Glenn Greenwald says Democrats who inveighed against Bush's detainee policies and now support them under Obama owe Bush an apoogy (not for the first time). As if. Ross Douthat makes a similar point, without asking for the improbable "I'm sorry I called you a reckless, Constitution-shredding war criminal":
For those with eyes to see, the daylight between the foreign policies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama has been shrinking ever since the current president took the oath of office. But last week made it official: When the story of America’s post-9/11 wars is written, historians will be obliged to assess the two administrations together, and pass judgment on the Bush-Obama era.
The death of Osama bin Laden, in a raid that operationalized Bush’s famous “dead or alive” dictum, offered the most visible proof of this continuity. But the more important evidence of the Bush-Obama convergence lay elsewhere, in developments from last week that didn’t merit screaming headlines, because they seemed routine rather than remarkable.
One was NATO’s ongoing bombing campaign in Libya, which now barely even pretends to be confined to humanitarian objectives, or to be bound by the letter of the United Nations resolution. Another was Friday’s Predator strike inside Pakistan’s tribal regions, which killed a group of suspected militants while the world’s attention was still fixed on Bin Laden’s final hours. Another was the American missile that just missed killing Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born cleric who has emerged as a key recruiter for Al Qaeda’s Yemen affiliate.
Imagine, for a moment, that these were George W. Bush’s policies at work. A quest for regime change in Libya, conducted without even a pro forma request for Congressional approval. A campaign of remote-controlled airstrikes, in which collateral damage is inevitable, carried out inside a country where we are not officially at war. A policy of targeted assassination against an American citizen who has been neither charged nor convicted in any U.S. court.
Imagine the outrage, the protests, the furious op-eds about right-wing tyranny and neoconservative overreach. Imagine all that, and then look at the reality. For most Democrats, what was considered creeping fascism under Bush is just good old-fashioned common sense when the president has a “D” beside his name.
Yes, it is a wonder. Blantant hypocrites. Well, I suppose that is a bit harsh because in order to be hypocritical, one must have principles in the first place and there's no evidence of that one the left.
Posted by: lyle | May 09, 2011 at 04:44 PM
The Paulite portions of the Tea Party will likely supply the opposition Douthat is looking for. PLus, there is a Repub,lican constituency for the elimination of the more obnoxious elements of the security state. (For example, I trust the GOP more than the Dems to do something about TSA obnoxiousness, once the reality of Osama's demise setas in...)
Posted by: Appalled | May 09, 2011 at 04:46 PM
Do you supose he's trying to rescue his reputation? Preserve a sliver of credibility?
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2011 at 04:48 PM
Do you supose he's trying to rescue his reputation? Preserve a sliver of credibility?
Except he has neither. There's nothing left to save.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | May 09, 2011 at 04:53 PM
((Imagine the outrage, the protests, the furious op-eds about right-wing tyranny and neoconservative overreach. Imagine all that, and then look at the reality. For most Democrats, what was considered creeping fascism under Bush is just good old-fashioned common sense when the president has a “D” beside his name.))
applause applause!!!
Their hypocrisy is something we need to shine the spotlight on and never turn it off ... I want to see campaign ads of Obama pre his being elected condeming all the things he himself is doing.
Posted by: Chubby | May 09, 2011 at 04:55 PM
present
Posted by: Barack Obama | May 09, 2011 at 05:00 PM
Bush,like most real leaders doesnt allow assassinations of leaders like the cia didnt before taking out 'tthe truth,'plames wonderful works attesting.O is a fascist,spreading drones form cia s failed afpak policy globally and/to assassinate leaders and their families(usually just the males,another agenda).O was against the war,never served govt and wouldnt answer the phone.Who is surprised?
Posted by: Rog | May 09, 2011 at 05:25 PM
I think back to when all the Dems who had been cheerleaders for taking out Saddam jumped ship in droves when things started going bad. "Bush lied" became their excuse for having gone along in the first place.
It's been all hypocrisy, all the time, ever since. Unprincipled, craven bastards.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 09, 2011 at 05:41 PM
Obama is easy about his identity in lots of things--policy, race... Just ask Steve Sailer: Obama's mom on her son's choice of racial identity.
Posted by: anduril | May 09, 2011 at 05:47 PM
Troo 'dat, DoT. Not surprising that OBL thought he could wait us out; kind of surprising he didn't (assuming it still doesn't happen but I think the tide is flowing in a good direction).
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 09, 2011 at 05:49 PM
anduril that's a very interesting article; as in highly disturbing in looking at Toonces and Stanley Ann. Both come off as dysfunctional and broken characters, no doubt initially caused by Stanley Ann's weird lack of responsibility to provide for young needy Barry. Even though she was the source of the problems you can still kind of sympathize with her as Barry chooses to identify with his even bigger POS excuse for a father.
Btw, one of the commenters was wrong on Deval Patrick's father being a "black activist". In fact Pat Patrick was a, for lack of a better term, jazz saxophonist with Sun Ra's various Orchestras (or Arkestras in the vernacular). I'm sure Pat was a horrible father, as many absentee musicians are, but a very good player. Sun Ra was the ultimate auto-didact and extremely well read on a variety of topics (although almost always using what he read to support his nutjob theories; the continual peril of the self-read). When Ra was in Chicago the NOI was always trying to co-opt his ideas (a lot of his musicians had Islamic names) until he'd flummox them by referring to blacks as inferior or cursed. So referring to Deval's dad as a "black activist" at the very least sends the wrong message.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 09, 2011 at 06:11 PM
It's been all hypocrisy, all the time, ever since. Unprincipled, craven bastards.
So true.
Posted by: Janet | May 09, 2011 at 06:19 PM
((.... the Dems who had been cheerleaders for taking out Saddam jumped ship in droves when things started going bad....))
"going bad" I think means that they saw that if they supported Bush and his venture succeeded, they would be politically marginalized for years.
Posted by: Chubby | May 09, 2011 at 06:26 PM
Unprincipled, craven bastards.
Phrase of the Day.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 09, 2011 at 07:13 PM
DOT:
...It's been all hypocrisy, all the time, ever since. Unprincipled, craven bastards...
I try to recall such levels of hypocrisy from the right but all I can come up with are the guys who are caught getting their wires waxed like Gingrich, Ensign and Vitter. You know the whole family values thing?
Posted by: MoodyBlu | May 09, 2011 at 07:19 PM
Except those three guys don't undercut American military missions when they display their hypocrisy.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 09, 2011 at 07:26 PM
Anduril,
Terrific piece on BHO identifying as black. During the 2008 election, my son was a junior at Penn State. I asked him why there was so much support for BHO at a place like State College and he said they all want to vote for the "cool, black dude".
BHO figured it all out early.
Posted by: MoodyBlu | May 09, 2011 at 07:27 PM
Somebody was too busy rubbing his MD buffet belly to post a new thread and now he posts three?
I had some good sh*t to say, but fo-get it now.
Change the site name to "Just One Lazy Mofo"
Posted by: Long Time Listener | May 09, 2011 at 07:28 PM
Remember when leftists worried about the Imperial presidency? Democrats sure have changed their tune about the unitary executive theory:
"This event provides a case study of the effort by the Bush administration to expand presidential power. While most of the attention to this push has focused on national-security issues, it covers the gamut of domestic issues as well. A central pillar has been the so-called Unitary Executive Theory, which undercuts the ability of Congress to regulate the executive branch. (2008 - WH overruled EPA regulations)
LUN
Posted by: Frau Quertreiberin | May 09, 2011 at 07:34 PM
Your TSA keeping you safe from terrorists.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 09, 2011 at 07:42 PM
TSA obnoxiousness
I wonder what we'd lose by simply disbanding the entire thing.
One certain benefit: A decrease in the number of union employees.
Posted by: PD | May 09, 2011 at 08:10 PM
Change the site name to "Just One Lazy Mofo"
And where do we find your updated-daily blog?
Posted by: PD | May 09, 2011 at 08:12 PM
There's a big difference between a shameless hypocrite and a weak human being.
Newt et al were weak human beings who failed to live up to their own standards, but at least they had standards and I'm sure they still respect those standards and felt shame about not living up to them. No victory laps and gloating in the breaking of them.
Do the hypocrites being discussed in this thread hold to one set of standards? NO they do not. Do they feel shame and remorse about not living up to that set of standards? NO they do not. The standards they purported to believe in and hold as near and dear were no such thing. It was just all feigned rhetorical phoney baloney and only hypocrites deliver phoney baloney masked as heartfelt conviction.
Posted by: Chubby | May 09, 2011 at 08:14 PM
Remember when leftists worried about the Imperial presidency?
Oh, yes. My former senator, Russ Feingold, often went into full-shriek mode, for example, referring to Bush as thinking he was King George.
Once Obama got into office and did the same thing, I waited to see what Feingold would have to say. Silence, because he'd gone into full-fellation mode.
Posted by: PD | May 09, 2011 at 08:19 PM
We need a candidate who will make this point, and there are obviously many opportunities to do it. I made reference to Giuliani in the other thread, but he's one person who could take this hypocrisy to Obama in a painful way. I hope he gets in. He's not afraid to attack.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 09, 2011 at 08:25 PM
SEALs go from superhero to sex symbol
It's not just the ladies here, apparently.Posted by: Extraneus | May 09, 2011 at 08:40 PM
Says it all that Tom cites a noted, mainstream lefty's slagging of Obama to point out that mainstream lefties who slagged Bush aren't slagging Obama. And the commenters here are in such a deep stupor of denial, they don't even recognize the ruse.
As usual, the comments about what liberals think are based on wingnut representations of liberal views, not on what liberals are actually saying. Five minutes on Google yields:
Robert Scheer, veteran LA Times journalist, ubiquitous lefty commentator: `` Barack Obama is betraying his promise of change and is in danger of becoming just another political hack.''
Alex Cockburn, writing in The Independent:
`` Obama wants to enlarge the armed services by 90,000. He pledges to escalate the US war in Afghanistan; to attack Pakistan's territory if it obstructs any unilateral US mission to kill Osama bin Laden; and to wage a war against terror in a hundred countries, creating a new international intelligence and law enforcement "infrastructure" to take down terrorist networks. A fresh start? Where does this differ from Bush's commitment on 20 September 2001, to an ongoing "war on terror" against "every terrorist group of global reach" and "any nation that continues to harbour or support terrorism"?
Gore Vidal, historical novelist, former senate candidate, owner of W.F. Buckley: `` “I was like everyone else when Obama was elected – optimistic. Everything we had been saying about racial integration was vindicated. But he’s incompetent. He will be defeated for re-election. It’s a pity because he’s the first intellectual president we’ve had in many years, but he can’t hack it. He’s not up to it. He’s overwhelmed. '…“Obama is doing dreadfully. I was hopeful. He was the most intelligent person we’ve had in that position for a long time. But he’s inexperienced. He has a total inability to understand military matters. He’s acting as if Afghanistan is the magic talisman: solve that and you solve terrorism.''
Ryan Lizza has a 5,000 word assessment of Obama's foreign policy in the May 2 New Yorker magazine which is objective, so includes several layers of criticism of Obama for not bringing the promised change in foreign policy.
Examples abound. The indelible fact is that liberals are hugely disappointed with Obama's foreign policy and consider it a massive failure on point after point.
My own views are similar: O's Afghanistan policy has been a massive failure and a huge disappointment. The policy has succeed only in enriching power brokers in the country who will turn on us as soon as we stop funneling cash to them.
On Gitmo: while blame for the failure to close Gitmo falls largely on conservatives in Congress who whipped up anti-Muslim fear and credibly vowed to block placing any detainees in their states/districts, I still fault Obama for proving unwilling to spend any discernible political capital on the issue. To the extent that he did push back, he was ineffective, and deserves criticism for that as well.
On the Patriot Act, Obama waffled, plain and simple. To my knowledge, there were no mitigating circumstances. My guess is that Obama very cynically calculated that, were there any terrorist attacks, his opposition to the Patriot Act would be held against him at great political cost, while his flip-flop on the issue wouldn't hurt him much at all with his base supporters, given their only credible option would be to vote for Republicans, who would, given the chance, make the Patriot Act even more Big Brother-like.
I don't know of any liberal who is an enthusiastic supporter of Obama's foreign policy. All are disappointed not just with his foreign policy choices, but his seeming fecklessness in using the bully pulpit on issues like Gitmo.
Where I tend to depart from almost all the liberals I know is that I have much lower expectations for public officials and, indeed, for democracy in general. Presidents never make big changes because they can't. Moreover, democracy, as a process, weeds out people who actually believe in making big changes in favor of lowest-common-denominator sloganeers. This is why the most meaningful measure of Obama's success is not against his own promises, but against the performance of his predecessors. And on that score, Obama is doing much, much better than Bush in supporting liberal values. I'm sure even wingnuts would agree on that…
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 09, 2011 at 08:46 PM
I certainly understand why most are concerned about the TSA shaking down babies and I agree that we should be profiling. But I also have to say that I've seen parents try to smuggle drugs into prison in their babies diapers and it happens more than you'd think. I once got a tip from a rat that a new man had smuggled 60 bags of heroine into the jail in his rectum. Forgive me for being crude here but that's the reality. Defendants in criminal trials often know when they're going to jail so they'll put a package in the safe as it's referred to. When we shook that inmate down he had 45 bags of heroine, a half oz of pot, a bic lighter, a crack pipe, 20 cigarettes and a package of rolling papers...all "in the safe."
Posted by: Rocco | May 09, 2011 at 08:46 PM
A lifelong friend to dictators everywhere, a a second generation Stalinist, and border line truther, those are good people to tick off, but as consummate cynics they were the easiest marks in the world.
Posted by: narciso | May 09, 2011 at 09:03 PM
((And the commenters here are in such a deep stupor of denial, they don't even recognize the ruse.))
get back to us when you are honest enough to admit that you would have had kittens if a Bush mission had dispatched OBL in the manner that the Obama mission did, sea funeral and all
Posted by: Chubby | May 09, 2011 at 09:04 PM
It was just all feigned rhetorical phoney baloney and only hypocrites deliver phoney baloney masked as heartfelt conviction.
This is what I think when I hear a lefty feign getting the vapors over waterboarding.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 09, 2011 at 09:09 PM
Obama is doing much, much better than Bush in supporting liberal values. I'm sure even wingnuts would agree on that…
I wouldn't agree at all. I think liberals/leftists suffer from a mental disorder and hate themselves and everyone they come in contact with who doesn't. I also don't think libs/leftist have any values to support. Their whole premise is built on "PR victim du jour."
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 09, 2011 at 09:12 PM
Narco: are you suggesting those are the only liberals who are aghast at O's foreign policy, or are you being dishonest?
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 09, 2011 at 09:13 PM
It's a wonder isn't it Sara, those of us who understand that state power be waged against
any enemy, foreign and domestic, the three above fall in the latter category, they have
embraced specially in Scheer's case, possibly
the most bloodthirsty of regimes.
Posted by: narciso | May 09, 2011 at 09:18 PM
--There's a big difference between a shameless hypocrite and a weak human being.--
Precisely.
The Pharisees were not hypocrites because they sinned but because they didn't believe what they preached.
Espousing values you don't really hold makes you a hypocrite.
Doing that which you wish you had the strength not to just makes you human.
Posted by: Ignatz | May 09, 2011 at 09:18 PM
The mental contortions the left is currently engaged in are just like this weekends first batch of ribs: deeeeeeelicious.
A lot more thought and care went into the ribs though and consequently the end result was superior.
Posted by: Not-bubarooni | May 09, 2011 at 09:19 PM
bbuster:
When you're reduced to Alex Cockburn and Gore Vidal, or Glen Greenwald, the pickings are slim indeed. Shoot, the lefties who drop in here are still bashing Bush -- most of them don't even bother to mention Obama, let alone offer up a critique.
Posted by: JM Hanes | May 09, 2011 at 09:23 PM
Gore Vidal, historical novelist, former senate candidate, owner of W.F. Buckley: `` “I was like everyone else when Obama was elected – optimistic.
LOL @ Gore "Everyman" Vidal owning WFB like the Lakers owned the Mavs.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 09, 2011 at 09:23 PM
--On Gitmo: while blame for the failure to close Gitmo falls largely on conservatives in Congress who whipped up anti-Muslim fear and credibly vowed to block placing any detainees in their states/districts--
Yeah it was all those conservatives in control of the closure of Gitmo.
Conservatives like Dick Durbin .
Posted by: Ignatz | May 09, 2011 at 09:26 PM
Oh, Not-bubarooni - ribs! Yum!
Posted by: centralcal | May 09, 2011 at 09:33 PM
Finally, Duke and Duke, went old school for a bit;
http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/05/09/top-obama-nominee-justice-department-blocked-republicans
Posted by: narciso | May 09, 2011 at 09:38 PM
Those who visit the prog hell sites should start referring to BOzo as George W. Obama - just to help the Gleen in his desperate attempt to save his reputation among his cabana boys.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | May 09, 2011 at 09:39 PM
Bubu is a sophomore. More important, a loser.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 09, 2011 at 09:39 PM
Newt Gingrich is about as shameless as they come, personally and politically, with a heaping dose of arrogance where his standards ought to be. Almost nobody jumps on bandwagons as quickly or weasels as expediently as he does.
Posted by: JM Hanes | May 09, 2011 at 09:40 PM
Obama is doing much, much better than Bush in supporting liberal values
I'm enough of an antiquarian that I tend to think of "liberal" as having something to do with liberty, but that's a losing battle. In the modern vernacular sense of "liberal values" meaning "anti-American values", spending money that doesn't exist, placing oppressive burdens on law-abiding citizens and businesses, alienating allies, allying with aliens, yes, Obama is doing much more of all that than any President before him.
I have a question for you, though. One finds so few true believers left these days, and I've been dying to ask one of you: what do you think has been the smartest thing Obama has done in office? Not just the most important thing, or the thing with which you agree the most; what has he done that made you think, "that worked brilliantly, and I would never have thought of it"?
Posted by: bgates | May 09, 2011 at 09:43 PM
I wanna come clean about something that has bothered me since the books came out: I was only in it for the dick and i got stuck with a dick. Know what am sayin?
Posted by: Stanley Ann's Feets | May 09, 2011 at 09:43 PM
Gingrich? No interest.
Posted by: sbw | May 09, 2011 at 09:44 PM
Why do you guys hate Harry Reid? He seems like a nice man. He always leaves me money. He said next time i get to meet President Osama.
Posted by: Charlotte The Harlot, A Cowpuncher's Whore | May 09, 2011 at 09:45 PM
NBC/WSJ:
"Only 37 percent approve of the president’s handling of the economy, while 58 percent disapprove.
"Also, just 31 percent believe the economy will improve in the next 12 months, compared with 43 percent who think it will stay the same and another 25 percent who say it will get worse.
"These economic numbers, GOP pollster McInturff says, underscore the “tremendous anchor the economy is to the president’s job standing.”…
"The good: The U.S. economy added 268,000 private-sector jobs in April, the most since 2006. The bad: Average gasoline prices have reached nearly $4 per gallon, and the unemployment rate increased from 8.8 percent to 9.0 percent."
And get this: the sample was 43% Dem, 31% GOP.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 09, 2011 at 09:46 PM
Vidal's best book was a novel about Aaron Burr. How's that for symbolism?
Posted by: JM Hanes | May 09, 2011 at 09:48 PM
Now why do you suppose we went into Libya all willy nilly with no mission and no Congressional approval?
Maybe Dave Letterman can do a Top 10 for you stooges over to my Left. Or Tina Fey can devote a 30 Rock episode for you to see how "smart" it all is. (She smart.)
Can you imagine how many rounds President Osama has bought in the last 24 months?
Have you seen our return to shareholders? And all it took was a measly round of campaign donations to that huckster from Chicago. Ask Rahmbo.
Ask AxleDoofus.
Ammo makes bitches of them all.
Posted by: CEO, Safety Flares Are My Cover Business | May 09, 2011 at 09:49 PM
Finally, Duke and Duke, went old school for a bit
Whoa! Blow the whistle and ring the bell. And tell the fatted calf that this is a verrrrrry bad day for it.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 09, 2011 at 09:51 PM
Vidal's best book was a novel about Aaron Burr. How's that for symbolism?
Most of his "historical" novels make Rocky and Bullwinkle's Fractured Fairy Tales look fact based by comparison. I think his real strength is in being a snarky reviewer of hubris drenched gasbags. And in being an asshole.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 09, 2011 at 09:58 PM
My criteria used to be: live up to impossible standards. I can't, but it makes me feel good to drag along on your coattails. Now, I'm older, I don't care what the neighbors or the old biddies think. I do not see morality or immorality as an issue with gas prices, or CEO salaries, or interrogations, etc. I'm far too pragmatic and the older I get the more my attitude is, do whatever it takes, just get 'er done! And, if some politician wants to play kinky in his private life, more power to him or her. I much prefer people of action and high energy, those who live life to the fullest and not those who have spent their lives in some box, passing judgment on the rest of us and then making up all kinds of rules to suit their version of morality.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 09, 2011 at 10:12 PM
Gingrich is a self-promoter..no more, no less. Any time his glib talk and smooth manner seduces you, remember the ad with Pelosi on global warming.
PHEH
Can we have a candidate who actually knows who his father is?
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2011 at 10:20 PM
clarice-
That's why I'm starting to lean with an edit of the last go around.
We're living with the Abel. Time to bring back Cain.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 09, 2011 at 10:24 PM
This is what I think when I hear a lefty feign getting the vapors over waterboarding.
Particularly when in the previous breath they've been getting the vapors over the idea that the unborn shouldn't be killed.
Posted by: PD | May 09, 2011 at 10:28 PM
"and another 25 percent who say it will get worse."
That was probably the few who bothered to read:
"Fannie Mae SEC 10-Q Report “MERS System could pose counterparty, operational, reputational and legal risks for us.”"
http://4closurefraud.org/2011/05/09/fannie-mae-sec-10-q-report-mers-system-could-pose-counterparty-operational-reputational-and-legal-risks-for-us/
"If investigations or new regulation or legislation restricts servicers’ use of MERS, our counterparties may be required to record all mortgage transfers in land records, incurring additional costs and time in the recordation process"
They have just admitted MERS titles haven't been recorded and aren't worth the paper they are written on.
"The future of our company is uncertain."
Their future is certain. They are going to bankrupt the US and the title fraud will make the US housing market far worse than it today.
Posted by: pagar | May 09, 2011 at 10:28 PM
pagar-
I told you this was bad.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 09, 2011 at 10:31 PM
our counterparties may be required to record all mortgage transfers in land records, incurring additional costs and time in the recordation process
Is that different from "may be required to record transfers the way it was done before we decided to subvert the process"?
Posted by: PD | May 09, 2011 at 10:32 PM
Bgates asks: ``What do you think has been the smartest thing Obama has done in office? Not just the most important thing, or the thing with which you agree the most; what has he done that made you think, "that worked brilliantly, and I would never have thought of it"?
Nothing I can think of sails through all three of those goalposts, but, then again, that goes for all presidents in my lifetime. I would never expect a president to make decisions that would surprise me as to their intelligence. On all the issues, the choices tend to be rather clear and the challenge is almost always to have the courage to do the right thing, rather than the popular thing and to have the skill -- not exactly the same as intelligence -- to successfully argue your case in public.
I do think Obama's appointment of Hillary Clinton as Sec. of State instead of veep was a very shrewd move that has worked out brilliantly. I was a vehement supporter of Hillary for veep, so, indeed, it would not have occurred to me to name her to state but I don't think the decision shows Obama's intelligence so much as his extremely moderate split-the-half-down-the-middle political style.
I would also point O's appointment of Jon Huntsman, a Republican governor, as ambassador to China. Not sure that's necessarily a call that shows surprising intelligence, but it does show that O's confident enough in his own ideology to base his decisions on things like the fact that Huntsman speaks mandarin and has solid experience in China, rather than simply naming a partisan hack to the post.
It is an interesting question, though, bgates. I have to say I'd love to hear what you think are Bush's smartest decisions that surprised you and you would have never thought of...Surely you have those right at hand, right???
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 09, 2011 at 10:34 PM
PD-
Pre-cisely.
And then there is that little exposure of securitization methods and conduits.
I told you this was my little bug-a-boo.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 09, 2011 at 10:34 PM
I'd appoint Hillary SoS too, if she was squeezing my balls.
If I had any, of course.
So that leaves iBama.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 09, 2011 at 10:37 PM
And this leaves three in a row.
G'night.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 09, 2011 at 10:58 PM
Groan...the fool drones on. He actually expects to be read and--get this--taken seriously.
Start without me.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 09, 2011 at 10:58 PM
I told you this was my little bug-a-boo.
That and pickled vegetables?
I've never been to Russia, but I found those quite prevalent in Sweden on a business trip to Uppsala a couple years ago. After about three days, I couldn't swallow them any more.
Posted by: PD | May 09, 2011 at 11:08 PM
I'd love to hear what you think are Bush's smartest decisions....
Why?
On all the issues, the choices tend to be rather clear
Was the choice to bomb Libya clear? Was the choice to wait as long as we did obvious? Was it unquestionably the right thing to seek UN but not Congressional approval, announce American military involvement during a junket outside the country, make it clear that we were not trying to topple Khadaffy....?
the challenge is almost always to have the courage to do the right thing, rather than the popular thing
For instance, while it would be popular for unemployment or deficits to be as low as they were during the Bush presidency, Obama has the courage to do serious long-term harm to America.
Posted by: bgates | May 09, 2011 at 11:11 PM
bgates, yours is a great question that I still use with older folks about Bill Clinton. It renders them speechless.
Posted by: MarkO | May 09, 2011 at 11:15 PM
Pager: They have just admitted MERS titles haven't been recorded and aren't worth the paper they are written on.
Sorry, but they admitted no such thing. I believe they are required to outline possible risks the company faces in these reports but that in no way consitutes an admission in the manner you suggest. I'm no fan of the MERS system but I'm not aware of any Appeals level Cts that have held MERS held mortgages to be invalid as a matter of course.
Posted by: Mad Jack | May 09, 2011 at 11:24 PM
sorry. I meant "invalid as a matter of law"
Posted by: Mad Jack | May 09, 2011 at 11:26 PM
It renders them speechless.
That's basically what I was going for here.
Posted by: bgates | May 09, 2011 at 11:27 PM
I try to recall such levels of hypocrisy from the right
Well, there was that "party of fiscal responsibility" thing c. 2000-2006. It took the next 4 years to make them look relatively prudent.
Posted by: Ralph L | May 09, 2011 at 11:36 PM
lol...I was rendered anything but speechless.
bgates, however, is speechless on his own question, unable to answer. Hilarious. Hara kiri with his own pen...lmao
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 09, 2011 at 11:36 PM
I can't beleie what I've been hearing on the radio. Are the sooper genus's in charge actually accusing the Pakistani govt of harboring Bin Laden, out loud, in broad daylight? We. Are. So. Screwed.
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 09, 2011 at 11:41 PM
How is it Eddie Bear, has once put it; BEOTWE, clearly the influence of master statesman, Joe Biden,how have you been Po,
Posted by: narciso | May 09, 2011 at 11:49 PM
I'll have some of what narciso's having.
Posted by: Ralph L | May 09, 2011 at 11:57 PM
Smartest things Bush 43 did:
(a) Gitmo
(b) enhanced interrogations
(c) tax cuts
(d) indefinite detention without trial
(e) drone strikes
(f) secret prisons
(g) warrantless intercepts
(h) agreement with Pak to allow unmolested unilateral strike to get UBL in Pak territory
(i) military tribunals
When history comes to judge, it's not gonna be close.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 10, 2011 at 12:06 AM
Smartest things Obama has done:
[see (a) through (i) above]
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 10, 2011 at 12:21 AM
I would add, small but sustainable commitment to Afghanistan operations, and then moving the main war front to better terrain in Iraq, where the natives eventually tired of the fanatics.
Posted by: Ralph L | May 10, 2011 at 12:29 AM
George W. Obama
Buraq Hussein OwesBush, or simply...
Can we have a candidate who actually knows who his father is?
Obastard.
Are the sooper genus's in charge actually accusing the Pakistani govt of harboring Bin Laden, out loud, in broad daylight?
Yes. The giant blue-headed Megaminds leading the charge of Smart Diplomacy, who can think of nothing more beautiful than the yowling call to prayer, whose leader takes great care to properly pronounce Pock-ee-ston, somehow missed the glaring reality that Pakis are an honor culture. In other words, if you want something from them, you do not intentionally call them out in front of other Pakis.
Clearly Bush is to blame for this.
Posted by: Soylent Red | May 10, 2011 at 12:47 AM
Arnold and Maria Shriver have separated after 25 years of marriage. I'm saddened.
Posted by: DrJ | May 10, 2011 at 12:52 AM
And what were you doing at 8 years old.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 10, 2011 at 12:57 AM
Arnold and Maria Shriver have separated
That's too bad.
Who is Arnold Shriver?
Posted by: bgates | May 10, 2011 at 01:05 AM
He's the Girlymanvernator.
Posted by: PD | May 10, 2011 at 01:14 AM
Authorities "do not yet have a motive" of suspect who tried to break into American Airlines cockpit while shouting "Allahu Akbar!"
Oh, dear! What can the matter be?
Oh, dear! What can the matter be?
Oh, dear! What can the matter be?
Rageh went nuts in the air.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 10, 2011 at 01:26 AM
I suppose a JOM post where Glenn Greenwald swerves into unexpected consistency is the proper place to comment about infamous Palin hater Andree McLeod doing the same.
ADN says that McLeod is now demanding an ethics investigation of the Ex-Palin aide just coming out with a tell all smear book on Sarah Palin. The aide used State E-mails as sources in his book, and since McLeod has already brought umpteen Ethic's Charges against Palin for using those same State E-mails, she now wants this guy hounded as well. EX-AIDE'S BOOK: An ethics complaint had been filed against Frank Bailey.
Posted by: daddy | May 10, 2011 at 05:14 AM
Sara, tks for the link and good for the men who took him down!
Posted by: BR | May 10, 2011 at 05:46 AM
Fox and Friends reporting that Pakistan has ok'd US talks with OBL's three wives.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 10, 2011 at 06:05 AM
DoT,
Just downloaded "Seal Team Six" by Howard Wasdin to my iPad. It is now available at iTunes.
Btw, I thought you had Bubu in your Narcisolator?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | May 10, 2011 at 06:34 AM
Good morning.
(Click here for full size.)
Posted by: Extraneus | May 10, 2011 at 06:39 AM
The click is worth it just to see Hillary.
Posted by: Jane (sit on the couch or save your country) | May 10, 2011 at 07:12 AM
Sara,
I cheered Mark Levin tore Newt a new one (LUN), but I still don't think he's a hypocrite. Yes he's wimpy, easily manipulated and seems cowardly when he ingratiatingly bites lefty bait, but I think he really believes what he says. I may not like his take on conservatism but I don't fault his sincerity.
By the opposite token, hypocrites know full well they are lying when they do their demogoguing. The character assassins who went after Bush are now amply proving that their attacks never had any grounding in honest conviction whatsoever.
Posted by: Chubby | May 10, 2011 at 07:20 AM
Interesting review of the muslim funeral rite by Ann Barnhardt.
"Islam is evil. There is nothing even remotely good about it. Even the funerals are satanic and designed to destroy human love and break people’s hearts. Looking forward to heaven? Don’t bother. Your spouse has a new, better spouse to replace your sorry @$$, and your parents have new, better children to replace the walking disappointment that is YOU. No one loves you, you are a disappointment and a mistake, and no one is waiting for you. So sayeth allah the merciful.
Where’s my lighter . . . ?"
Posted by: Janet | May 10, 2011 at 07:22 AM
Ex,
Boy did they set themselves up for all this parody and satire. That photo is going to be one big viral laugh a minute. My son (he's 7) recognized everyone of those "Situation Room Superheroes". LOL
Posted by: Jack is Back! | May 10, 2011 at 07:25 AM
Note to all Bay State JOMers. If you go to Janet's 7:22am link to Ann Barnhardt you will see she is going to be giving a talk at Marist in Framingham on Sunday the 15th of May. Now that is one lady I would pay good money to listen to rip the libs a new rectal orifice.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | May 10, 2011 at 07:29 AM
((Boy did they set themselves up for all this parody and satire.))
"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."
--Saul Alinsky
Posted by: Chubby | May 10, 2011 at 07:35 AM
They're all playing Black Ops on their laptops, too.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 10, 2011 at 07:36 AM
Newt has to convince me he's not plumbing new depths of shallow.
If you take a position, explain why so it becomes compelling to others.
Posted by: sbw | May 10, 2011 at 07:36 AM
The click is worth it just to see Hillary.
If she dressed like that, Clenis could save a lot on "escort services".
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 10, 2011 at 07:44 AM
BTW, the "A" stands for Capt. Asshat.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | May 10, 2011 at 08:34 AM