Obama Got Osama! Team Obama is touting the one success of this administration, prompting a range of responses.
Mostly nonsense - the idea that delegating operational control to Admiral McRaven meant Obama was dodging responsibility.
More nonsense from Joe Biden:
As [The One] walked out the room, it dawned on me, he’s all alone. This is his decision. If he was wrong, his Presidency was done. Over.
Why would it be over? Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? McQ is brief on this - "We’d have simply never heard about it" - so I will beat a dead horse. Let's cut to the New Yorker account of the raid from Aug 2011 for perspective:
The Abbottabad raid was not DEVGRU’s maiden venture into Pakistan, either. The team had surreptitiously entered the country on ten to twelve previous occasions, according to a special-operations officer who is deeply familiar with the bin Laden raid. Most of those missions were forays into North and South Waziristan, where many military and intelligence analysts had thought that bin Laden and other Al Qaeda leaders were hiding. (Only one such operation—the September, 2008, raid of Angoor Ada, a village in South Waziristan—has been widely reported.) Abbottabad was, by far, the farthest that DEVGRU had ventured into Pakistani territory.
The added distance made the Osama raid riskier, but if any of these prior raids had gone sour we would have had irate Pakistanis to deal with, just as we are in fact dealing with them now over a botched airstrike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers. So were all these raids also acts of heroic leadership in which Obama gambled his Presidency?
Left unreported by the New Yorker - if there were "ten to twelve" prior raids, was the Osama raid really Lucky 13? Obama is bolder than we know!
TO BE CONTINUED...
More nonsense can be found amongst the usual suspects. The BooMan relies on an early report of the raid to tell us, seemingly with a straight face, that the military had no contingency plans for nearbby back-up helicopters until Obama intervened. His excerpt and conclusion:
About 10 days before the raid, Obama was briefed on the plan. It included keeping two backup helicopters just outside Pakistani airspace in case something went wrong. But Obama felt that was risky. If the SEALs needed help, they couldn't afford to wait for backup.He said the operation needed a plan in case the SEALs had to fight their way out. So two Chinooks were sent into Pakistani airspace, loaded with backup teams, just in case. One of those Chinooks landed in the compound after the Black Hawk became inoperable. The raiders scrambled aboard the remaining Black Hawk and a Chinook, bin Laden's body with them, and flew to the USS Carl Vinson in the North Arabian Sea. The ground operation had taken about 40 minutes.
Not only did the president insert the Chinooks into the operational plan, but that decision proved critical to the success of the mission.
The New Yorker had a different version by August:
Forty-five minutes after the Black Hawks departed, four MH-47 Chinooks launched from the same runway in Jalalabad. Two of them flew to the border, staying on the Afghan side; the other two proceeded into Pakistan. Deploying four Chinooks was a last-minute decision made after President Barack Obama said he wanted to feel assured that the Americans could “fight their way out of Pakistan.” Twenty-five additional SEALs from DEVGRU, pulled from a squadron stationed in Afghanistan, sat in the Chinooks that remained at the border; this “quick-reaction force” would be called into action only if the mission went seriously wrong. The third and fourth Chinooks were each outfitted with a pair of M134 Miniguns. They followed the Black Hawks’ initial flight path but landed at a predetermined point on a dry riverbed in a wide, unpopulated valley in northwest Pakistan. The nearest house was half a mile away. On the ground, the copters’ rotors were kept whirring while operatives monitored the surrounding hills for encroaching Pakistani helicopters or fighter jets. One of the Chinooks was carrying fuel bladders, in case the other aircraft needed to refill their tanks.
I think the two added at Obama's suggestion sat at the border and thankfully were not needed.
Good post -- except that it wasn't the Germskis who bombed Pearl... ;-o}
Posted by: Michael J. Kubat | April 28, 2012 at 06:52 PM
except that it wasn't the Germskis who bombed Pearl
Tom is making fun of the smartest president ever. Obama may or may not know who actually bombed us at Pearl Harbor.
Posted by: Sue | April 28, 2012 at 06:55 PM
BO uses WJC, a man who turned down chances to kill and/or accept an offer to turn over UBL alive as his sock puppet in a Romney hit ad,
Posted by: PaulV | April 28, 2012 at 06:56 PM
I have no problem with Obama doing a victory lap on this. I do wonder what Bush would have done, though. I doubt he would have taken credit for it.
Posted by: Sue | April 28, 2012 at 06:56 PM
Michael, it was a reference to a Belushi movie, Google is your friend
Posted by: PaulV | April 28, 2012 at 06:58 PM
Obama may or may not know who actually bombed us at Pearl Harbor.
I really should have finished this thought with Obama may or may not know but our Dear Leader definitely knows who bombed us at Pearl Harbor. Smartest Dear Leader ever!
Posted by: Sue | April 28, 2012 at 06:59 PM
it was a reference to a Belushi movie,
For real? So does this mean Obama got his history lesson from a Belushi movie?
Posted by: Sue | April 28, 2012 at 07:03 PM
Here you go, Michael. Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
Posted by: AliceH | April 28, 2012 at 07:04 PM
On the other hand, our president is WAAY smarter than Bluto. From a speech July 2008 (source Linked Under Name), my emphasis:
Posted by: AliceH | April 28, 2012 at 07:09 PM
Bin Laden Dead, General Motors Alive. Believe it or not, this is his platform.
=============
Posted by: Jolts&Volts=Votes. | April 28, 2012 at 07:11 PM
Heh, Bin Laden off life support, General Motors on it.
================
Posted by: What's good for General Motors, is good for the USA. | April 28, 2012 at 07:12 PM
It won't work unless he can some how tie it to how the economy has expanded under his watch, how it has made gasoline prices lower than Newt's $2.50 a gallon, or how employment is at a all time high.
You can bullshit with razzle dazzle or you can razzle and dazzle with bullshit. Pick your choice.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 28, 2012 at 07:13 PM
Me thinks the pitzer putz is demonstrating that not only is it wrong that he "does not give a shite" but in fact it is bugging him down right to his soul, assuming his still has one. That he is disappearing off into the ether means he is but a whisper in the deep woods, unnoticed and forgotten.
Posted by: GMax | April 28, 2012 at 07:16 PM
"Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?"
One of the bestest movie lines ever.
Defines a culture.
Posted by: sbw | April 28, 2012 at 07:17 PM
I think he is giving the shite a dump on your head, from where I sit.
Posted by: GMax | April 28, 2012 at 07:22 PM
Lest I forget - Eventually I want to comment on the notion that in disbanding the CIA team that had spent a decade hunting Bin Laden Bush had abandoned the search. Not so!
Also, the Booman has a howler of a post which deeply deserves a bit more exposure.
The key bit is this:
He bases that on an early report of the raid which was overtaken by subsequent reporting.
Still one might apply a bit of common sense - his view is that, until Obama intervened ten days before the Go date, the military was relying on two Black Hawks with no backup.
Fortunately Obama got involved so they added two Chinooks. Uh huh. Seeing as how Carter's Debacle in the Desert sent eight copters when they needed six (and three eventually malfunctioned due to a dust storm), I think it is a better bet that the military is sensitive to the need for back-ups.
But maybe Obama is that insightful!
Posted by: Tom Maguire | April 28, 2012 at 07:31 PM
Ben Shapiro is the "nonsense" king at Brietbart.
http://www.westernjournalism.com/breitbart-editor-we-wont-vent-obamas-forged-selective-service-card/
We are not Shapiro.
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 28, 2012 at 07:33 PM
Ibama took several months to give the go-ahead on the raid. If you can call what he did giving the go-ahead.
I can't think of anyone except Ron Paul who would not have made the same gutsy call, but months sooner.
Posted by: PaulL | April 28, 2012 at 07:38 PM
I wonder why TK? I like Shapiro quite a bit, and I expect he had a good reason.
Posted by: Jane | April 28, 2012 at 07:40 PM
By the time we got Osama he was pretty much done with except for dying his hair taking viagra and living in squalor with his wives and children. In time I'm sure we'll learn tht ISI turned him in cause he was running out of dinars.
Posted by: Clarice | April 28, 2012 at 07:42 PM
"White House misses senator's deadline on prostitution scandal.
The White House has ignored a deadline to provide answers to a senior Senate Republican about the Secret Service prostitution scandal, an aide to Sen. Charles Grassley said Friday.
In his letter, which contained 14 questions about the review, Grassley said he wanted the answers by Thursday. However, the deadline came and went without any word from the White House. E-mails and phone calls to the White House from Grassley's staff members Thursday were ignored, Grassley aide Beth Levine said.
The White House declined to comment about why the material had not been sent to Grassley."
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/27/politics/secret-service-grassley/index.html
Wait till Larry Sinclair(asshole) hears this!
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 28, 2012 at 07:45 PM
Not one he could quantify, Jane. Super Vetters Extraordinarie ignore the Sheriff of the fourth largest county, by population, in America.
Makes no sense.
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 28, 2012 at 07:49 PM
The sock puppet is *always* superior to Cleo.
Posted by: Frau Steingehirn | April 28, 2012 at 07:51 PM
Remember this from 2003:
****But now, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright is telling reporters that the Bush administration may already have captured Osama bin Laden and will release the news just before next year's presidential election.
On Fox News Channel's "Special Report with Brit Hume," Roll Call reporter Morton Kondracke recounted Albright's comments to him during an encounter before Tuesday night's broadcast, while she was waiting in the green room to appear on another show.
Kondracke said the former Clinton official approached him and asked, "Do you suppose that the Bush administration has Osama bin Laden hidden away somewhere and will bring him out before the election?"
Kondracke said that Albright didn't seem to be joking, explaining, "She was not smiling."
He shot back, "You can't seriously believe that."
Albright replied that she thought a bin Laden October Surprise orchestrated by Bush was "a possibility."****
Posted by: PaulL | April 28, 2012 at 07:53 PM
I take it Ben has been getting deleted.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 28, 2012 at 07:53 PM
NO LIMIT is a moby.
Posted by: PaulV | April 28, 2012 at 08:07 PM
Who is the Boo Man?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 28, 2012 at 08:07 PM
I have no problem with Obama doing a victory lap on this. I do wonder what Bush would have done, though. I doubt he would have taken credit for it.
A bit of a post from a friend of mine on FB -
"George W. Bush speech after capture of Saddam Hussein:
"The success of yesterday's mission is a tribute to our men and women now serving in Iraq .
The operation was based on the superb work of intelligence analysts who found the Dictator’s footprints in a vast country. The operation was carried out with skill and precision by a brave fighting force. Our servicemen and women and our coalition allies have faced many dangers in the hunt for members of the fallen regime, and in their effort to bring hope and freedom to the Iraqi people. Their work continues, and so do the risks. Today, on behalf of the nation, I thank the members of our Armed Forces and I congratulate them."
Notice the word "I" was used exactly twice in the statement above, "I Thank" and I congratulate."
Now let's see how many times our current President can use the word "I" or "my" in his speech?..........
Barack Hussein Obama speech, Sunday, May 1, 2011:
"And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as I continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.
Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by my intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan . And finally, last week, I determined that I had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.
Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad , Pakistan .""
Posted by: Janet | April 28, 2012 at 08:08 PM
I am still at aloss as to why Ben/Dana/Leo (its not Cleo) hangs out here? Does he really think he is busting balloons or creating havoc or changing opinion or ruining our social experience? If so, then he is validity to the worthlessness of an Ivy League education.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 28, 2012 at 08:09 PM
it's cleo
Posted by: boris | April 28, 2012 at 08:10 PM
Janet,
There is class and then there is......?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 28, 2012 at 08:13 PM
Remember the next time that he tries to deny he is Dana Ward, that in addition to the outburst where he reacted to the use of his first wife's name, he just bragged about being related to Lt Col Ward who was killed at Goliad.
Not a very good liar, now is he?
Posted by: GMax | April 28, 2012 at 08:13 PM
The real TM @7:33 links to Boo
Posted by: PaulV | April 28, 2012 at 08:15 PM
The gutsy call:
August 2010: Interesting, but get back to me when you know more.
September 2010: I can't order an operation based on guesswork.
October 2010: I need a 100% guarantee.
November 2010: What do you think, Joe?
December 2010: What do you think, Hillary?
January 2011: What do you think, Bob?
February 2011: I'll have to sleep on this.
March 2011: Didn't I already say that I needed to think about this?
April 2011: Do I have deniability, Val?
May 2011: Why have you interrupted my golf game?
Posted by: PaulL | April 28, 2012 at 08:18 PM
Who refers to themselves as a "hairpin"? Did you mean douchenozzle?
Posted by: GMax | April 28, 2012 at 08:18 PM
He's driving away some of our best posters. He ruined Jeff Goldstein's website. People who play the game with him are really allowing him to ruin this website.
Posted by: Clarice | April 28, 2012 at 08:21 PM
The Lord would not repeat that mistake, twice. NO WAY
Posted by: GMax | April 28, 2012 at 08:22 PM
Gallup:
"Although Obama's approval rating is improving, this is offset by the fact that it remains below the averages at the same point in time for presidents who were re-elected. All presidents since Eisenhower who were re-elected enjoyed average approval ratings above 50% during their 13th quarters in office."
Posted by: Clarice | April 28, 2012 at 08:24 PM
One of the more interesting details that fell through the memory hole, was where Obama and his family where before Abbottabad. the report in the Daily Mail, from about a month
ago, suggested Sharipur and Peshawar, which raises a question who knew in the Pakistani government, did Kayani, who is now the Chief of the Army, but was the head of the ISI.
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 08:24 PM
Narc, any info on these two who just defected?
Actress Anailin de la Rua and actor Javier Nunez, cast members of "Una Noche" ("One Night"),
Posted by: PaulV | April 28, 2012 at 08:29 PM
And a fan of feathers, dont forget the feathers...
Posted by: GMax | April 28, 2012 at 08:31 PM
We know now, that few trusted Scheuer, to actually handle the hard work of tracking Bin Laden, Widlanski explains why, in 'Battle for
the Minds, other more capable figures handled
that task, and he took credit for it, The same
cannot be said for Pillar, who too many took his judgements seriously,
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 08:32 PM
Yeah but one in particular here cant teach...
Posted by: GMax | April 28, 2012 at 08:37 PM
None of those things apply, except maybe changing opinion.
Because a decade of calling people "racist greedy bastards" over and over is SO convincing.
And if people are playing my game, it means they're thinking.
Except I've never seen evidence that you think. All I've ever seen from you is reactionary name-calling and bile. Your words, your actions, your endless insistence on barging into communities that disagree with you in order to spit on the people there makes it clear that what you do is not "think", but HATE.
I learn from you,
Bullshit. The crap you spew today is indistinguishable from the crap you spewed a decade ago. That's how you're so recognizable. You never change, because you start from the position of your own absolute purity and our absolute corruption.
You want to show signs of being capable of learning? Learn that when your comments are being deleted, you're not welcome, and stay away.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 28, 2012 at 08:38 PM
I haven't read much except the headlines on those Cubans. But if they made a movie in Cuba about escaping from Cuba, how did they get permission to come to New York to get an award for it?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 28, 2012 at 08:40 PM
Now if Pillar had gone to Faber, I mean Dartmouth earlier, he might have been the model for Blutarski, more like Niedermayer.
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 08:42 PM
ONE AGAIN...ARE REPUBLICANS JUST TOOO STUPID. STOP FIGHTING OVER OBAMAS STRENGHTS.
Yes he approved the raid, yes they killed Bin Laden...
But the REAL question was never who could kill Bin Laden, the real issue is what if we had CAPTURED Bin laden?
Would Obama have used enhanced interrogation on Bin Laden? Would he have waterboarded him if we suspected he had a plan about to be activated?
Romney should have come out as soon as that Obama ad aired and challenged Obama - would you have used enhanced interrogation on Bin Laden to save American lives? To save an American city?
Obamas teams only answer would have shown how ridiculous his position is, NO I WOULD NEVER WATER BAORD HIM, BUT I WOULD PUT A BUNCH OF BULLETS IN HIS HEAD. It would show Obamas TRUE weakness and bring back the whole subject of GITMO and trails for terrorists, etc.
Man these Republicans truly are just plain dumb.
Posted by: Pops | April 28, 2012 at 08:45 PM
In time I'm sure we'll learn tht ISI turned him in cause he was running out of dinars
I have never considered it, but that's probably spot on.
"Osama didn't pay again this month, Boss"
"What, He thinks I am funny, like clown"
.
.
"Osama? You won't see him around no more"
Posted by: scott | April 28, 2012 at 08:46 PM
Headed out for dinner with five other couples and twelve Maine lobsters.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 28, 2012 at 08:48 PM
Don't stint on the butter.
Posted by: Clarice | April 28, 2012 at 08:49 PM
Just got this announcement:
We are proud to announce that one of MAFPAC’s favored pro-troop candidates has won their primary bid in Arizaona. Former US Marine and veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom Jesse Kelly is running in for Congress in a special election for Arizona's 2nd district.
Is this Tucson and Giffords seat?
Posted by: GMax | April 28, 2012 at 08:51 PM
DOT, they left relatives in Castro;s paradise.
Posted by: PaulV | April 28, 2012 at 08:53 PM
Yes, it is, GMax, ironically, Jesse Kelly, was originally dismissive of the Huntress, yet
she endorsed him anyways.
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 08:53 PM
Headed out for dinner with five other couples and twelve Maine lobsters.
Are lobsters good at dinner conversation?
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 28, 2012 at 08:54 PM
That's usually the way it works, and with the Visa lottery, you need special consideration to qualify, that's why giving one to Josefina
Vidal, is just bewildering.
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 08:55 PM
Are lobsters good at dinner conversation?
Are you kidding? Its like listening to Dana Ward yammer on and on...
Posted by: GMax | April 28, 2012 at 08:56 PM
Good question to ask Obama?
If Bin Laden had been captured instead of assasinated, what WERE your orders to the military regarding interrogation? Was he entitled to a lawyer? Was he not to be questioned? Did you forbid enhanced interrogation to discover any imminent plots to kill innocent Americans?
This would get very ugly for Obama very quickly..yet the Republicans failed miserably to even bring it up.
He doesn't want to get into those questions and the Romney campaign gave him a pass.
Posted by: Pops | April 28, 2012 at 08:57 PM
The only person that could have held that district as a Democrat was Giffords and she barely got reelected. Looks like we have a Marine headed for the House of Representatives.
Posted by: GMax | April 28, 2012 at 08:59 PM
I agree with you, Pops, that Cofer Black, who is one of Romney's advisors should have fired
back sooner, since he was running that operation first at the CTC and then State liason,
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 09:01 PM
Great comment at 08:08 Janet,
Mighty revealing.
Posted by: daddy | April 28, 2012 at 09:03 PM
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 09:05 PM
"He's driving away some of our best posters."
I agree and apparently he's not the only one.
It bums me out.
I hope you are having Maine lobsters DOT.
Posted by: Jane | April 28, 2012 at 09:06 PM
Vro what it's worth, Pharrer's work suggests
that Zawahiri, was always trying to get rid
of any competition, including Osama, This theory makes some sense, superficially, unlike
Osama, Zawahiri really suffered at 'the Citadel' after the Sadat assasination, and has probably chafed at the notion of having
taken so many risks, and yet not receiving
sufficient recognition,
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 09:15 PM
Are you kidding? Its like listening to Dana Ward yammer on and on...
Ah. Thus dunking them into boiling water or splitting them in half and putting them under the broiler first.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 28, 2012 at 09:16 PM
Janet,
I had forgotten about Bush's speech after Saddam was captured. Thanks for the reminder and comparison.
Posted by: Sue | April 28, 2012 at 09:16 PM
"A Truly OrwellianMeasure
April 27, 2012 2:07 PM
A Truly Orwellian Measure House Chamber, Washington, D.C. April 27, 2012
Mr. Speaker:
Under the Fourth Amendment, if the Government wants to snoop through a person’s email, it must first convince a judge that there is probable cause to believe that person has committed a crime and it must specify the documents it believes are relevant to that charge.
Yesterday the House passed a measure that makes a mockery of this cherished protection. Under the guise of cyber-security it allows the government to pressure and cajole Internet providers to turn over their subscribers’ data and for the government then to use that data – without the consent or even knowledge of the individuals affected – for a wide variety of vague purposes unrelated to cyber-security – all without warrant.
This is a truly Orwellian measure that our Bill of Rights was specifically written to prevent. I hope the House will have second thoughts as it reflects on the ramifications of this act."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6CWns0EoJg&list=UUMh04KC4LfIzKoXh2Xws_pw&index=1&feature=plcp
http://mcclintock.house.gov/2012/04/a-truly-orwellian-measure.shtml
They came for my keyboard and nobody spoke up...
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 28, 2012 at 09:46 PM
Disagree. Romney should not get distracted by responding to Obama. He should just stay on message. Jobs, Economy, Debt. Over and over. The election will be about that. Nothing else.
Posted by: bio mom | April 28, 2012 at 09:48 PM
Concur with bio mom.
Now, it's fine for partisans on the sidelines to snark and snarl about minor issues (Treacher's response to the wailing over Seamus the Dog was brilliant), Romney shouldn't open his piehole to say "good morning" to his wife without hammering Obama on the economy and spending.
Posted by: xbradtc | April 28, 2012 at 09:54 PM
Well, no, it's a policy question, as Pops points out, is killing every midlevel AQ figure the answer, or should there be some
reconsideration of aggressive interrogation.
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 09:58 PM
Narisco, sure. It's a valid policy question. It's also a distraction from the central issue of the campaign.
Obama wants to talk about anything but his performance on the economy. Why give him the chance?
Posted by: xbradtc | April 28, 2012 at 10:00 PM
TK, tell me why the House Republicans are the ones who passed that bill overwhelmingly. From what I have read, the president will veto it and thereby be on the side of freedom.
I need more clarification.
Posted by: Frau Steingehirn | April 28, 2012 at 10:04 PM
The same reason, that with a few exceptions, notably Disraeli in the 19th Century, and Thatcher and Churchill in the 20th, Mill
was right about the Tories.
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 10:11 PM
Anyone else watching the WH dinner?
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 28, 2012 at 10:21 PM
My best guess is pandering, Frau.
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 28, 2012 at 10:23 PM
I just read Kim Kardashian is there..Oh gosh..I coulda run over and seen her...my heart is broken-But who better deserves a place there than Kim?
Posted by: Clarice | April 28, 2012 at 10:27 PM
What is it, you are inferring about that get together of jesters and/or retainers, Clarice.
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 10:30 PM
I came up with that,too, TK. Is political theater all we get? The Dems put more Patriot Act stuff in place, and now they are against this? I smell a setup. Again.
Clarice found out who the Kardashians are, but would she recognize one?
Posted by: Frau Steingehirn | April 28, 2012 at 10:34 PM
Now there are some worthy people there, General Odierno, Petraeus, Allen West, Of course, the master of ceremonies has to be a classless jerk.
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 10:35 PM
I am sure it's even more classless or obnoxious than usual. what news organization inited Kim Kardashian? Every thing in this town just keeps getting more tasteless and juvenile.
Posted by: Clarice | April 28, 2012 at 10:39 PM
Kimmel was hilarious.
It was worth watching.
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 28, 2012 at 10:43 PM
What can one expect in the fourth year of Claudius's reign,
Posted by: narciso | April 28, 2012 at 10:46 PM
Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad , Pakistan .""
Posted by: Janet | April 28, 2012 at 08:08 PM
No shit, Obambi.
I thought some private would authorize an invasion into an "ally" country.
Posted by: mockmook | April 28, 2012 at 11:30 PM
He's driving away some of our best posters.
Are you sure about that? Granted he's a boorish clod who adds nothing of substance to the conversation but people are free to come and go as they please. TM has the ability to give him the bum's rush, which apparently he has quite a bit recently and I applaud him for doing so. But he hasn't driven away most of the people I can think of (JMH seems to come and go as she pleases and also chose to engage him periodically).
At the risk of pointing out the very obvious, there's no right to not be irritated.
Posted by: Captain Hate | April 28, 2012 at 11:34 PM
I'm pretty sure, CH. Of course one doesn't have the "right not to be irritated", but one has the right to go elsewhere when he is..and unfortunately that is happening.
Niters.
If TM doesn't want to go thru the bother of deleting all those posts, he ought to whistle and get one or two to help .
Posted by: Clarice | April 28, 2012 at 11:45 PM
He's driving away some of our best posters.
Are you sure about that?
I just assumed, CH, that meant those of us not driven away were being subtly informed of our status as "not some of our best posters". ;-)
Posted by: AliceH | April 28, 2012 at 11:46 PM
CH - thought you would enjoy this:
Although MLB has taken the vid down...
Posted by: hit and run | April 28, 2012 at 11:48 PM
SOME--not ALL, Alice H. Not ALL.
Posted by: Clarice | April 28, 2012 at 11:54 PM
Niters. If I remembered to take my meds they should be working their magic now.
Posted by: Clarice | April 29, 2012 at 12:01 AM
The comment by Janet could form the basis for an Internet political ad. Show the speech by Bush and and then Obama, and each time they say "I," have the the phrase it's used in appear superimposed on the screen.
Posted by: MJW | April 29, 2012 at 12:15 AM
The comment by Janet could form the basis for an Internet political ad.
MJW - I thought that, too, but there's the little matter of Bush not running. I couldn't think of how to turn that into even an "ABO 2012" promotion much less a more direct "Romney 2012".
Posted by: AliceH | April 29, 2012 at 12:51 AM
MJW - I thought that, too, but there's the little matter of Bush not running. I couldn't think of how to turn that into even an "ABO 2012" promotion much less a more direct "Romney 2012".
That is a problem, but it still might work as an Internet ad, which allows for more focused negative attacks. The point would be to show that with Obama, it's all about him. Perhaps it could be used along with other examples of his egotism.
Posted by: MJW | April 29, 2012 at 01:25 AM
President Obama was so vindictive this evening that I had to find something that helped me go to sleep with good thoughts and I found this:
President Bush dances with a wounded warrior.
h/t @MmcKinnon (twitter)
Good Night Patriots.
Posted by: Ann | April 29, 2012 at 01:28 AM
The Maine lobsters were just wonderful. They made no conversation at all at dinner, but they did some fine singing beforehand.
Nytol.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 29, 2012 at 01:55 AM
The aforementioned Mr. Kimmel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK8ID0Eki68
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | April 29, 2012 at 02:29 AM
I thought Kimmel was good, and have to admit, Obama was quite funny. He got under my skin in all the right places which I am quite sure was his intent.
Posted by: Jane | April 29, 2012 at 02:44 AM
While we are on the subject of the WH Correspondents dinner. Why do the Republicans alolow the liberals to define groups such as THE RICH. You notice in the press, THE RICH only inludes Republicans supporters. Meanwhile, the Top 1% supporters of Obama are not called THE RICH, or the 1%, they are called CELEBRITIES.
Republicans need to start calling eveyone the press says is a 'celebrity' into what they really are, the rich 1%.
Then when the press compain about the RICH, Republicans should counter with all the rich the press mis-labels as celebrities.
The same way with liberals getting to say who 'environmentalists' are, when in fact, they aren't environmenta;ists at all, they are in fact EARTHISTs, and technology phobes, and progressphobes.
Posted by: Pops | April 29, 2012 at 06:16 AM
How I made Million dollars in the sharpened pike business:)
Sunday's with Clarice and quite the hoot!
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 29, 2012 at 06:58 AM
Thanks. JiB/
Posted by: Clarice | April 29, 2012 at 07:40 AM
There is road rage and then there is this.
Ouch!
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 29, 2012 at 07:52 AM
Maybe Dan Savage has opened the door on being able to talk about the content of the Bible with students! If he can give a sermon on his interpretation of the Bible...then it should be fair for another speaker to give a sermon on his/her interpretation. Lessons from the Bible are now a go!! Thanks, Dan!
Posted by: Janet | April 29, 2012 at 07:55 AM