Remember the great lefty whinge during the Bush Administration – “you called us unpatriotic?”
(Of course, no lefty could name a single significant conservative who had called all liberals unpatriotic, or who were referrring to defined groups of lefties whose stances were proudly anti-American, or who were referring to specific policies that, they claimed, actively harmed US interests and endangered the United States; when pressed to provide same, the examples inevitably turned up to be one of the three limited cases above, and they always will. But I digress).
But now that they’re in power?
Criticizing the Administration’s handling of the Eunuchbomber is…well, you know where this is going, don’t you?
In an oped in USA Today, John Brennan — Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism — responds to critics of the Obama administration’s counterterrorism policies by saying “Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda.”
Hm.
Brennan writes that, “Terrorists are not 100-feet tall. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill.”
Right. But they deserve the response we hope to enact; extinction.
But let’s be honest; after all their lofty campaign rhetoric, the Administration is finally learning how to deal with terrorists.
Is the news coming in clearly that the Christmas Day guy has qualified himself for a Darwin Award without actually killing himself? If so, cool.
And it’ll be fun to watch the excuses as Obama channels Cheney…..good for Dear Leader to learn, but boy will his base be happy about it.
And it’ll be fun to watch the excuses as Obama channels Cheney
Wasn’t there an SITD commentator who referred to McCain as “McSame”?
bubbasan, Darwin awards go to people who have “removed themselves from the genepool by themselves” there are plenty of living Darwin Award winners, they actually tend to be the best stories usually.
Was it DG spewing left-wing talking points?
My compliments on the use of the term Eunuchbomber, it is a much more apt term than some of the others like ‘undybomber’. I would support the current stance on terrorism any day over our former fool of a leader (the one who couldn’t pronounce nuclear correctly – not unlike Palin).
“the one who couldn’t pronounce nuclear correctly – not unlike Palin).”
versus the guy who can’t pronounce corpsmen.
Wet Dog, how is that search for link to O-Keefe charges coming along?
Glad to see you took a break to admit Dear Leader is a current “fool of a leader”. And this is from a Harvard Professor no less!
Bush believed in the surge — Obama voted against it.
If Obama had actually followed through on his promise to immediately withdraw American troops from Iraq, there would have been a bloodbath.
The “fool of a leader” is the Current Occupant.
Re: pronunciation
As usual, DG favors style over substance.
….
So who was that SitD commentator babbling “McSame”?
Will that person start saying “Barack McSame Obama” and “Darth Biden Cheney”?
….
DG, how long will your BDS last?
It must be a bit difficult to suffer PDS at the same time.
Bwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaaaa
….
How’s about anal cavity bomber or AC Bomber for short.
“Nigerian Knicker Bomber” suits me.
The other one I’d heard was the “Fruit of Kaboom” Bomber. Although Eunuchbomber is probably the best one, because it’s a good pun and quite descriptive.
‘Terrorists are not 100-feet tall’
I wish they were, because it would be so much easier to identify them as targets.
In Iraq and A-stan, the main advantage the enemy has is being able to blend in with the local population. But once we identified them, we engaged the target, aiming for center mass.
In America, the main advantage the enemy has is being able to blend in with the local population. But once we identify them, we call in the DOJ lawyers to ask nicely if they will tell us about the people that sent them.
We are either at war or we are not. President Obama’s main problem seems to be using a ‘war on drugs’ or a ‘war on poverty’ approach to the war on terror.
Hello nail, meet the hammer… This is what I tend to think when Mitch writes about a topic that is definitely in his wheelhouse (to mix metaphors that is)…
It is beyond amazing that level of hypocrisy on the Left has not waned over the last several years… Very nice job calling them out on it again Mitch! Keep up the good work.
Gee wiz just plain crabby, can’t you find those O’Keefe charges for yourself? I seem to recall the STrib had them available with their article on his most recent antics, but any google search should turn them up for you.
Or were you referring to the other legal actions in regards to the ACORN fictional footage?
Good thing O’Keefe has all that right wing soft money promoting his efforts; he must need a pretty good sized legal defense fund about now…
KR! glad to see you’re back – Swiftee desperately needs your help; he got in waaaaay over his head over on ABs blog, and it appears to have shrunk some of his body parts like ice water.
ACORN fictional footage?
Er, “Edited” isn’t ‘the same as “fictional”.
Since ACORN sacked most of the “stars” of O’Keefe’s videos, it must not have been that fictional.
Please substantiate the “fictional” claim – preferably with a credible source, as opposed to more Media Matters canned spin.
NYTopinion columnist Frank Rich:
If Reid can serve as the face of Democratic fecklessness in the Senate, then John McCain epitomizes the unpatriotic opposition
While Mr. McCain was a POW in North Vietnam Mr. Rich was attending Harvard.
“he got in waaaaay over his head…”
DG, you would make a great Black Knight.
Actually, Doggone, O’Keefe was never charged with the ACORN filming, as to do so opens up the process called “discovery” where any number of sensitive ACORN documents would have become public–at a time when the group is being investigated for many issues, and faces investigation for many more. The threats were mere bluster, quieted as ACORN lawyers explained exactly what might become public to their employer’s management.