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

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse"

"Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD"

"Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy"

Woodworking and Construction Hacks

"CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination"

"NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law"

"Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing"

Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine

Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn.

After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning

Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate

Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending.

Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar”

"Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny"

"Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is"

Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner.

Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him

South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien

GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis

Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash

New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms

Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania

Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally

"It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala

Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump

Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive'

(Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.


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: 11843
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 # 29.

#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  


#15. To: Ferret Mike (#12)

the vote of the people from being tainted by those who can buy too large a voice

That would be a violation of equal protection. If you succeed in taxing all the rich out of existence. It will be that much harder for people to challenge the government.

A K A Stone  posted on  2011-05-02   18:12:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: A K A Stone (#15)

This country was the most prosperous immediately after WW II when the wealth was spread more evenly and people had spending power enough to fuel industry and commerce. I most certainly would not want to tax the rich into extinction, but too much wealth in too few hands kills economic prosparity extremely effectively.

However, they do not pay their fair share, and we need to change that.

We also need to change the status of corporations from the concept of them as individuals. That has been a legal precedent that has caused intense nightmares in so many aspects of our collective lives, I'd have to write a book to cover this.

And one of the things this manner of defining them does is hurt the concept of equal protection under the law. It turns the golden rule into, "He who has most of the gold makes the rules.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2011-05-02   18:22:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Ferret Mike (#17)

We also need to change the status of corporations from the concept of them as individuals. That has been a legal precedent that has caused intense nightmares in so many aspects of our collective lives, I'd have to write a book to cover this.

If there are enough examples to write a book about it. How about just 5 examples.

A K A Stone  posted on  2011-05-02   18:24:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: A K A Stone (#18)

To consider a corporation a kind of person for the purpose of law is such an inexact metaphoric fit that it needs to be addressed and changed.

Rather than consider a corporation a person who cannot die, be imprisoned, or swear on a deity who created them, corporations should be recognized as something like countries without sovereignty.

Think about it, their actions are like the action of a state, rather than a person in that they are collective actions then that of a person. Their crimes are more like something in the nature of war crimes than felonies commited by a human being.

I am more of the mind to consider corporate charters as being treaties, and that corporations operate on the sufferance of the *people* upon whose land they sit.

This would place corporations on a more constrained level, whose existence carries no implied protections under the constitution of the United States.

Much of the worst damage corporations do is indemnified by their state as a fake person. Remove that, and then you redefine the nature of the American economy for the better.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2011-05-02   18:38:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Ferret Mike (#22)

People run corporations. They are responsible for their actions.

You didn't answer the question.

A K A Stone  posted on  2011-05-02   18:44:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: A K A Stone (#23)

Citizens United was one of the most inane decisions ever rendered by the court and most certainly will be overturned.

There are volumes of case law which recognizes that the people running a corporation have an existence, often immune, from the existence of a corporation and its liabilities.

Case law has also recognized that a corporation can be altered or abolished by law. People, on the other hand, are either alive or dead.

Only the truly stupid believe the decision to be sound.

war  posted on  2011-05-02   18:55:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: war (#27)

There are volumes of case law

war take your case law and stick it up your ass.

Case law doesn't trump the constitution.

NO LAW

NO LAW

NO LAW

A K A Stone  posted on  2011-05-02   18:57:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 29.

#30. To: A K A Stone (#29)

You can hold your breath and stomp your feet too for all I care. A corporation is not a person. You are willing to fight and die for your rights? Tell me how Exxon can do that.

war  posted on  2011-05-02 19:02:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 29.

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