[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Freepers Still Love war

Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump

"The Democrat Meltdown Continues"

"Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process"

"Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working"

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"

"Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands

"Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies"

"Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk"

KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel

"Trade should work for America, not rule it"

"The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP"

"How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap"

‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’

Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible"

"Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!"

"If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think"

"Ending EPA Overreach"

Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built

Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew

The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED!

Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing!

Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy?

Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia)

"Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department"

Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent

"Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail"

Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly

"Real problem with the Palestinians: Nobody wants them"

ACDC & The Rolling Stones - Rock Me Baby

Magnus Carlsen gives a London System lesson!

"The Democrats Are Suffering Through a Drought of Generational Talent"

7 Tactics Of The Enemy To Weaken Your Faith

Strange And Biblical Events Are Happening

Every year ... BusiesT casino gambling day -- in Las Vegas

Trump’s DOGE Plan Is Legally Untouchable—Elon Musk Holds the Scalpel

Palestinians: What do you think of the Trump plan for Gaza?

What Happens Inside Gaza’s Secret Tunnels? | Unpacked

Hamas Torture Bodycam Footage: "These Monsters Filmed it All" | IDF Warfighter Doron Keidar, Ep. 225

EXPOSED: The Dark Truth About the Hostages in Gaza

New Task Force Ready To Expose Dark Secrets

Egypt Amasses Forces on Israel’s Southern Border | World War 3 About to Start?

"Trump wants to dismantle the Education Department. Here’s how it would work"

test

"Federal Workers Concerned That Returning To Office Will Interfere With Them Not Working"

"Yes, the Democrats Have a Governing Problem – They Blame America First, Then Govern Accordingly"

"Trump and His New Frenemies, Abroad and at Home"

"The Left’s Sin Is of Omission and Lost Opportunity"

"How Trump’s team will break down the woke bureaucracy"

Pete Hegseth will be confirmed in a few minutes


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: On The Democrats Making Of The Death Of Bin Laden All About Themselves And Obama
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2011/05/on_the_democrat_1.php
Published: May 2, 2011
Author: hyscience
Post Date: 2011-05-02 16:04:40 by no gnu taxes
Keywords: None
Views: 12204
Comments: 42

As Michelle Malkin points out, Democrats are "all in a Twitter" praising Obama and taking all the credit for finally having nailed Osama Bin Laden.

As a matter of fact, listening to the boasting of the Democrats, you'd think instead of just signing the executive order authorizing the action, that it was Obama himself, the one, who putting his life on the line, rappelled from the Black Hawk helicopter down to the compound, and pulled the trigger on Bin Laden.

This, of course, without giving Bush - who set in place the policies that have kept us safe since 9/11, which Obama has been forced by the reality on the ground to uphold almost to the letter in spite of all his campaign promises, and that ultimately made the extermination of Bin Laden possible - any credit...you know, that "oaf " Bush!

But, with 2012 fast approaching, what else would you have expected of the Democrats?

First, the Democrats are "politically correct", Islamist-loving "doves", champions of Muslim terrorists' rights, demanding to shut Guantanamo - you know, that evil place of "torture" where Jihadists get three "Halal" meals a day, have "Goldilocks Accommodations" with rooms not too cold, not too hot / beds not too soft, not too hard, and where they torture Islamic inmates during interrogations by playing loud Dixie Chicks music (wait, that actually may constitute "torture") - advocating to ban Military Tribunals of enemy combatants in favor of Holder's "Judge Judy" Civilian Trial "Circuses" on American soil, calling the waterboarding responsible not only for the capture of Bin Laden but for much of the intel that has kept us safe for ten years "torture", riling to dismantle the Patriot Act and rendition, while rooting for the Islamists with their "bleeding hearts".

But now that Osama Bin Laden has been killed, under Obama's watch - thanks to the policies that George W. Bush set in place, of the tireless efforts of our military and intelligence agencies over the last ten years, and the sobering fact that the elections of 2012 are just around the corner, all of a sudden the Democrats are "Hawks" and Obama's "Warmonger" policies (didn't Obama win the Nobel "Peace" Prize?) are the ones responsible for our continuing successful execution of the War on Terror!

Wait, scratch that. The Democrats and Obama did manage to steer away from Bush policy in one crucial aspect! It is no longer called "War on Terror" under Obama, but an "Overseas Contingency Operation" which indeed nailed Osama Bin Laden.

Seems the Democrats are a bit confused. They don't know whether they want to be Muslim-appeasing Jihadist-loving doves ... that changed the name of the "Terror Attacks" to "Man-made Disaters" and of the "War on Terror" to "Overseas Contingency Operations"....or now that Osama Bin Laden has been killed under Obama's watch ... he's all of a sudden no longer the mild-mannered, Marxist, Harvard professor, but "Conan-bama the Barbarian" And they, the Democrats, the "Scourge of Islam" - warriors that kill the people that want to kill us!

As Ripley would have put it: "Believe it or not..." ROFL!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 16.

#1. To: no gnu taxes (#0)

From the camp who voted for against the war, before they voted for it...

Seriously- being a democrat is a mental disorder. They do not care what they have to do to steal power.

diva betsy ross  posted on  2011-05-02   16:19:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: diva betsy ross (#1)

"Seriously- being a democrat is a mental disorder. They do not care what they have to do to steal power."

Which is why the SCOTUS stole the election for Bush and ruled corporations could unanimously give as many dollars as they can to try to steal control of the rest of the government in future elections, right?

Ferret Mike  posted on  2011-05-02   16:23:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Ferret Mike (#2)

Which is why the SCOTUS stole the election for Bush and ruled corporations could unanimously give as many dollars as they can to try to steal control of the rest of the government in future elections, right?

Wrong.

Ever read this

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, "?

You want the government to shut up corporations from hiring people to speak for them. That would require a law, part of which would be abridging free speech. Those kind of laws aren't allowed.

A K A Stone  posted on  2011-05-02   17:52:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: A K A Stone (#9)

I am assuming you speak of the dustruction of well crafted campaign spending law here.

If you don't control the deep pockets, they buy the government. It doesn't get anymore simpler and obvious as that.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2011-05-02   17:56:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: Ferret Mike (#10)

I am assuming you speak of the dustruction of well crafted campaign spending law here.

If you don't control the deep pockets, they buy the government. It doesn't get anymore simpler and obvious as that.

I'm not going to argue what you say is true or untrue for the moment. But that isn't the point. The point is if the decision Citizens United case was decided according to the words of the constitution.

A K A Stone  posted on  2011-05-02   18:00:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: A K A Stone (#11)

I disagree. For one thing, I don't buy the concept of corporations as having or deserving to be considered individuals.

Second, the elections called for in the U.S. Constitution calls for a choice by the people, not the best candidate money can buy.

The purpose of campaign spending law was to keep the vote of the people from being tainted by those who can buy too large a voice in the media buy dropping a money bomb on an election.

I know that the American Civil Liberties Union has traditionally agreed with your POV, but even they are speaking up about reconsidering this for the first time after observing the shenanigans of corporate money giving this last election.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2011-05-02   18:06:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Ferret Mike (#12)

Second, the elections called for in the U.S. Constitution calls for a choice by the people,

The Electoral College just called and called you ignorant.

socalv8  posted on  2011-05-02   18:07:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: socalv8 (#13)

I'm familiar with how presidential elections are run, but I also know that the president is not the only official the Constitution calls for elections for.

And yes, I am aware senators used to be appointed and many people argue that they still should be.

But that was a post, not a legal document where I had to frame everything about elections talked about in the U.S. Constitution in such a manner every aspect of them and stipulation was covered.

As someone who did qualify as a paralegal and knows his way around a law library, I can do that. But I don't need to, and all too often my posts are too long and chatty anyway.

SO I didn't write a tutorial on presidential election process, sue me.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2011-05-02   18:15:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 16.

        There are no replies to Comment # 16.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 16.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com