will stop, they are very wrong. There is nothing more repellant to a groupthinker than an individual. It will show up not as anti-war protests (after all, what ever happens now in Iraq will be written off to President Bush) or even equal rights demonstrations, but as marches to ban guns, marches to ban pro-life associations, marches to end the free market under the auspices of either going ‘green’ or strangling financial markets. The important thing is the need to come together under a banner, whatever the banner. And for those who choose not to participate, there will always be plenty of Helen Jones-Kelley’s around to keep an eye on you.

As for the media, expect it to become as degradingly boring as the CBC in Canada….

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:49 pm 84. BC:

To lobogris:

What does that make all the countries who followed him into Iraq, you ask? A) well, there wasn’t that many — while Bush and his people tried to make it sound like some big multinational involving 30 countries, in actuality, there were only 5 who provided any military troops, and of those only England and, to a much lesser extent, Australia, really committed and serious numbers: the UK – 45,000, Australia – 2000, Romania – 278, Poland – 200, and Albania – 70. B) Countries that did their research, like “Freedom Fries” France and Germany, had issues with the supposed evidence presented by Bush and his people; and C) This was strictly a US operation — we made the charges, claimed all this evidence, said it was absolutely necessary, and badgered other countries to help. And ended squandering all the sympathy and good will from 9/11 and the Afghanistan operation.

And as far as the other US politicians go, remember that they don’t have the same level of access to intel that Bush has, so there is a reasonable act of faith to believe your President, especially since 9/11 was about a year old and still fresh on people’s mind when Bush starting talking up old Reagan buddy Hussein as a threat with ties to al-Qaeda. And that resolution congress was, 1) based on BS:

“Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated”…

“Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations”…

“Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq”

and 2, there was another section that goes: “Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to ‘work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge’ posed by Iraq and to ‘work for the necessary resolutions,’ while also making clear that ‘the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable’”

Anybody remember Bush “working” with the United Nations Security Council to deal with any of this stuff beforehand? The UN Inspectors were allowed back in, weren’t finding anything, but then had to leave because, well, evidence, schmevidence — we were going to invade anyway to remove Hussein, as per a longstanding PNAC plan that was signed of by some familiar names:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

A more complete list of PNAC members is here:
http://911review.com/motive/pnac.html

Note that McCain’s foreign policy advisor (until he was fired over some Palin stuff), Randy Scheunemann, is also on the list as president of the “Committee for the Liberation of Iraq” which was created by the PNAC.

How’s them for facts and research?

Nov 11, 2008 - 7:52 pm 85. fred:

The problem is that people like “BC” believe that the United States should not have a foreign policy independent of the UNSC. What these people have done during the last eight years will not be forgotten by us.

This country is in the midst of a Cold War that has been building since the Sixties. And it could break out into hot civil war in the future. God have mercy on the Left, because I won’t. And I’m not alone in that sentiment.

For nullifying the Constitution and installing collectivism in our land there will be a price paid in blood for this. I see the Communist Party is in a very celebratory mood these days and they are openly boasting of the work yet to come. Good. I hope they are emboldened, because they have absolutely no clue as to the level of violence they can bring down on themselves and their allies.

And by the way, the nation is broke and cannot afford to pay off the military enough money to defend their side.

So, unless reality jolts them back to moderation and respect for the charter and traditions of this nation they are on a collision course and a sanguinary conflict that will end badly for them.

Nov 11, 2008 - 8:53 pm 86. hp:

quasi-retraction: not quite so much “fraud”, although some of those funds undoubtedly did sponsor the voter fraud that occurred.

more like:

incompetent when it comes to handling somewhat sizable amounts of $.

good luck, america, when they take full control of your trillions.

Nov 11, 2008 - 9:11 pm 87. CFM:

BC: “How’s them for facts and research?” Considering your inability to comprehend the first cited source, and the comic book nature of the second, somewhere between laughable and pathetic.

Hurley: The election is over. The Obama campaign troll fund will be cutting you off. You should be looking for a job.

Nov 11, 2008 - 10:06 pm 88. Jason S:

84. BC:

It does not matter that there were “not that many” countries who supported us in the Iraq war. Mulilateralism is not a prerequisite when it comes to the United States of America looking after its own interests. In fact the doctrine of liberal multilateralism is fraught with folly since it can never be guaranteed that a consensus will be obtained on the nature of any external threat, nor will the liberal democracies whose approval and support we seek always be willing to run the same risks in overcoming such threats.

We simply cannot make our policy hostage to the lowest common denominator of either a UN or even a NATO consensus. The idea that we must seek UN approval is perhaps the most ridiculous of all the arguments leveled at the Bush administration. The UN is a hopelessly worthless organization, since its members are also comprised of some of the most corrupt and oppressive nations on Earth, with whom we share no common interests whatsoever.

I must also take issue with your fixation on the issue of WMD’s – you know as well as I do that WMD’s were not the reason why we went to war, although it is true of course that they were perhaps overemphasized for the purposes of selling the war. The Authorization for the Use of Force bill begins with 23 “whereas” clauses justifying the war. Only two of these clauses refer to stockpiles of WMDs. On the other hand, twelve of the reasons for going to war refer to UN resolutions violated by Saddam Hussein.

The reason for invading Iraq was overwhelmingly: regime change. Contrary to your insinuation that the Democrats were “duped” into supporting the war by misleading intelligence, they did in fact both support and call for regime change right from the first Gulf War, something that Bush Senior failed to do. In fact here is a video of Al Gore in 1992 criticizing him for ignoring Saddam’s ties to terrorism and his attempts to acquire weapons of mass destruction:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JE48XHKG64

Saddam had nuclear intentions and the 1981 bombing of his nuclear facilities by Israel was an act of prudence without which he almost certainly would have possessed nuclear weapons upon his invasion of Kuwait. He was certainly in the process of rekindling his nuclear ambitions when we invaded Iraq. The book “The Bomb in My Garden” by Mahdi Obeidi, an ex-nuclear scientist under Saddam, confirms this:

http://www.amazon.com/Bomb-My-Garden-Secrets-Mastermind/dp/0471679658

Those who believe there was no need for regime change in Iraq are sorely lacking in wisdom. I also find incredible your insinuation that France’s opposition to the war was based upon their superior assessment of the situation, when it is obvious that they had friendly relationship with Hussein and a vested interest in letting him remain in power. Food for oil anyone?

The wisdom of the Bush administration can be seen in their recognition that our best interests lie in a stable and peaceful geopolitical balance – and that such a situation will only be achieved through the removal of rogue regimes and the spread of liberal democracy and free trade. Capitalist democracies do not make war with each other and have no reason to. It does not matter how much the left bleats and hoots about “Bush the war criminal” and “America the terrorist state” – an objective history will look kindly upon him, and unfavorably upon any subsequent President who fails to protect the seeds of Middle Eastern democracy that Bush planted.

Nov 11, 2008 - 11:22 pm 89. Rachel Peepers:

Mary,

You sure do ask a lot of questions. Although I’m sure some are rhetorical, something tells me not all are.

My first inclination is to give you my phone number so I can address them one by one. Or was that my thirty first inclination. At this hour of the night sometimes even I’m not sure. Or has my thinking been clouded by a piece of uncooked potato a la Mr. Scrooge?

Nevertheless, I press on.

Your question?

How will the left react when the easy targets are no longer popping up? Perhaps a corollory question might be, “How should the mainstream media have reacted during the election when they had so many targets to pick from. (Ayers, Dorne, Wright, Biden, Obama)

But that’s ancient history. Who really cares?
We can beat and bash the mainstream media only so long and their party line won’t change. And torture has been banned. I get the feeling at leftist cocktail parties they have scar showing sessions where the leftist media outlet with the earliest invitation to the Inaugural Ball is praised beyond recognition.

But you ask, what will the left now scream about, what will raise their ire? I’d personally like to torture them and ask them why they betrayed their duty to the United States. And voted for a racist, American hating brown eyed handsome me.

But, hey, that’s me.

But back to your question, Mary.

I don’t know.

Maybe the leftists will become terribly pickeyuin. Maybe they’ll reduce their demands and simply press for the heads of Bush and Chaney to be placed on a platter by midnight, January 20tth. in Abe’s lap at the Lincoln Memorial? Do I look like I have crystal balls?

Maybe they’ll get on David Letterman and demand Barack order all U.S. troops in Iraq to immediately stand down; lay down their arms and surrender to the people’s Iraqi militia.

Maybe the Black Panthers will be chosen to head the trial of any and all U.S. soldiers found in uniform illegally occupying and within the borders of Iraq.

Here’s one that U.S. students may really get their teeth into. Cut off the ears of all wives of U.S. servicemen serving abroad and have a mass barbecue Janet Reno style a la Waco, but this time in Midland, Texas.

Maybe some of the Obama girls and Panther boys can arrange bus caravans to big U.S. cities, and like the Free French cut the hair off French female sympathizers who collaborated orally with the Germans, find known Republican female sympathizers and offer them up to all the repressed, under educated black men who Bush and his government put into jail for so called heinous crimes against humanity.

Say, isn’t OJ unjustly in jail? Well, get him out, Obama. You’re the commander in chief.

When you think about it, there’s really no end to the redress against whites that needs to be done in this country. At the very least, take their land, spread their wealth, and offer up their woman to our repressed black brothers.

Time has come today. Time has come today. The blacks have waited almost 300 years to truly be set free. It’s time to make whitey pay.

Nov 12, 2008 - 2:24 am 90. BC:

To Jason S: Well, well — one of the regulars here actually got something right: yes indeed, invading Iraq to take out Saddam was indeed regime change, as the PNAC letter to Clinton pretty clearly stated. Saddam was useful to US interests in the 80’s, but not so much after that Kuwait business and his support of Palestinian terrorists (which were the *only* terrorists he supported, despite lying ass toadies like Stephen Hayes claiming otherwise. Not good news to Israel, but really of no concern to US security.)

But that’s not exactly how the invasion was sold, was it?

Remember when almost 70% of the US public thought Hussein had something to do with 9/11 thanks to all the BS “associations” Bush and his people were making? In a Newsweek poll from just last year, 41% of Americans answered “Yes” to the question “Do you think Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq was directly involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001?” And that same poll showed that most of these people had no clue that most of the hijackers were Saudis. Remember when former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill said that Bush was exploring removing Saddam early in 2001? And how both
former White House counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward said that Bush started drawing up invasion plans shortly after 9/11?

All that talk about WMD’s and ties to al-Qaeda was just utter, deliberate lying. Clinton didn’t know because the US didn’t have many resources in the area at the time, and Hussein wanted to make Iran think he still might have WMD stockpiles (Saddam considered Iran to be his real enemy). But thanks to the war in Afghanistan and the return of the UN inspectors, as well as a big ramp up in covert ops, Bush was getting far more intel and all of it was pointing away from both WMD’s and al-Qaeda ties. (Oh, by the way — do you know why Hussein kicked out the inspectors in the first place? He discovered that the US had planted at least one spy among them.)

But we still invaded. Maybe Bush thought that once we had the full run of the country, we’d find WMD’s and al-Qaeda hidden in the bushes and under rocks or such. That didn’t work out, although with all the ensuing disorder and chaos, al-Qaeda did up coming into Iraq, but I do believe that was not the point.

But then the war itself went badly and the lies just piled up further. The civilian casualties are much, MUCH higher than anyone realizes, despite at least two studies having the number at about million, and this is info the Pentagon has but is apparently considered confidential. And you know how right wingers are now claiming how the surge worked and that war was somehow a success? No. The surge was about as successful as fireman who get a house fire under control only after the house had burnt down to its foundations (and with the fire itself being started accidentally by the firemen.) And also I doubt many of you know that the true reduction in attacks was not caused by the surge (which was not that much in additional numbers, percentagewise) but by essentially bribing Sunni insurgents to leave the Shiites alone and help instead with defeating al-Qaeda and their supporters (whose bloody and brutal arrogance was not exactly helping to make new friends in Iraqi neighborhoods.)

Lies upon lies upon lies, compounded by gross incompetence and causing insane amounts of death and destruction — that’s Bush’s legacy.

Nov 12, 2008 - 5:34 am 91. RealOne:

Come on Mary you can do better than this. First to confuse students and liberal professors as the only ones who support Obama is to discount the large margin Obama won by. Whats to be mad about when we had an election which clearly demonstrated the will of the people? Why would students protest our new President who seeks to change the terrible direction our country has been going these past 8 years? A president who has inspired millions with words of hope, someone who has vowed to make public service cool again when most students want more out of their government? You Mary are a minority on your campus for a reason. And will be for some time because the people have spoken, we are done with your put downs (the one) and done with your ineptitude (your lousy writing ability). Its over for you and your ideological peers. Get hype America, feel proud and smile with condensation at our at our conservative brothers and sisters who still don’t get it.

Nov 12, 2008 - 5:49 am 92. Whatnow?:

Wow,
Impressive writing from an accomplished writer who practices her trade of teaching intro to creative writing classes at a fourth tier institution. Congratulations PJ media you must be proud to have such an authority of the issues on staff.

Nov 12, 2008 - 5:57 am 93. mac:

The irony will be their form of governance will finally force these self-styled banner-carriers of peace and justice to shut up.

Nov 12, 2008 - 5:58 am 94. mac:

BC, you seem a bit offput about removing funding from Palestinian terrorist groups via Saddam H. Your rationale seems to be, ‘it only helps the joooos’. Are some terrorists acceptable?

Nov 12, 2008 - 6:21 am 95. Michael:

Thank you Whatnow?. You confirm my belief in liberals by your mean spirited personal attack with no attempt at dialogue and debate. Cudos to you.

Nov 12, 2008 - 6:45 am 96. john parker:

Jason S:

Very fine comments sir; I actually clipped and saved them, and that is something I never do. I’d like to see you on PJM as an author, not just a commenter.

About this:

“Apparently if you don’t dissent, you’re unpatriotic. Everything the President does must be questioned. Every act of government must be scrutinized with a cynical eye and subject to intense conspiracy detection. There must be no benefit of the doubt. There is no such thing as “good intention” when it comes to government.”

Very nicely put. I have always believed that in America, the right to dissent is vitally important and indeed, worth fighting, even dying for. But the left has systematically abused this right, turning it into a fetish, or a symbol of trendy social conformity, and rendering it meaningless through overuse by ill-informed adolescents with no understanding of the real world. They march over stupid, trivial non-problems like animal research, nuclear waste, and to save the lives of convicted murderers (to say nothing of trying to preserve the rule of tyrants overseas), while meanwhile, the world’s genuine problems (the rise of fascist China, nuclear proliferation, Islamic totalitarianism, Zimbabwe, etc.) pass unnoticed, or if acknowledged, explained away as somehow being caused by US actions – as though no country but America is capable of making plans or taking actions. In addition, I’ve often noted how their “intense conspiracy detection” is somehow only applied to the US and its institutions, especially conservative ones like the GOP and the military. When it comes to foreign governments and terrorist groups, this detector is somehow magically disabled, and the leftist instantly morphs into a hyper-naive yokel who takes any assertion, no matter how absurd, at face value: “well shucks, if Ahmedinejad says he wants nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, that’s good enough for me, he seems like a nice man! Castro’s done so much for health care, surely all those stories about repression just couldn’t be true! If we just pull our troops out of Saudi Arabia like Osama says, surely he’ll stop hating us!” etc., etc.

Nov 12, 2008 - 7:10 am 97. Jason S:

90. BC:

How the war was sold to the public is far less relevant than its real purpose and reason. And that reason was perfectly legitimate. We have not fought one war in history that was not “sold” to the public. Bush didn’t “lie” – Democrats lied. Their assertion that Bush lied to them is a lie in itself. Saddam had already used WMD’s before and was quite capable of using them again. He played cat and mouse games with UN inspectors and defied every resolution against him. Heck, if the UN thought he was enough of a menace to warrant the control of resolutions, that’s saying something considering how tolerant towards totalitarian oppression they usually are.

Listen, the idea that Saddam was not a threat to Middle East stability and hence our own interests is just pure baloney. The man had a nuclear program and demonstrated himself to be evil and reckless. That alone was enough to justify regime change. He also had extensive ties with terrorists and his removal was certainly beneficial in fighting the wider war on terror.

You say “the civilian casualties are much, MUCH higher than anyone realizes…” as if you’re any kind of authority on the matter and have access to figures that nobody else does. The studies which put the figure at around a million have been shown to be flawed. Furthermore, the surge HAS been a success, and many gains and improvements have been made in the country. No matter how much you whine, the fact remains that the removal of Saddam Hussein was a prudent measure in the long run and democracy has taken firm root. In fact Bush’s legacy is that the seeds of democracy have been planted in two countries in the Middle East which previously knew nothing but dark, totalitarian oppression and brutality. No, it was never going to be clean and there was never not going to be bloodshed. But, I would not turn back the clock under any circumstances.

I note also that you talk about us having a relationship with Saddam in the 80’s when that was in our interests, as if that were a bad thing. Yes, we supported Iraq over Iran during their war – a case of the lesser of two evils at the time since Iran was a far greater threat to Middle East stability. It’s called strategy and prudence. Iraq has not been “burned to its foundations” and I guess you liberals will whine and whine and whine about gains and improvements in Iraq for the rest of your lives. At some point, the rest of us will just cease to take notice. I’m halfway there already.

Nov 12, 2008 - 7:11 am 98. cfbleachers:

Bush had better intel and the inspectors had returned?

Where does this information come from. The entire WORLD said they didn’t know, Saddam had hidden stockpiles previously, there were a slew of resolutions and sanctions for not complying and anyone who thinks that Saddam was not working hand in hand with terrorists is terminally naive and spectacularly uninformed.

The British, French and Israeli intelligence communities were all confirming that Saddam had the capacity to keep, maintain and continue to build an arsenal of WMD’s. Only a fool at this point in time would suggest that Saddam had no intentions of doing so. He had a nuclear program in place.

Moreover, it was Clinton, Gore, Albright, Berger, Cohen who said explicitly, that Saddam was the greatest threat in the world to hand over weapons of mass murder to terrorists. They are on record as saying that very thing.

Lastly, it is impossible to disprove a negative. Ian Pacepa says that there was an emergency plan to evacuate certain weapons from dual use facilities in place. Removal to Syria was in the plans. One can believe or disbelieve him at their whim. To suggest that President Bush had “different” intelligence than Clinton, the Brits, France, Israel…is inane.

If we took the Taliban out and Saddam could not make good on his announced willingness to state sponsor terrorism because we took him out…it was the elimination of state sponsorship of terrorism that has proved most effective.

We can discuss the wisdom of preemption or the direct link to terrorism ad nauseum, what we can’t do is bastardize the truth about the threat that Saddam presented if he gave terrorists a state sponsor. It would have made no sense to eliminate them in Afghanistan only to have them set up shop in Iraq.

The Democrats are on record saying he was the greatest threat to do just that…now, they want those pesky facts to disappear. Sorry. Not going to happen.

Nov 12, 2008 - 7:46 am 99. susan:

BC spewing bullsh*ts as usual.

5 countries in Iraq? dont let facts get in the way of course.

In testimony before the Senate Armed Services committee on August 3, 2006, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld described the coalition in Iraq as composed of 34 allies (plus the US).

As of June 13, 2006, MNF-I reported that 27 countries (including the US) maintained responsibility over the six major areas of Iraq. Since that time, Japan has withdrawn all of its forces from Iraq.

For the purposes of this tally, only countries that contribute troops as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom are counted.

Countries which had troops in or supported operations in Iraq at one point but have pulled out since: Nicaragua (Feb. 2004); Spain (late-Apr. 2004); Dominican Republic (early-May 2004); Honduras (late-May 2004); Philippines (~Jul. 19, 2004); Thailand (late-Aug. 2004); New Zealand (late Sep. 2004); Tonga (mid-Dec. 2004) Portugal (mid-Feb. 2005); The Netherlands (Mar. 2005); Hungary (Mar. 2005); Singapore (Mar. 2005); Norway (Oct. 2005); Ukraine (Dec. 2005); Japan (July 17, 2006); Italy (Nov. 2006); Slovakia (Jan 2007).

Countries planning to withdraw from Iraq: Poland had earlier claimed that it would withdraw all soldiers by the end of 2006. It however extended the mandate of its contingent through at least mid-2007. Denmark announced that it would withdraw its troop contingent by August 2007.

Countries which have recently reduced or are planning to reduce their troop commitment: South Korea is planning to withdraw up to 1000 soldiers by the end of 2006. Poland withdrew 700 soldiers in Feb. 2005. Between May 2005 and May 2006, the United Kingdom reduced the size of its contingent by 1,300. The United Kingdom also is planning to reduce significantly the size of its contingent by the end of 2007, with an initial reduction of 1,600 troops followed by an additional 500 troops by end of 2007.

——————————

There are far less countries that supported kosovo indipendence (Albania, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru and Palau and USA) but that doesn’t seem an obstacle for you.

Nov 12, 2008 - 8:31 am 100. kochevnik:

cfbleachers,

I keep hearing your hyperbole about terrorists in Iraq, but so far no names or dates. The only real terrorists I see are the repubs who destroyed the economic future of the US and cronies like yourself who cheer America toward civil war.

Nov 12, 2008 - 9:02 am 101. Turtledove:

Jason S: Bravo! Wonderful posts. I think Bush’s biggest mistake may have been in not listening to John McCain much earlier. He was advocating for a “surge” and a change in tactics early on in the war.

Nov 12, 2008 - 10:03 am 102. Pat J:

I think the left will still be yelling until the Iraq War ends and most of the Bush Administration ends up in the Hague for crimes against humanity.

Nov 12, 2008 - 11:00 am 103. daniel:

Wrong wrong wrong!!!

Unless Obama is really a left wing radical in bed with Islamic fundamentalists and other anti-Americans -which I doubt- he will act in the interests of the United States of America.

This will mean he will sooner or later (possibly sooner rather then later) annoy the heck out of code pink and their supporters. Why would he still listen to them? He doesn’t need them anymore, not even for reelection and he wont get reelected if his administration becomes the 2nd Carter administration. This is why we are hearing this tough talk about Afghanistan.

Consider this: If a McCain administration decided on a preventive attack against Iran, how would the American people and media have responded? I think at best with doubt, I think most people would come to the conclusion the Neocons are at it again. How people here in Europe would respond…? I don’t even want to think of it.

Now think president Obama. He gets the intelligence briefings George Bush gets but cannot speak about, imagine he comes to the same conclusions which isn’t very hard because he already did. He just said that Iran having nukes is unacceptable.

There is nobody more suitable to launch a preventive attack on Iran then President Barack Obama. The left will hate him, trust me.

Nov 12, 2008 - 11:17 am 104. BC:

To Susan: You are as confused as usual, although which country sent in what troops when is, I admit, a bit confusing since at points *later* in the war there were more contributions, although usually for a limited time period. This seems to be the most comprehensive list I can find, which also includes when they were sent and for how long:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_orbat_coalition.htm

Go look for which countries contributed at the time of the initial invasion in 2002. Not so many, eh?

Don’t let the facts hit you on the way out.

Nov 12, 2008 - 11:50 am 105. BC:

Actually, this makes it more clear who actually committed troops at the very beginning “Coalition of the Willing” bit:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coalition_of_the_willing

Nov 12, 2008 - 11:56 am 106. BC:

To cfbleachers: What part do you not understand? Imagine that you had a troublesome, pain in the butt neighbor that you *thought* was also harboring, say, illicit drugs and guns, but you didn’t know for sure. You heard rumors, and you know that several years ago the police raided the neighbor, there was a gunfight, people were killed, and the neighbor was put on probation (poor policework), but you never actually saw any drugs or guns recently.

That was Iraq during Clinton’s time.

Not let’s suppose you and some other neighbors started videotaping your neighbor’s house, had a tech friend tap into their wireless PC network and set up a sensitive microphone to overhear conversations, got some delivery and utility guys to report anything suspicious, and even got the city to send in housing inspectors once a week to make sure everything was kosher, but no drugs and guns ever turned up.

That was Iraq in the months leading up to the invasion.

See the difference? *All* of the intel Bush was receiving from both his people and the UN inspectors was showing Hussein to be clean as to WMD’s and ties to al-Qaeda. But Bush still told the inspectors to leave and he invaded anyway.

It’s not that complicated….

Nov 12, 2008 - 12:21 pm 107. jane:

Gee – an anonymous poster on a messageboard KNOWS that “*All* of the intel Bush was receiving from both his people and the UN inspectors was showing Hussein to be clean as to WMD’s and ties to al-Qaeda.” but our oh so intellegent & highly educated Congress didn’t?

Nov 12, 2008 - 1:16 pm 108. AD Army:

BC, having been deployed to Iraq and having toured the remaining munitions bunkers (dozens at my location alone) which were minimally 20,000-25,000 sq ft and VENTILATED..the only reason for ventilation in a munitions bunker is for crew safety in the vicinity of CHEMICAL weapons. Did Sadam have them when we invaded? Where did they go? A satellite cannot tell you what is inside a bunker, only boots on the ground can. I am not the only OIF vet that saw these (and photographed them), President Bush may have operated on limited information, but the cost of not acting could have been astronomical for allies in the area including Israel. As I recall, Saddam prevented inspectors at every turn from gathering intell, I guess he paid for that.

Nov 12, 2008 - 2:04 pm 109. tanstaafl:

Great piece and litany of conundrums for the professionally outraged, especially…

How will students prop up their self-esteem without asserting their intellectual superiority to the president of the United States?

Will Bill Ayers take down his picture of Ché ? Will Ward Churchill rip the “I love Marx” poster from his office door ? (oh wait…Churchill got fired already for plagiarism and other junque…)

It can’t be easy attempting to teach college and stare at all those t-shirts bearing a likeness of The One™

May the force be with you, Ms. Graber.

Nov 12, 2008 - 2:53 pm 110. BC:

To Jane: Well, if you know where to look, like places like this, for instance:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB254/index.htm

To be honest, I was not exactly too thrilled with Congress going along so willingly with Bush’s plan. Granted that 9/11 was only about a year old at the time and everyone was still on edge and fearful of another attack, there were still plenty of red flags that should have been picked up on. In my case, during Powell’s UN Powerpoint presentation, he accused Hussein of supporting Ansar al-Islam, a terrorist group in Northern Iraq with ties to al-Qaeda.

The problem, though, was that Ansar was a Kurdish group in Kurd territory, in the US enforced “No Fly” zone, and so was an enemy area to Hussein and out of his control. Also Ansar wanted to establish an Islamic republic in Iraq, so there was absolutely no way Hussein was supporting these guys. If that wasn’t enough, that Kurdish section borders Iran, and publicly available informational had Iran supporting Ansar, and since Iran was Hussein’s mortal enemy….

It didn’t exactly take a lot of Sherlocking to find all this, so I really don’t know what the hell Congress was thinking. My guess was that they were just spineless — the French were vilified for not being supportive, and the public’s emotions were really high to deal swiftly with any more immediate threats, which was how Hussein was portrayed.

Nov 12, 2008 - 3:06 pm 111. tanstaafl:

Aw, shoot, not the ole “Democrats knew, Republicans were fooled” argument on the charming Saddam’s intentions.

The act to make removal of Saddam the foreign policy of the US was passed under Bill Clinton in 1998. And the charming Hillary, Kerry, Edwards and (Joltin’) Joe Biden all voted “yea” in 2002 to authorize the use of force in Iraq.

You could only say that those Senators’ attempts to cover their backsides when “the war” went South was, individually and collectively, an act of extreme cowardice.

Democrat quotes on WMD’s

Nov 12, 2008 - 3:09 pm 112. tanstaafl:

The civilian casualties are much, MUCH higher than anyone realizes, despite at least two studies having the number at about million, and this is info the Pentagon has but is apparently considered confidential.

BC, didn’t we get all that straightened out on another PJM article site ? All those phony baloney Johns Hopkins/Lancet hugely inaccurate statistics of Iraqi civilian deaths ?

I see you’re un-teachable, a perfect ideological follower for The One™

Nov 12, 2008 - 3:34 pm 113. Mark:

In 1975, I was a sophomore in high school joyously awaiting the new era of Jimmy Carter. We had all been deluged with chants of “peace” and “love” since early childhood, and we eagerly awaited Carter’s promise to bring the world together in harmony. It was, after all, the dawning of the age of Aquarius. We had all been taught that war was wrong, police and government were corrupt and evil, drugs were a form of spiritual awakening, and that “unfettered love” would solve all the worlds problems. Jimmy Carter was going to take us all into the land of milk and honey. Sound familiar? Four years later, gas shortages, interest rates and unemployment skyrocketed and all of Carter’s policies threatened to bring down an entire nation. When the radical Muslims of Iran stormed our embassy and held innocent Americans hostage, I had a profound awakening. I realized then, that I had been duped and I was changed forever. Young Americans are about to learn all of these same lessons, and learn them they will. While displaying all the “airs” of intelligentsia, Obama’s lack of substance is unprecedented in American presidential politics. All of his “ideas” are regurgitated, worn out, leftists cliches, that have proven disastrous to every society that they have been applied to. Indeed, his collectivist, individual freedom killing philosophy, has been the root of the demise of every major civilization in the history of the world. It should be pointed out that every enemy of America and every thuggish dictator in the world are wildly cheering the election of Obama. They have good reason to see this as a gaping hole in the armor of the United States. For those who see this election as an “awakening of conscience”, I have some bad news. If Obama succeeds in implementing all of his plans to “change” America, a possible implosion could occur. If this happens, the meek will not inherit the earth. They will be the first to be slaughtered, like the mindless lambs that they are.

Nov 12, 2008 - 3:55 pm 114. Slade Gordon:

wow, i came across this site and read a dozen articles across a range of topics — feels like a very red scene — very snarky clenched teeth, dare i say, repubs, and just plain gross. i guess its the ultimate tolerance test.

maybe the Move-On red state roundup and re-education program is called for — just wait, relax, you’ll thank us later…

Nov 12, 2008 - 4:17 pm 115. tanstaafl:

OTOH, Slade G, we might think about sterilizing you before you’re able to pass the genes along.

Nov 12, 2008 - 6:47 pm 116. hp:

Whatnow? hm. 114 comments and counting. made your personal attack look purty green-eyed in envy. 114 and now +1. she’s obviously doing something right.

tanstaafl TheOne™

))))))))))))))))

Nov 12, 2008 - 7:03 pm 117. Jason S:

To BC and other liberals – the following might be of great interest to you.

“Egyptian Scholar: Twice as Many Iraqis Died During Clinton Years”

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/11/egyptian-scholar-twice-as-many-iraqis.html

Also, the following exchange in an interview with Madeline Albright on 60 Minutes:

“Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price–we think the price is worth it.”

So let’s see. If twice as many Iraqis died under Clinton as under Bush, and Bush actually did something positive (removed Saddam, installed democracy) then who’s the better president? Who’s “evil”? Fact is, liberals think Bush is the devil while Clinton was a knight in shining armor. Isn’t it about time we put this myth to bed?

Nov 12, 2008 - 8:46 pm 118. Rogan:

Democrats and assorted Leftists are still blaming “Reagonomics” for every economic problem, even though the real source of any market troubles can always be traced back to Democrat policies. Bush/Cheney will be used as the scapegoat for all the disasters Obama and the Democrats will cause for decades to come.

The strategy for Democrats is clear: Create the problem, blame Republicans, then use the resulting “crisis” as an excuse to give Democrats more power to gradually destroy Capitalism and individual freedom- which is their ultimate, unspoken goal.

This pattern has been consistent at least since Franklin Roosevelt. His policies deepened and prolonged the Depression that was caused by market tampering by the government in the first place. Yet, he is still conidered a great President by most!

Democrats can never admit that their policies are invariably disastrous and the sycophantic MSM will never make them. Republicans must fight to break this pattern. Bush never fought the Democrats while in office. His reward will be endless demonization by those he tried to be civil towards.

Nov 12, 2008 - 10:07 pm 119. BC:

To Jason S — Consider your source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yusuf_al-Qaradawi

Nov 13, 2008 - 8:14 pm 120. The Historian:

RADICAL POLITICIANS WILL DESTROY OBAMA
The far left in Congress is on track to ruin the Obama administration:

http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2008/11/radical-politicians-will-destroy-obama.html

Nov 13, 2008 - 9:13 pm 121. Jason S:

119. BC:

I considered my source. My point still stands. Half a million Iraqi kids died under Clinton and no regime change to show for it. They died for nothing, yet I’ve yet to hear anyone call Clinton a “baby killer.”

118. Rogan:

The left will always do everything they can to sabotage the capitalist system and then blame the free market for their handiwork. It’s a shocking case of chutzpah, like a murderer blaming his crime on the existence of his victim.

Leftists will move mountains to defend the freedom of a woman to kill an unborn baby, but they won’t lift a finger to defend the freedom of individuals to trade with each other on their own terms. They’ll fight for the freedom to burn the American flag but not for the freedom of Americans to keep the fruits of their labor.

Nov 13, 2008 - 10:01 pm 122. Someone75:

hp:

Um, coherence? I have no idea what you attempted to express. You mentioned something about fraud. Were you referring to Bush losing the 2000 election and still becoming president?

Nov 13, 2008 - 10:50 pm 123. conrad carter:

It’d be nice to have an Artist attribution for the head but I believe it is the unusual work of Arthur Robbins.
http://www.poolpaintings.com/paintings2.html

Nov 13, 2008 - 11:34 pm 124. kochevnik:

Jason S,

>I considered my source. My point still stands. Half
>a million Iraqi kids died under Clinton and no
>regime change to show for it.

And a million died under baby Bush, just so Iran can take over. Are you that blind to understand why the US in general is earning pariah status? Your left/right distinction is a false one, and immaterial to the obvious fact that your country has killed over a million Iraquis.

Bush Sr. left Iraq without Sodamn. Probably because he knew the invasion was unjustified and simply a land grab. You repubs have an amazingly short memory.

>The left will always do everything they can to
>sabotage the capitalist system and then blame the
>free market for their handiwork.

Repubs favor hoarding, and democrats favor equatable representation. Not exactly rocket science.

Nov 14, 2008 - 10:31 am 125. Jason S:

124. kochevnik:

A million Iraqi kids died under Bush? I don’t think so. Let’s stay within the bounds of reality here.

Also, if you weren’t so ignorant and disingenuous you would be prepared to admit that the Iraq war wasn’t “just so Iran” could “take over.” First of all, Iran has not taken over. Second, the war was to instigate regime change in the face of Saddam’s continued defiance of the UN resolutions against him – resolutions were based on the consensus that the man was a serious threat to the world (and given the UN’s track record of appeasement, that’s nothing to be sniffed at).

Well, less Iraqi’s died under Bush than Clinton – and Bush has a democratic Iraq to show for it. The invasion was not a “land grab” – let’s please try and keep this discussion above the level of 16 year old kids on a “World of Warcraft” forum – and the first Bush was entirely wrong to leave Saddam in power, as the Democrats never tired of telling him throughout the 90’s.

I’m a little confused by this wretchedly pathetic comment at the end of your post:

“Repubs favor hoarding, and democrats favor equatable representation.”

By “hoarding,” do you mean “saving”? Nothing wrong with that. Or do you mean allowing wealth to remain in the hands of those it belongs to? Nothing wrong with that either. Furthermore, Democrats do not favor “equatable representation.” They favor using the state to enforce equality of outcome.

Nov 14, 2008 - 5:57 pm 126. john:

The revolution devours it own children.

die Revolution ist wie Saturn, sie frißt ihre eignen Kinder
–Georg Buchner

Nov 15, 2008 - 6:35 am 127. Timothy Birdnow:

Outstanding piece!

Revolutionaries learn early that it is always easier to rebel than to govern, and young leftists are apt to be disillusioned by the Buppie Messiah. Where can they vent their spleen?

Of course, Obama will try to push through his American Oprichnina-interior secret police, and will push to nationalize the banking industry (wait; we`re already doing that), and give us socialized medicine, government suppression of energy in the interest of a scientifically dubious Global Warming war of the worlds scare, and will invite attack on America by talking when he should be fighting, but he will find it difficult to do this and keep the American People on his side. The nice thing about our system is that we can kick him out for no-confidence. His leftist friends will be apparent for all to see.

If Republicans learn their lessons, they could have another landslide in 2012.

Nov 15, 2008 - 2:46 pm 128. Tina Trent:

I once made the mistake of criticizing a poem by Audre Lorde ( of course, then she died the next day, inspiring histrionic memorialization that continues unabated). I merely mildly pointed out that were she experiencing the symptoms she had versified, a trip to the doctor would have been more appropriate than continuing to write, let alone date.

Poetry should not contradict simple reality, even if it flies beside it, or in its face.

But in academia, one must not criticize people like Audrey Lorde,

I don’t think most parents realize what goes on, routinely, in academia today. The revolution is over. The crazies won a long, long time ago, and now they relentlessly indoctrinate every poor kid through the medium of education, pre-K to post-graduate. Every wonder about those M.Ed.s who always seem to run all the federal grant and community development programs? This country is beginning to remind me of Kusturica’s Underground, without the bombs and starvation, of course.

Nov 16, 2008 - 8:52 am 129. Chip:

Excellent perspective Rogan!

This is a very sad reason why the Democrats have not been held to account much:
“Bush never fought the Democrats while in office. His reward will be endless demonization by those he tried to be civil towards.”

Meanwhile, Democrats who have held office for awhile are skating on horrible records…
The people of Michigan have confirmed my belief that what goes around can also hit you in the rear end even if you have just witnessed the same thing happening to your neighbor.

The Democrats have been in control of Congress for the past two years. When the next hike in THEIR minimum wage increase package hits retailers, combine with retail deflation because of a lack of consumer confidence, we will see the biggest spike in new unemployment filings since the Great Depression.

Will the Democrats take responsibility for this?

Just like Barney Frank and Dobbs, they will all try to distance themselves from any responsibility.

I will give Obama about 9 months until he loses his patience and then turns into a dictatorial tyrant and will butt heads with Pelosi and others at will.

Sadly, the members of this new generation who believed in CHANGE, for the only reason that it will become a form of CHANGE, will pay a very dear price. Kind of like my generation did for electing Jimmy Carter. Deflation followed by scarcity, followed by monopoly, and ultimately followed by inflation

The only problem?
There may not be another Ronald Wilson Reagan to bail out the nation from this round of Democratic damage visa-vie post Obama!

Nov 26, 2008 - 5:37 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: