Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
#1 In other words, "PencilNeck and NutJob gave us secret campaign donations."
Posted by Mullah Richard 2012-11-02 08:51||
#2 Are events in Benghazi not bad enough? Why can they simply not just stay the hell out of it?
Posted by Besoeker 2012-11-02 08:56||
#3 Whats the matter, weapons unpack and check clear, now they don't play ball? ClusterF's.
The peace of islam at its borders was the demi-glas of the Obama doctrine of unclenched smart diplomacy, the new appreciation of America. It has been asked, why suddenly so serious about Benghazi when the Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan are killing people too? It is because in the back of everyone's minds, who have a mind for such things no matter their particular affiliation, it call into question every top-down decision. This is not the abstract ROE theory, not so abstract to those killed by Greens. To me, at least, it settles the question of whether he is a D!k or a P@ssy. Now every bad guy and opportunist in the world knows it. Every good guy and Voltairist in the world knows they will be persecuted for any and every agenda pushing measure from a Barry administration. This president can no longer issue an Executive Order and say its for your own good, knowing that when it comes down to getting dirt underneath your nails he won't even bring you cup of water.
Here is what it has done to me. I have advocated Drone Theory, but to picture this particular soul sittting down to poached eggs and a menu of targets should be shuttering to everyone; even if there was good reason to not go his explanation was shut up and don't talk about it. Commodus is not a moral man.
Posted by swksvolFF 2012-11-02 11:37||
#4 Western patience has been wearing thin with the SNC, a group of largely expatriate Syrian activists
Might help if the elites didn't gravitate toward the dilletantes in the first place.
Posted by Pappy 2012-11-02 12:37||
#5 Commodus is not a moral man.
And neither is Mrs. Clinton (although it might be argued that she is more of a man than Commodus, she is certainly no more moral).
As to the SNC, would it not be realistic to assume that the guys who are actually fighting and bleeding are the legitimate representatives of the rebellion while the "gentlemen" who are sipping tea and dining in Qatar should be ignored? I mean, what's going to happen if Assad is ever defeated? Will the US recognize the rebels who control Damascus by force of arms or the weenies who are staying in some nice hotel hundreds of miles away?
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-11-02 12:41||
#6 Perhaps Mrs Clinton wants more representation for AlQaeda and Hamas since they are on the ground and fighting?
Posted by tipover 2012-11-02 13:19||
#7 How about a government of national unity? It's got to work. It just has to.......
Posted by Alaska Paul 2012-11-02 20:10||
#8 Now the kids are in bed...Furthermore:
This is the second time this administration has attempted to curb our rights as US Citizens, that it is our freedom which makes Barry's job too difficult. I find this abhorrant. Bad guys in Mexico get arms, it is blamed on our Bill of Rights and Calderon is invited to Congress to scold us. Good guys get killed in a bad land and it is blamed on our Bill of Rights and Barry goes in front of the UN and scolds us.
For example, say I find the works of Frank Lloyd Wright offensive. Say I find the concept of blending house into environment as primitive and sub-human, anti-progress. It is the right of others to emulate his work and my right to disagree with it. I could find the works of Tom Hanks offensive or blasphemous, but will not chastice those who think the master of our times was upstaged by a volleyball or his freedom to make a twilight years romantic comedy.
What Barry did was subtle and yet offensive. He says he needs more flexibility not only for a non-electorate defined second term yet from the constraints of the Bill of Rights, and Constitution in general. Forcing people to work for the benefit of others is immoral, and Holder should be ashamed of both commenting on how he marched for rights yet actively or passively works to errode rights of others. I used to think Hillary! as a professional politician who would do what needed to be done to further her agenda yet the comment about prosecuting the maker of the film should hammered in, as it implicitely states than everyone is guilty of something if they do something out of the comfort level of who is in charge.
And anyone who believes that the USA is a lighthouse in stormy weather should take heed to what was conducted. It is here that existentialism can be best achieved; what to do with freedom? By using our freedom we either innovate ourselves or set the bar for others. Yes, there is the bull which comes out, but it is in and of itself a challenge to others to evaluate how they feel. That is their free will, so as they choose. Humans choosing whether to be animals or beings.
We are a beacon. Choose how you may.
For any culture which believes they are more than what they are told to be, more than mere beasts of burdon, this administration is against those concepts.
Barry says that ATMs cost jobs. Technology frees us to become more, same as the printing press, same as the cotton gin. Republicans may not be the best thing ever, but the b&lls!tters are the international collectivists who by order must enforce a lowest common denomenator policy...or else. Authoritarianism, by any other name smells as stink.
Posted by swksvolFF 2012-11-02 22:27||