Carol at No Sheeples Here, renowned for her incredible graphics, is also incredible with videos. Here’s here latest. Head on over to No Sheeples here for commentary
Really, Obama is not qualified to be the pool cleaner at a YMCA, much less President and National Command Authority.
BTW, all you Right Wing Extremists go ahead and snag this awesome graphic from No Sheeples Here. I did. Replaced my old one (check the sidebar)
Mighty spiffy sidebar there, matey. Thanks for blogging the video.
You’re a gentleman AND a scholar.
Sorry, but without the full context of Obama’s comment about “absorbing a terrorist attack,” it is hard to place blame or praise on it.
From first blush, it seems to me that he is saying that if another terrorist attack were to occur, we would take the hit and keep going.
Callous?
Maybe.
Accurate?
Definitely.
What do people want him to say? “If we were to suffer another terrorist attack, we should dismantle the United States, and surrender to the terrorists.”
That’s the alternative.
I don’t like Obama but I believe the attack on that statement is misplaced and an unnecessary cheap shout.
My pleasure, Carol.
There are certainly different ways of looking at it, GC. This post at Hot Air is a good place to start.
Sorry Teach, that article doesn’t help at all to me. It is still lacking the context of the question and answer.
Are generals / commanders “insensitive” because they know there are going to be losses and yet they still send troops into battle? Should we not have stormed the beaches of Normandy simply because of predicted 20 – 50% losses?
Certainly the quote has the potential to be incendiary, but quotes from books prior to their release are not made to educate or inform, they are made to drive sales of the book.
I am not saying I want to give Obama a pass on this. I am not saying that I want to hang him from the yardarm or draw and quarter him. All I am saying is that I would prefer to see the quote in context and then make a judgment on whether it is callous or not.
“terrorism” is not designed to defeat us, it is designed to make us live in fear. Teach just how afraid of terrorists are YOU? People should stop fearing them, they are not that big a danger to Americans, especially if SOME would stop magnifying their abilities
and denigrating the commander in Chief of the USA can only help our enemies. Teach the right wing HATED FDR before WW II called him a socialist and implied that he was not a Christian. Thankfully they stopped ALL of that right after Pearl Harbor and became the loyal opposition. NO ONE would ever dare to say FDR was not fit to command. And Trach perhaps YOU should re read the Constitution of the United States of America to better understand the People of the United States chose Obama and he WILL be our POTUS for the remainder of his term. Only enemies seek to weaken the USA
Terrorist seek to change your way of life into their way of life, Ryan. Are people afraid of them? Not really, but we do have a respect for what they can do.
As for your comments on FDR…..
First, FDR’s policies lengthened the Great Depression, mush like Obama’s policies are lengthening the economic crisis we are going through now.
FDR’s greatest contribution to the war was basically staying out of the way. He was advised on broad strategy and let the professional soldiers do their jobs. Contrast that with Obama who cannot make a decision and who hamstrings military units and leaders. Of the three main leaders of the Allies – FDR, Stalin, and Churchill – there is no doubt that FDR was the weakest war time leader.
Oh, and as for FDR’s leadership? One word – POTSDAM. You remember Potsdam, don’t you Ryan? That is where FDR, seeking to appease Stalin, gave him have of Europe effectively starting the Cold War. Much like FDR, Obama wants to appease those who are basically against us.
Finally, I remind you that you criticized Bush incessantly while he was in office. You and your fellow leftists screamed about “illegal wars,” “war for oil,” “human rights violations,” “Bush = Hitler,” etc. Back then you believed that “dissent was the highest form of patriotism.” Now you think that criticizing the President is wrong and evil.
That dog just don’t hunt you lying, ignorant, hypocritical, leftist moron.
john,
Do you read? I mean really, the Republicans were constantly on FDR throughout his entire presidency, I am sorry, wrong term, his dictatorship of the US. Even during the war they hounded him on his socialistic agenda. As GC notes, it was only years after his death that the economy of the US began to recover from his extension of the depression. Note that the US was the last country to recover from that economic event because we were using the same economic theories that are currently the favorites of the Big O. They have been proven wrong and one wonders why the Democrats want to continue to use them in this enviornment. Perhaps it is because FDR well knew that his actions weren’t helping the economy but with the economy weak he had the American people were he wanted them. Then there is the engineering he did to produce the Pearl Harbor disaster.
GC,
Like you, I am puzzled by O’s comment. I can’t understand the media reaction to the statement, but something about it makes me uneasy. O says that we can absorb the hit. Does he really think that he is in as much danger from such an event as the unwashed? With his security and the fact that Biden would take his place, he is the safest man on earth. I know that with my job I have to be very careful in making statements. Anything that would imply a lack of concern for my patient’s well being can be twisted and invoke an emotion that is negative. That may be what people are concerned with here.
O, John, you never answered the question, do you drive a car?
I do know that ‘lil johnny was top of his class at truck driver school.
Are you serious? Your side went full on batshit crazy over Bush for almsot 8 years. You called him a terrorist, said……well, if you don’t know the full hit parade, then you are clueless. So don’t lecture me, bub.
I know that with my job I have to be very careful in making statements. Anything that would imply a lack of concern for my patient’s well being can be twisted and invoke an emotion that is negative. That may be what people are concerned with here.
I agree with you. All I am saying is that we don’t know the question, and we don’t know the context.
Assume you were talking with a patient, laughing about a suggested treatment or drug and said (while laughing with the patient) “No, you’re crazy if you think this is going to affect your love life. You’ll still perform as well as ever.”
Now take the same line without the context and have someone like Bob Woodward whittle the comment down to “you’re crazy.”
Headline: Doctor Dave Says Patient is Crazy!
Or, as a former teacher of mine used to say, “a text without a context is a pretext.”
I too am a little apprehensive about the comment, but I keep coming back to the idea that these quotes are released to drive sales – not give any type of “accurate” picture – and we don’t know the question or the context of the answer.
I can only apply the same standard that I would want applied to myself and any other person. Without context, I will withhold my judgment on this issue.
Hope that makes sense.
And just so you know, Ryan makes his living driving a truck. Go figure.
If ryan drive a truck, then what in the world is he doing supporting the global warming hoax? That is the dumbest thing that I ever heard. Does he know that his job is set for termination? The reason for the question was to see if he was doing something for the environment rather than mouthing off. But if he drives a truck! My god, that is the worst of all offenders.