House of Eratosthenes

Okay now this is cool. You mean every time I write something that says Obama is a one-termer, His political life gets a new lease by means of a terrorist getting killed? Is that karma or something?

I can deal with that. Obama is a one-termer, Obama is a one termer, Obama is a dead duck, Obama’s gonna lose, Obama is a one termer.

Seriously, America’s worst President does deserve some credit on this. Still waiting for the details to come out, but that much does seem clear. At the very least, He deserves credit for not getting in the way when the military did what it’s supposed to do, just like with the Somali pirates getting skull-capped.

Now things get bizarre in lefty-land. President Obama delivered a speech carefully stripped bare, by which I mean right down to the bones, of any “Hoo-rah” stuff. No foam rubber finger with “We’re Number One” on it, no don’t you go fucking with the USA or we’ll get ya. Not a trace. It’s clear He was trying not to piss off the internationalists, the anti-patriots, the anti-exceptionalists.

But something funny happened. He got to “killed Osama bin Laden” and there was no euphemism. Went ahead & used the k-word, just like that.

This tells me we’re nearly unanimous in agreeing with my fringe-kooky outlook on capital punishment — at least, the essentials of it. That we’ve got these bad people living among us who, for one reason or another, aren’t capable of living among us and tossing their bad asses in a cell isn’t good enough. Obama delivered this weird speech, syllable by syllable, trying His darnedest not to piss off His base…then used the word “killed.”

There are no concerns that I’ve found, anywhere, about the World Community trembling in agitation and fear about those out-of-control Americans and who are we gonna come after next. I imagine that’s because Obama’s a lefty. Kind of an “Only Nixon Can Go To China” moment in reverse.

Another weird thing: From what I’m hearing, President Obama made His announcement last night once the DNA match confirmed the identity of the deceased, at which point said deceased was deceased “about a week.” (Update: This does not seem to be the case…) ~~That would mean Osama met Allah sometime really close to Easter Sunday, which would be pretty cool…but it also means the sequence of events goes like this:~~

1. Osama bites it. Once the ensuing firefight dies down, Military, or experts, or experts in the military or whoever immediately go to work on DNA tests to prove it’s really the guy.
2. Obama releases His birth certificate.
3. After the DNA tests prove what was known for nearly certain anyway, Obama makes the announcement.

Which provides a further answer to what I was asking on Birth Certificate Day, “why release this document on April 27 of the third year of Obama’s term?” I say “further” because the answer to that question is compatible with the interests of President Obama…not to the interests of America. We already had that much. I’m still not sure how it helps the country to release that personal record on that particular date, but now it’s a little clearer why that decision was made.

(Update: Looks like some things will have to remain a mystery.)

Lefties are now bragging rather brazenly that Obama was in the Big Chair when Osama flatlined, and President Bush couldn’t get this done. We’ll see a lot more of this, and there’s a concern that it might change the result of the election. Could be. Why worry about that one today; America will vote the way it’ll vote, and whatever that is, that’s how it will go. But do I need to backpedal on my prediction? I don’t think so. You can’t win re-election presiding over a crappy economy.

In fact I have another prediction:

“What exactly did Barack Obama do to bring down bin Laden?” is going to net me the same blank stares I used to get when I asked “what exactly did Bill Clinton do to revive the economy?” To date, it looks like the most logical answer to that is “use George W. Bush’s idea of putting General Petraeus in charge of things.”

You’re getting an object lesson in how crappy leaders do their so-called “leading,” although anyone who’s ever had a crappy boss already knew about this. They sit, like scavengers, waiting for something to happen that doesn’t completely suck. Then they swoop in and claim credit. In the meantime, while things continue sucking, they change the subject or blame the predecessor. So you see it’s a very simple process…blame predecessor, change subject, blame predecessor, change subject, when something happens that doesn’t suck you claim credit. Then the next day you change the subject and blame the predecessor. It will be this way as long as it works, and this has always worked.

Update: Wisdom from my Hello Kitty of Blogging account:

You spend three solid years explaining to me the evils involved in fruit, sugar, pastry, shortening, etc…then after all that one day you say “look, I made a cherry pie!” Of course I’m going to look at you funny. Any rational person would say “Okay, so you want credit for the pie…but you clearly have no idea what goes into one…or you think I don’t…or…that’s not a real pie.”

Assassination squads is bad. Aggressive action is bad, especially in a “sovereign nation.” Decisive action without years and years of “due process” based on presumption of innocence, with “he did it and he knew what he was doing but he might be clinically crazy” being defined as innocence…is bad. Guns is bad. Anytime good guys win and bad guys lose, there’s some way to make it bad.

And then Obama zoinks Osama and that’s supposed to be good.

I don’t know why liberal democrats continue to pretend to be supporting some kind of principle, as opposed to a nakedly partisan agenda. Oh wait — yeah, I do know now that I think about it. They’re accustomed to talking to people unwilling or unable to retain and process meaningful information.

“What exactly did Barack Obama do to bring down bin Laden?”

I don’t think you’re going to get blank stares. The Obamaphile will respond, “He sent in the SEAL team that got Osama.” Of course, to that you can respond, “So, it seems there is a military solution to terrorism after all. I thought we could just talk out our differences and everything would be fine.”

“…is going to net me the same blank stares I used to get when I asked “what exactly did Bill Clinton do to revive the economy?””

Had to listen to two liberal co-workers go on last night about what a wonderful guy Clinton was, particularly with the economy. Was busy actually, you know, working…and didn’t participate in the conversation, but I thought about pointing out that the dot-com boom had a lot to do with the economy being good in the mid-90s. I’m hard pressed to identify anything he did.

Liberals seem to be awfully short on realizing that correlation (a president) does not equal causation (something good happened on his watch).
- cylarz | 05/02/2011 @ 11:40
They treat the correlation/causation much the same way they treat Constitutional passages: They see it when it isn’t there, and then they don’t see it when it is there.

An example of c/c being there: Businesses had some idea of what it costs, after regulation & taxes, to hire so-and-so many people during the Bush administration. And so unemployment was about 5.6%. They’ve got nary a clue right now, so unemployment is close to 10%. But of course, if you bring that up it will be time to change the subject, toot-sweet…
- mkfreeberg | 05/02/2011 @ 11:52
Sorry, not buying that the guy they killed was Bin-Laden. Ann Barnhardt has a post up showing that the photo of the guy is as fake as the birth certificate.

I still hold to the theory that Osama was killed years ago in Tora Bora. This is just another lame attempt at directing the public’s attention to anything other than what’s important.
- Moshe Ben-David | 05/02/2011 @ 18:04
I guess now we have an answer to all those “war is NOT the answer” stickers lefties love to plaster all over their Priuses — “no, but targeted assassinations by illegal incursions of black ops troops into sovereign — nay, allied! — nations IS the answer.”

[n.b. I’m thrilled that we got the s.o.b. and have no problems with SEAL incursions into Pakistan, which is our “ally” pretty much to the exact extent — and for the exact reason — France is. I’m just remembering all the things that used to be horrible, evil, deplorable, unconstitutional, violations of the Geneva Convention, etc. etc. etc. back when that guy with the -R after his name was in the White House. Ye gods, if I tried to change my mind that fast I’d blow a hemisphere.]
- Severian | 05/02/2011 @ 18:26
Like the birth certificate, whether or not it was Bin Laden is irrelevant. The guy probably could have lived in that compound until he died of old age had he not chosen to release a tape every so often to remind us that he wasn’t dead. This actually shores up the incompetence of the whole administration–you know where he is, you know exactly how to get him, and you *don’t* wait until October 2012 to strike? Boob.

Sev, I’ve been shaking my head at the scene all day. Put up a very simple question on my FB:

A question for my lefty friends pounding their chests over the death of Bin Laden–if it turns out that the information that led to this successful strike came from “enhanced interrogation techniques,” will you:

a) criticize Obama with the same fervor as you criticized Bush,
b) quietly acknowledge that even extreme methods have their place, or
c) “I don’t care, Obama is awesome”?

One response to the actual question which was “d) Obama doesn’t use EIT.” And I guess all intel’s usefulness expires when they change the locks on the White House door.

When your philosophy is based on the sands of convenience, how can you level the charge of hypocrisy? I think I’m starting to like the “echo chamber” idea. I will acknowledge the divide, I won’t try to bridge it, and I will leave the results up to God.
- Jason | 05/02/2011 @ 19:44
b) quietly acknowledge that even extreme methods have their place

If they have any sense of honesty at all, this is clearly the correct answer.

d) Obama doesn’t use EIT.”

If the Obamunist gives this answer, yell: “BZZZT! Wrong! Try again, dumbass!”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/02/bush-era-interrogations-provided-key-details-bin-ladens-location/

The fact of the matter is that EIT does and did yield actionable intelligence. Even if it really is the case that the the EIT happened only under Bush’s watch, the fact remains that the intel was used by Obama.
- cylarz | 05/02/2011 @ 23:46

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

The Paper Tiger Came for YouMonday, May 2nd, 2011

The Paper Tiger Came for You
Monday, May 2nd, 2011