Patterico's Pontifications

11/24/2012

Reminder: Obama Still a %$@*-Up

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 1:37 pm

This is who this country elected:

In his tour of Burma, billed as an historic first visit since Burma’s 2007 move to democracy, it was clear he was in way over his head, even on small things. Obama repeatedly referred to the country’s Nobel Peace Prize-winning leader Aung San Suu Kyi as Aung Yan Suu Kyi, an astonishing error given her global fame.

He also bungled the norms of Burmese polite address, calling Thein Sein, the nation’s leader “President Sein,” an error comparable to addressing Cambodia’s Pol Pot as Mr. Pot.

But he also undermined his supposed democracy mission, first by telling the Burmese leaders that he too wished he could govern without opposition, calling into question whether he himself believed in the representative government he was advocating.

By 2016 the people who voted this guy into office will finally realize how badly they f’ed up.

By then it will be too late.

170 Responses to “Reminder: Obama Still a %$@*-Up”

  1. Eeesh.

    Patterico (43b036)

  2. Μαλακας.

    nk (875f57)

  3. And no, μαλακας does not mean what Google Translate says.

    nk (875f57)

  4. From the same link:

    Bun Rany, Cambodia’s first lady, gives President Obama a “sampeah” greeting at a tilt usually reserved for servants.

    Not only is Obama an unprepared amateur, he’s demonstrated no willingness to learn during his first term. That makes him an arrogant amateur so it’s no wonder his foreign policy has been a disaster.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  5. No. So long as their free stuff keeps coming, his base won’t care if he turns into Richard Libertini.

    The Sanity Inspector (3d270e)

  6. Remember, a repeat of Jimmy Carter is a Best-Case Scenario!
    He very well could turn out to be a “General Leopoldo Galtieri”.

    askeptic (2bb434)

  7. But historian Michael Beschloss assured us that this Obama person is the smartest man to ever become President.
    Hmmm. Maybe Beschloss had actually said, “smarmiest,” but it somehow got lost in the spell-check.

    Elephant Stone (65d289)

  8. To our host’s assertion — “By 2016 the people who voted this guy into office will finally realize how badly they f’ed up” — I must ask this:

    Can you give a single previous example to suggest that those people are willing to accept reality after denying it so fervently all this time?

    When Jim Jones passed out the Kool-Aid, the answer he got every time was “Bless you!”

    Beldar (cab489)

  9. I don’t give much credence to the “sampeah” spin, DRJ. Her tilt is lower than his, for one thing. At worst, he is treating her as an equal.

    nk (875f57)

  10. “When Jim Jones passed out the Kool-Aid, the answer he got every time was “Bless you!””

    Beldar – But Jim Jones couldn’t print money, issue bonds and tax people to keep his scam going and wound up with a bunch of bloated corpses in the jungle.

    I don’t plan on accepting any drinks from strangers just in case.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  11. Personally, my father taught me when meeting a lady to stand up straight and not extend my hand unless she extended hers first. Slight bowing of the head, a polite greeting. Different strokes for different folks.

    nk (875f57)

  12. The only thing more amateurish than the President in this Administration, are the Protocol Officers.

    askeptic (2bb434)

  13. “The only thing more amateurish than the President in this Administration, are the Protocol Officers.”

    askeptic – Barky probably should have just grabbed her in a bear hug the way Michelle grabbed the Queen Mum.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  14. I honestly don’t think President Obama feels the need to be prepared, to know the basic protocols and customs, let alone doing the rudimentary work of knowing his host’s name and correct pronunciation. I think it stems from believing rather the important thing is his presence. Clearly, it will be about him, therefore no need to waste his time on matters of foreign protocols.

    Remember, this is the guy who arrogantly decided he did not need towould sit down and studiously prepare for the debates.

    Dana (292dcf)

  15. Remember, this is the guy who arrogantly decided he did not need towould sit down and studiously prepare for the debates.

    Comment by Dana (292dcf) — 11/24/2012 @ 2:28 pm

    Sadly, he was right.

    Matador (7e574f)

  16. No, they won’t, Patterico. Not the vast majority of them, anyway. Tell you what: I will make a wager with you right now that when Obama leaves office in January, 2017, his approval rating will be higher than 45%

    Chuck Bartowski (ad7249)

  17. Shortly after the election I had a bit of a tiff with a liberal friend when I told him that I was willing to bet that by summer of 2016 Obama will be about as unpopular in opinion polls as Bush was in the summer of 2008. Hey, maybe I’m wrong — maybe ObamaCare will be working just fine and maybe a strong economy will counteract the effects of Obama’s tax increases while providing some deficit reduction and maybe moderate Islamists really will take over in the Middle East — but I have an ugly foreboding that Obama simply isn’t up to the challenges that he is going to be facing over the next few years.

    JVW (4826a9)

  18. ==To our host’s assertion — “By 2016 the people who voted this guy into office will finally realize how badly they f’ed up” — I must ask this:
    Can you give a single previous example to suggest that those people are willing to accept reality after denying it so fervently all this time?==

    That’s a reasonable question, but starts with a gross generalization. I think we must keep something in focus: Not all who voted for the president’s re-election are clueless, mindless “Obamabots”. Many of them saw his flaws, recognized his promises not kept, and had real concerns about his competence and temperament as shown in his first term. I know people like this. But, just as some voters on the libertarian/conservative/right have said that while they felt both presidential candidates were flawed, they reluctantly held their noses and voted for Romney because to them he was less problematic than Obama—I think some numbers of Obama voters applied that same logic in voting for him coming from the opposite direction. By 2016 it may well be too late, but I think we make a mistake for 2014 and 2016 if we automatically just give up and assume none of these Obama voters can be reachable to us with the right candidates and with the right platform.

    elissa (33aab3)

  19. I think I slightly hedged by saying that Obama wouldn’t be any more than 10 points higher in favorability than Bush was. I think Bush was down in the mid-20s in his last summer. Obama could steal the entire treasury and start a nuclear war with Britain and he would still find a cadre of idiots numbering in the 30% range to support him.

    JVW (4826a9)

  20. Holding their noses to re-elect this incompetent buffoon… quite a mental image.

    Americans will soon come to understand the tragic mistake they have made in putting their trust in one so feckless.

    Colonel Haiku (5088bf)

  21. When in Burma, do as Burmese do.

    Elephant Stone (65d289)

  22. Americans will soon come to understand the tragic mistake they have made in putting their trust in one so feckless.

    And let’t not overlook that we have another four years of the disgraceful drunken uncle for a Vice President too.

    JVW (4826a9)

  23. Holding their noses to re-elect this incompetent buffoon… quite a mental image.

    I can tell you honestly that I did no different in 2004…

    Ghost (2d8874)

  24. If four years of continuing deterioration of our country – on a number of levels – didn’t clue voters in, then I have little hope that four more years will.

    After all, it was during the first four years that we made the hard left turn turn and moved closer toward the European model. There won’t be any huge change of trajectory in the next four years, just a continuing push in the same direction.

    Plus, guilty white liberals outnumber common sense. They’ll hold fast.

    Dana (292dcf)

  25. Amity Shlaes is predicting that we will see a re-enactment of the Depression within a Depression just as in ’37-’38.
    The question arises, since the Left already calls the current circumstance (to tar GWB) The Great Recession, what will the name be for the Recession within a Recession?
    For FDR, ’37-’38 is what made the Depression “Great”.

    askeptic (2bb434)

  26. I don’t think Obama supporters are going to change their minds about him in the next 4 years. If they supported him in 2008 and they support him now — whether that support was enthusiastic or reluctant — they will continue to give him the benefit of the doubt.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  27. The State Department building caught fire today.

    Early word on the cause is ‘spontaneous combustion resulting from a YouTube video’.

    Icy (boobees) (0de99d)

  28. The country has been listing left for decades. The course only hastens if there’s a D executive & legislative branch. Only the judicial has been there to stop the tossing overboard of the Republic. (Well, we thought it was there, until Roberts decides to go rogue).

    Anyone think Romney was going to rescind the Patriot Act (and the illusion of security for freedom), or maybe try to force a Bork onto the Court, or roll back the Prescription Drug benefit or Obamacare?

    I’m afraid to say the Republic is lost. And yes the D’s are mostly to blame, but the R’s of today are nothing more than liberals 20 – 30 years ago.

    scott (b8618e)

  29. JVW, regardless of Obama’s popularity in 2016, his longer term reputation will continue to drop, I am convinced. I am certain that he’s few “accomplishments” will become known as fiascoes, and that his many errors will continue to multiply.

    I am confident that his inability to get any legislative agenda, his unseriousness re: budgets coupled with the juvenile tactics of Congressional Democrats will become more of the theme of historian review of his tenure.

    SPQR (768505)

  30. There is a very real possibility of the bottom dropping out of the economy as the country plunges over the Deficit Cliff, along with the imposition of the “Clinton-era” tax rates aka the ending of the Bush Tax Reductions.
    If real unemployment approaches 20% at the same time that the Feds have no money to pump into the economy, the First Keynesian may take a major hit on his popularity. I’m sure he’ll be real popular in the academic community as people have to pay those student loans without having jobs, and faculty and staff are laid-off as enrollment plummets.
    The Good Times are ahead.

    askeptic (2bb434)

  31. The Asians are very good at math, obama is not.
    Ruh Roh…

    mg (31009b)

  32. Looks like Obama’s White House Protocol Briefings are in the stack of unread papers underneath his Bengazi Security Briefings.

    BRB, I have to go check the NY Times Front Page to see the articles about what an idiot Cowboy our President is to make these kinds of gaffes. Those articles were non-stop from 2000 to 2008, I’m sure they are there now.

    Kaisersoze (d67f66)

  33. By 2014 we will be in the “Greater Recession” and it will be instructive to see Obama’s supporters trying to blame the Republicans for the mess. I actually think that a lot of his current support will ahve melted away by then. When he leaves office, whether in 2017 or earlier by resignation or impeachment (I have hopes for the 2014 midterms), he will have less support than Truman or Nixon.

    Of course, there is also the possibility that he’ll pack the Supreme Court full of hacks who will find the 22nd Amendment unconstitutional and then run again.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  34. Perhaps his failed protocol in Asia was a result of the fact they don’t speak Austrian there.

    Elephant Stone (65d289)

  35. #31: Remember that Obama’s math stops at arithmetic. Which is like saying a pianist’s training stops at Chopsticks.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  36. By 2016 the people who voted this guy into office will finally realize how badly they f’ed up.

    WHAT in Ghu’s name leads you to this ridiculous flight of incredible fancy?

    Smock Puppet, 10th Dan Snark Master (aacc3d)

  37. The average IQ falls around 100 to 105.

    Profound intellectual impairment falls down around 30 and below.

    America is below average.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  38. they reluctantly held their noses and voted for Romney because to them he was less problematic than Obama

    Sorry, Elissa I would believe that anyone incapable of grasping how much worse Obama was than Romney is someone utterly incapable of EVER grasping how bad Obama is.

    Smock Puppet, 10th Dan Snark Master (aacc3d)

  39. Obama is like his syccophantic followers. He is an idiot, who has been told that he is a genius.
    It’s almost as if Obama is the smartest REEEETARD. And the rest of the REEEETARDS think that they are somehow ELEVATED by virtue of being a fellow traveler with Obama. He’s not smart, he’s an idiot. He is enabled by the Press and millions of morons.

    gus (694db4)

  40. No, it’s like the pianists’ training stopping a black and white keys.

    gus (694db4)

  41. By 2016 the people who voted this guy into office will finally realize how badly they f’ed up.

    No, they wont. And they wouldn’t care if they did.

    miked (04e8ba)

  42. Right miked. The more Jug ears Fugs up, the more someone else needs to be attacked.

    gus (694db4)

  43. Why, Patterico! There is no difference between Romney and Obama, remember? People have incredible facility for self-deception. Nothing bad that happens will ever be Obama’s fault, according to the DNC and MSM (which are the same thing).

    Simon Jester (a6c0b3)

  44. sorry–Smock Puppet, 60 million people is a pretty big universe to categorize as forever hopelessly lost. We already know that included in that group of misguided Obama voters are intelligent and decent and busy left leaning family members/loved ones of persons central to this blog and also to this large conservative commenter community. They are voters who happen to view the world from a somewhat different perspective than many of us do and they are also regularly misinformed by the media. They are not all greedy and simply looking for “free stuff”.

    I stand second to no one in despising what Barack Obama has done to diminish both this country’s spirit and our institutions as well as our reputation in the world. I hate how he has demeaned the office of the presidency. I have known he was dangerous, a fraud and lazy since he was an Illinois legislator and I have tried and will continue to try to enlighten others about this if they seem even remotely persuadable. We don’t need to persuade everybody, you know. We just need to persuade four or five million of them. I guess I still hold out hope that that’s doable.

    elissa (33aab3)

  45. What will make them turn, elissa, gas at $6.00, an attack on the homeland, I want to know what replaces ‘binders full of women’ and the 47%,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  46. Only when white folks are stripped naked will the world heal.

    mg (31009b)

  47. There is no persuading them. No moving left on abortion, gay marriage or immigration will make them see us as anything other than 1%er racists who will make them get out of bed in the morning.

    Looks like we are going to have to hit rock bottom before we can rehab.

    Matador (7e574f)

  48. Galtieri-like inflation is practically a given, among other economic woes we can expect over the next 4 years.But he makes silly liberals feel good about themselves and those with their frasping hands out want more stuff. Running a 2-car funeral would overtax his administrative abilities. He may be a f___ up, but we are truly f___ed.

    Bugg (c8b43a)

  49. Frank Zappa did a song apropos of Urkel, The Idiot Bastard’s Son. Why is it that commie mom didn’t abort his sorry ass? Been watching The Wire series. Those drug lords and many of their minions have better minds than Obama and I doubt they are much different morally. Big Balls Barack has no problem ordering drone attack killings from afar. Can you imagine how the leftards would have viewed all of O’s BS had it been performed by W and Cheney? The media gives libs a pass totally. Think our DNC media would be delving into Benghazi if the potus were republican?
    So assclown Brian William’s thinks it is hilarious that Romney was caught on film pumping his own gas? Like bitch Williams, crybaby pants-peeing Chrissie Matthews or Matt Lauer pump their own? Same jackasses attack free enterprise while getting filthy rich off it. Bald jerk Lauer is supposed to get canned from his $21.5 mil gig? I’d like to see the lot hanging from lamp posts all around NYC and DC. Scum of the earth, along with many pols.

    Calypso Louis Farrakhan (e799d8)

  50. I can’t believe you’re nitpicking this stuff when Obama has committed a laundry list of impeachable crimes.

    j curtis (1869e3)

  51. Same president, different day.

    navyvet (02dd07)

  52. 49- CLF, A strong hemp rope will be needed for the lamp posts.

    convict (31009b)

  53. It’s naïve to think Obama’s fans will learn anything by 2016 if they haven’t learned anything by now. They’ve demonstrated that the concept of “cause and effect” is beyond them. Obama is, for instance, engineering a train wreck in n. Africa and the ME. The chief sponsor of Hamas is now our negotiating partner in Egypt. Thanks to Obama’s college-freshman leftist instincts Hamas has a direct conduit to Libyan and Iranian (via Sudan) weapons. And the MB will make sure Hamas rearms. Because President Arab Spring is so desperate to declare the unfolding catastrophe he’s wrought a success that Morsi knows he’s got the fool over a barrel. Hamas slips the leash and out comes Obama’s federal wallet dispensing whatever it’ll take for Egypt to put Hamas back on the chain. And Obama’s minions will believe this clown when he tells them he’s restored America’s standing in the world after “cowboy Bush” shredded it. (Although everybody was afraid to “shred” one of our consulates when Bush was President.)

    Steve57 (08bc52)

  54. Comment by convict (31009b) — 11/24/2012 @ 9:11 pm

    Piano Wire!

    askeptic (2bb434)

  55. I was with a group of “private contractors” who mentioned that most of the troops being rotated out of Afghanistan are penciled-in for duty in North Africa, starting with countries near the Horn of Africa.
    I wouldn’t be surprised to see new facilities going up in Morocco too.

    askeptic (2bb434)

  56. It’s not FP related but the angry leftard to companies annoncing what steps they’ll have to take to survive Obamacare tells us what the future holds (as does the sacking of our Benghazi consulate and Hamas celebrating Obama’s reelection by attacking Israel). If companies had just quietly laid people off, cut hours, and raised prices the left would have been cool with it. They even said so. It was when businessmen went public and made noise about WHY they were doing what they were doing the left turned ugly. They didn’t want to hear it. These people are vocal about their conscious desire to be lied to. They will lash out at anyone who threatens to tell them the truth about Obama and his disastrous policies.

    Steve57 (43b783)

  57. And no, μαλακας does not mean what Google Translate says.

    Indeed it doesn’t :-)

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  58. askeptic @55, so Obama’s once again is shutting the barn door after the horse escaped. Or more accurately after he deliberately drove it off. Clearly President Tiger Beat has to kill somebody or several somebodies so he can keep pretending he didn’t screw the pooch in every possible way a pooch can be screwed in Benghazi. But to indulge indulge in another metaphor he let this genie out of the bottle and he ain’t stuffing it back in.

    Steve57 (43b783)

  59. Of course, there is also the possibility that he’ll pack the Supreme Court full of hacks who will find the 22nd Amendment unconstitutional and then run again

    Um, how can a constitutional amendment be unconstitutional?

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  60. Milhouse, it can be done. At least there are judges who are willing to rule that way with a straight face. Obama can find a compliant judge to bless his ambitions just as Obama blessed Zelaya’s extra-legal ambitions despite the fact his attempt to stay in power was completely against Honduras’ constitution.

    Steve57 (43b783)

  61. As long as the right has rove, schmidt,murphy,boehner,christie,gingrich,huntsman,jindal, the collectivist smiles.

    convict (31009b)

  62. The real constitution is the nation’s collective cognizance, or concience if you wish, of what is right. If Obama tries to be a Chavez, he will be taken out by his own Secret Service detail and put in a padded cell.

    nk (875f57)

  63. The average IQ falls around 100 to 105. Profound intellectual impairment falls down around 30 and below. America is below average.

    However, intelligence and political bias do not necessarily go hand-in-hand. Some liberals love to portray conservatives as being “rednecks in trailer parks,” but ignore the fact that just about every truly impoverished, dysfunctional, corrupt city/community in America is of the left. Meanwhile, some conservatives equate liberalism with failure and low IQ, while ignoring all the “limousine liberals” throughout America, people such as investor Warren Buffett or tycoon Michael Bloomberg of New York, or most certainly the “latte liberals” of Silicon Valley.

    Regardless of one’s intelligence, the facet of human thought that seems to really count the most is basic logic or common sense. And that tends to be in short supply, or becomes squished, when the ethos of “compassion and feel-good rule all” becomes pervasive.

    “Compassion and feel-good” (mixed with plenty of self-entitled greed) is running amok in Obama’s America, and also in France, in Greece, in Argentina, in Spain, in Venezuela, in Mexico, etc.

    Mark (52bc92)

  64. At least there are judges who are willing to rule that way with a straight face.

    I don’t believe this. If it were true at the Supreme Court level there wouldn’t be so many unanimous decisions. Constitutional amendments are by definition constitutional, and I can’t believe there’s a judge in the country who would claim otherwise, and there’s certainly not one on the Supreme Court. Any lower court judge who did rule that way would be impeached the next day. And if 0bama doesn’t voluntarily leave the White House on 20-Jan-2017 the Secret Service will move him out (unless Michelle wins in 2016, of course).

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  65. Well I’m less sanguine, after Kelo, after the detainee cases, and how NFIB vs.Sibelius, that they will do the right thing,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  66. Jebbie wants the Nomination.

    More photos for the ego wall.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  67. Well I’m less sanguine, after Kelo, after the detainee cases, and how NFIB vs.Sibelius, that they will do the right thing,

    None of those are decisions I agree with, but they’re all perfectly defensible. I think on each of them the side I support had the better argument, but would I think the same if I supported the other side? I can’t be totally confident of that. But there can’t be any question that the constitution is constitutional. It’s a tautology.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  68. Jebbie wants the Nomination.

    If his name weren’t Bush he’d have been a strong contender this year. I’d have readily supported him over Romney. Maybe by 2016 people will be so heartily sick of 0bama that they’ll be hankering for the halcyon Bush days and his name will no longer be a handicap.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  69. Well the problem is each one of these cases, often ignored all precedents, before, for pragmatic reasons, with Boumedienne they ignored the facts
    at hand as well,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  70. Milhouse, I’m told that learning new languages is a way to ward off precocious dementia. I’m on French, today (actually Cajun), but the only difference in the word is “o” in English and “eu” in French. ;)

    nk (875f57)

  71. By 2016 the people who voted this guy into office will finally realize how badly they f’ed up.

    Well at least those who didn’t vote for him. The others, not so much.

    ks1949 (ad6b2e)

  72. Well the problem is each one of these cases, often ignored all precedents, before, for pragmatic reasons, with Boumedienne they ignored the facts at hand as well,

    On the contrary, Kelo was perfectly in line with the precedents, and took them to their logical conclusion. It’s the precedents that were bad, and the Court could have limited them to their facts rather than extending them, but there was nothing legally radical about its declining to do so. Sibelius too was in line with precedent, and from a strictly legal POV is perfectly defensible. Much the same applies to Boumedienne ; I think the Court could and should have found otherwise, but it did not the precedents that prisoners of war have no right to habeas, it just said that first it must be established that they are POWs. None of the precedents addressed that, since in all previous cases the petitioners acknowledged their status.

    None of these decisions justify a claim that the Court, or for that matter any federal court, would ever dare to “rule” that the constitution is unconstitutional. Such a decision would be ultra vires and a legal nullity, and the armed forces (including the Secret Service) would simply ignore it.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  73. nk, I have no idea what you’re talking about. Which word?

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  74. Is “teusser” really a French word? :-)

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  75. seems German, from a quick perusal, the no compensation part seems the overreach, not the public use, of course bad law, yielded bad results,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  76. I believe μαλακας is masturbatieur in French?

    nk (875f57)

  77. seems German, from a quick perusal, the no compensation part seems the overreach, not the public use, of course bad law, yielded bad results

    Um, huh? Autocorrect strikes again? Or a slip of the mouse?

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  78. nk, I don’t know French, but in English “masturbator” isn’t quite the same thing as “tosser”. The former is strictly literal, the latter is figurative, as I take μαλακας to be.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  79. no, the word teusser, and a separate thought on Kelo,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  80. Patterico and most Republicans think Obama is an “amateur” or incompetent. Well, he was able to ram through Obamacare. By his own lights, Obama is able enough.

    As another commenter said, Obama will still be close to 45% in the polls in 2016. The combination of unanimous support from blacks and large backing from nonwhites in general, along with white liberals, will keep Obama from ever falling as low in the polls as Bush 43.

    DN (7fc565)

  81. What “no compensation part” are you talking about? The constitution clearly requires compensation, and Kelo received every penny of it.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  82. Um, how can a constitutional amendment be unconstitutional?

    Well, it depends on what the meaning of “is” is, and those pesky emanations from penumbras, which I’m sure someone can see – particularly on the 9th-Circus.

    askeptic (2bb434)

  83. When an Iranian nuclear weapon in a container goes off in New York Harbor, the Obama voters might begin to doubt him. Until then it’s pretty hopeless. Coleman Young was mayor of Detroit for 20 years. In his first term the city was barely 50% black. By the end, the white population had begun to flee to the suburbs which continue as a prosperous ring around the city.

    There has been some speculation that states will be the location of the study of the red state and blue state models as they are increasingly dominated by a single party.

    Mike K (326cba)

  84. Our honored host described our President as a “%$@*-Up.” Allow me to suggest a perfectly polite description of “F(ornicate)-Up” as truly conveying the message, without violating either standards of common decency or the FCC’s famous “seven dirty words.”

    The unfailingly courteous Dana (f68855)

  85. When an Iranian nuclear weapon in a container goes off in New York Harbor, the Obama voters might begin to doubt him.

    Nah, they’ll say we have to rally around him just as we did around Bush, whom they will portray as an incompetent fool, worse than our view of 0bama. And they’ll conveniently forget how their rallying around Bush lasted about a week, if that.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  86. I have even managed to train myself to use “Fornicate!” as a verbal expletive, rather than the more common vulgarity. Somehow, people pay more attention to it that way.

    The tremendously polite Dana (f68855)

  87. Milhouse (15b6fd) wrote:

    When an Iranian nuclear weapon in a container goes off in New York Harbor, the Obama voters might begin to doubt him. (Mike K (326cba))

    Nah, they’ll say we have to rally around him just as we did around Bush, whom they will portray as an incompetent fool, worse than our view of 0bama. And they’ll conveniently forget how their rallying around Bush lasted about a week, if that.

    Ahhh, but if that happens, and the liberal voters from New York City are vaporized, we stand a chance of the conservative voters upstate swinging the state to the GOP.

    The Dana who sees the silver lining on every dark cloud (f68855)

  88. Milhouse, yes, Greek is a connotative language, and μαλακας can range from idiot and up the scale of worthlessness, but the literal meaning is “jerk-off”.

    nk (875f57)

  89. wouldn’t that be a kick in the pants

    happyfeet (0c5563)

  90. nk, so’s the literal meanings of “tosser”, “wanker” “jerk-off”, etc., but one would never use them literally. If you meant merely to communicate that the subject engages in onanism, with no reflection on his character, would you still use μαλακας?

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  91. Dana, a nuke in the harbour would kill (and certainly vapourise) very few people, and the survivors, wherever they were, would still vote. And blame Bush.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  92. Who’s a wanker is that chris christie my god could jersey dial back on the trashy just a tetch

    happyfeet (0c5563)

  93. μαλ: English trans = “spiller”;
    ακας: English trans = “seed”;

    Colonel Haiku (3c7a44)

  94. Milhouse (15b6fd) wrote:

    Um, how can a constitutional amendment be unconstitutional?

    Apparently more easily than you think. In Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action v. University of Michigan, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Michigan’s ban on Affirmative Action violated the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, because it “unfairly placed a special burden on supporters of race-conscious admissions policies,” which means that, de facto, the Sixth Circuit said that the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause as far as race is concerned is unconstitutional!

    According to the Sixth Circus, the burden of trying to work around a ban on applying Affirmative Action outweighs the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection of the laws when it comes to race. I could never be a lawyer, because I’m just not smart enough to figure out how that makes any sense at all.

    The utterly confused Dana (f68855)

  95. Milhouse, yes. An onanist, with the widow and her four daughters. That is the basic meaning. But, figuratively, it can go from idiot/victim to person not so bad that you need be afraid of but bad enough that you cannot trust or want around.

    nk (875f57)

  96. In his first term the city was barely 50% black. By the end, the white population had begun to flee to the suburbs which continue as a prosperous ring around the city.

    The city of Detroit is Example-Number-One of how bad and corrupt a place can become, yet none (or at least even a small majority) of its people change their voting habits. Least anyone think that is somehow unique to certain demographics instead of the human race in general, keep in mind a country like Argentina.

    Although mostly of European descent, Argentina is not too different from Detroit writ large. Its current president, Cristina Kirchner, is sort of like Obama on steroids (but just a bit—eg, she has made it illegal to report the actual rate of inflation), and that nation has witnessed generations of leftist voting patterns. Reports out of its capital, Buenos Aires, in 2012 indicate there’s plenty of street crime in Argentina too.

    Alexis de Tocqueville made the following observations during the first half of the 1800s. They show how aspects of human nature haven’t changed much through the eons, but they also hint that this country eventually will hit a point of no return:

    “America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”

    “The greatness of America lies not in being more enlightened than any other nation, but rather in her ability to repair her faults.”

    “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money”

    Mark (52bc92)

  97. Yes, both her and her late husband, Nestor, were acquaintances of the Montoneros, the militant wing of the Peronist, ala SDS, she even set up her own rallying group, the Campora, like Evita,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  98. you get caught in one of them mobs in Cairo they *will* rape you silly cause the whole damn country is a buncha sexual deviants

    happyfeet (0c5563)

  99. You would think, they would strive to be as neutral as possible in their commentary,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  100. Comment by The utterly confused Dana (f68855) — 11/25/2012 @ 8:33 am

    Isn’t it amazing how the 6th-Circus has over-ruled a Constitutional Principle with a legislative act!

    And we are supposed to respect these clowns, and observe their rantings?

    askeptic (2bb434)

  101. You would think, they would strive to be as neutral as possible in their commentary,

    Not sure if you’re referring to the US Embassy in Egypt — based on the link you posted — or Twitchy.com. Regardless, I originally assumed that Twitchy was a division of Twitter.com. As such, I thought it was a nice change of pace that a company based in the San Francisco area, and undoubtedly chock full of latte-drinking liberals, had some staffers who were running counter to the group think of Obama-ism. D’oh to me since I now realize Twitchy is owned by Michelle Malkin.

    I know that one poll indicated Obama got a huge percentage of votes from Americans of Islamic background. I wondered if that was due in part to their sense of knowing who the biggest “useful idiot” was in the presidential election.

    When it comes to the ass-backwards nature of Obama’s sympathy for poor, pitiful, humble Islamism versus his gut reactions to the racist, sexist, homophobic, rapacious, imperialist nature of the Western World (ie, the US in particular), no bigger useful idiot than the guy now in the White House—and, in turn, those folks manning the US Embassy in Cairo.

    Mark (52bc92)

  102. Um, how can a constitutional amendment be unconstitutional?

    Apparently more easily than you think. In Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action v. University of Michigan, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Michigan’s ban on Affirmative Action violated the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, because it “unfairly placed a special burden on supporters of race-conscious admissions policies,” which means that, de facto, the Sixth Circuit said that the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause as far as race is concerned is unconstitutional!

    Um, what? The decision is certainly illogical, but you’re being even less logical than the court! It certainly did not rule that the equal protection clause is unconstitutional. On the contrary, the entire decision rested on that very clause! If the clause is somehow unconstitutional then what’s the problem? You will not find, anywhere in that decision, a statement that the clause is struck down, or anything to that effect.

    Your confusion is a result of the basic fallacy of trying to make logical conclusions from an illogical source. If a source is illogical, as this decision is, then you can’t deduce anything from it using the laws of logic; that’s only logical. It’s a very bad decision, but you can’t read into it more than it says.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  103. Isn’t it amazing how the 6th-Circus has over-ruled a Constitutional Principle with a legislative act!

    Um, when did they do that? That’s the very opposite of what they did. They upheld the constitutional requirement of equal protection, and used it to overrule a state law, as is entirely proper. The problem with the decision is not that it purports to overrule the constitution, but that it’s illogical, and gets the constitutional clause completely backwards.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  104. Holding their noses to re-elect this incompetent buffoon… quite a mental image.

    Americans will soon come to understand the tragic mistake they have made in putting their trust in one so feckless.

    The big question is why did not enough Republicans vote for Ron Paul in the primaries? He certainly knew the fiscal situation in the country, he explained it very clearly, and he has a loyal cadre of followers.

    Michael Ejercito (2e0217)

  105. Because he’s senile, and his foreign policy is stuck in the 19th century.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  106. The problem with the decision is not that it purports to overrule the constitution, but that it’s illogical, and gets the constitutional clause completely backwards.

    Judge Sutton made this eloquent point in his dissent.

    Another oddity of this theory is that it would apply even if the Michigan
    Constitution eliminated affirmative-action programs in another way. In 1963, the
    people of Michigan passed an earlier amendment to their Constitution, one that
    prohibited race discrimination by governmental entities
    . See Mich. Const. art. I, § 2. In
    view of this prohibition, a Michigan resident surely would have the right to bring a claim
    that the State Constitution’s existing prohibition on race-based classifications bars a
    system of racial preferences in admissions, contracting and employment
    . If there is one
    thing that the closely divided decisions in Bakke, Gratz and Grutter illustrate, it is that
    the Michigan Supreme Court could reasonably invalidate, or reasonably uphold, racial
    preferences under the State Constitution’s existing equal-protection guarantee. A
    decision invalidating racial preferences, however, would have precisely the same effect
    as Proposal 2
    , establishing that the Constitution bars racial preferences and placing the
    onus on proponents of racial preferences to alter the Constitution. The claimants have
    no answer to this point. If Proposal 2 violates the political-process doctrine, so too
    would a decision by the Michigan Supreme Court that comes to the same end
    through
    a permissible interpretation of the 1963 equal-protection guarantee.

    The same is true of a state court’s decision to apply strict scrutiny to racial
    preferences. Most state constitutions, including all of the ones in our circuit, mirror this aspect of the Federal Constitution: They require strict scrutiny of governmental
    classifications based on race. See, e.g., D.F. v. Codell, 127 S.W.3d 571, 575 (Ky. 2003);
    Harvey v. State, Dep’t of Mgmt. & Budget, Bureau of Retirement Servs., 664 N.W.2d
    767, 770 (Mich. 2003); State v. Thompson, 767 N.E.2d 251, 255–56 (Ohio 2002); State
    v. Tester
    , 879 S.W.2d 823, 828 (Tenn. 1994). One might think these constitutional
    safeguards would be secure from second-guessing by federal courts, but they are not
    under plaintiffs’ theory
    . For they impose special burdens on some policies that might
    benefit racial minorities in the admissions process without imposing the same burdens
    on policies that benefit groups categorized along non-suspect lines, such as children of
    alumni, athletes or band members. Under each of these state constitutions, a member of
    a racial minority who wants a governmental privilege must identify a compelling state
    interest that supports its provision. If plaintiffs are correct, that reality dooms the States’
    equal protection clauses
    , even though the federal Equal Protection Clause requires no
    less. That cannot be right.

    Coal. to Defend Affirmative Action v. Regents of the Univ. of Mich., p. 66 (Sutton, J., dissenting)

    I would add that some state court decisions, e.g., Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, 798 N.E.2d 941 (Mass. Sup. Jud. 2003), Opinions of the Justices to the Senate, 440 Mass. 1201 (Mass. Sup. Jud,. Ct. (2004), Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health, 957 A.2d 407 (Conn. Sup. Ct. 2008), Varnum v. Brien, 763 N.W.2d 862 (Iowa Sup. Ct. 2009), effectively make it more difficult for heterosexual couples to achieve beneficial legislation (such as bans on same-sex “marriage”) by requiring them to achieve an amendment to their state’s constitution, instead of appealing to the state legislature. If the Supreme Court adopts the Sixth Circuit’s reasoning, then the continued validity of these state court decisions would be in doubt.

    Michael Ejercito (2e0217)

  107. Because he’s senile, and his foreign policy is stuck in the 19th century.

    And yet her saw the fiscal cliff four years ago.

    Michael Ejercito (2e0217)

  108. Regarding Obama leaving office at the end of his second term:

    I predict that sometime in mid to late 2014 a number of liberal pundits will start floating the idea that Obama deserves a THIRD term.

    After all, the pundits will argue, he inherited such a mess from Bush, even a man as brilliant as Obama could not solve it a mere eight years.

    And, similar to their opposition to the Electoral College, there will be a great hue and cry from many Democrats that the law that limits presidents to two terms has outlived its usefulness.

    I am completely serious.

    Whitey Nissan (6de6a0)

  109. It seems to me that in Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, the Sixth Circus has come up with the strange notion that because the Supreme Court has declared a particular policy to be legal, anyone with an interest in the policy should have recourse to the lowest level of decision taking to get that policy implemented, even if higher levels of authority — the state legislature, state courts, or the state constitution — have decided not to put that policy into practice. In other words, if it can be done, it must be done, as long as the applicant can find one person somewhere who agrees.

    The Dana who isn't an attorney (f68855)

  110. Whitey Nissan (6de6a0) wrote:

    I predict that sometime in mid to late 2014 a number of liberal pundits will start floating the idea that Obama deserves a THIRD term.

    After all, the pundits will argue, he inherited such a mess from Bush, even a man as brilliant as Obama could not solve it a mere eight years.

    That really isn’t much of a prediction: we heard similar things in 1987 from Republicans, and in 1999 from the Democrats.

    Of course, if the economy is still in the doldrums in 2015, even the Democrats might not make that argument.

    If the 2008 election was about Hope and Change, 2012 was about Fear of Change. The people who have done best under President Obama, the more productive citizens, were willing to see things change, for the good of the country, while the people who have done most poorly were deathly afraid of change; the people who had done better had hope that change would make things better, while the people who had done worse were afraid that any change would be for the worse.

    The sadly realistic Dana (f68855)

  111. Note that Coalition, illogical as it is, seems to follow from Romer. It’s taking the premise of Romer to its illogical “logical” conclusion. In other words it’s solidly based on Supreme Court precedent, albeit a stunningly stupid one.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  112. effectively make it more difficult for heterosexual couples to achieve beneficial legislation (such as bans on same-sex “marriage”)

    How would such a ban be beneficial to heterosexual couples?

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  113. And yet her saw the fiscal cliff four years ago.

    He certainly did not.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  114. I predict that sometime in mid to late 2014 a number of liberal pundits will start floating the idea that Obama deserves a THIRD term.

    Of course. Every party with a popular second-term president floats the same idea. That doesn’t magically enable them to do anything about it. The best they can do is run Michelle. Which they may very well try, but the Clinton camp won’t go meekly along.

    And, similar to their opposition to the Electoral College, there will be a great hue and cry from many Democrats that the law that limits presidents to two terms has outlived its usefulness.

    No doubt, and they may even be correct, but you will surely have noticed that the electoral college is still with us despite over a century of such claims.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  115. 106 – Indeed.

    convict# (31009b)

  116. Personally, me thinks it’ll take a whole lot of racism to right these DisUnited States.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  117. If you’d told me on 10-Sep-2001 that Ron Paul would one day be a serious presidential candidate and that I would not be supporting him, I’d have called you crazy.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  118. a number of liberal pundits will start floating the idea that Obama deserves a THIRD term.

    If so, we’ll be witnessing history repeating itself. After all, one of the heroes of the Democrat Party — feted decades ago, honored today, and reelected 3 times, no less — never had to apologize for being a big flop:

    blog.heritage.org, January 2009:

    “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work.” …“I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises.” … “I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started… And an enormous debt to boot!”

    The words are those of none other than Henry Morgenthau Jr. — close friend, lunch companion, loyal secretary of the Treasury to President Franklin D. Roosevelt — and key architect of FDR’s New Deal. The date: May 9, 1939. The setting: Morgenthau’s appearance in Washington before less influential Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee.

    Morgenthau made this “startling confession,” as historian Burton W. Folsom Jr. calls it, during the seventh year of FDR’s New Deal programs to combat the rampant unemployment of the Great Depression.

    “In these words, Morgenthau summarized a decade of disaster, especially during the years Roosevelt was in power. Indeed average unemployment for the whole year in 1939 would be higher than that in 1931, the year before Roosevelt captured the presidency from Herbert Hoover,” Folsom writes in his new book, “New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR’s Economic Legacy Has Damaged America.”

    Not long ago, I was musing over whether the technology of the 21st century — mainly the personal computer and the ease of modern communication via the internet — would influence things, including American history (eg, the 2012 elections), for the better.

    WRONG! (And, if anything, Obama is a far more dumbed-down, far more decadent version of Franklin Roosevelt. However, George W Bush at least wasn’t as irresponsibly liberal as Roosevelt’s predecessor, Herbert Hoover, was.)

    Human nature is intrinsic and much of it is immutable, and therefore is innately self-indulgent, short-sighted and, yes, nonsensically left-leaning.

    Mark (01c836)

  119. Smartest President ever!

    Pay no attention to the serfs down at State Dept. who are trying to teach you anything! How dare they try to dilute this fine black President’s authenticity!

    Still, something tells me that every time a President tours Asia, George HW Bush hopes they do barf on some VIP.
    An exorcist style projectile barf onto ASSK would clear the resume

    SteveG (831214)

  120. “And yet her saw the fiscal cliff four years ago.”

    Michael Ejercito – If he did, that must have been some great weed he was smoking because significant short-term fixes that are hallmarks of Obama’s economic policies that comprise a great deal of the fiscal cliff had not been implemented four years ago.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  121. In particular, the fiscal cliff is a particular “fix” that had never been thought of before 2011.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  122. Milhouse @104, if a judge starts with a desired result that conflicts with the plain meaning of the Constitution then they have to get the “constitutional clause completely backwards,” as you put it. Working backward from the desired result through the fact they have to torture the language of the Constitution to get there, it’s not a problem for such a judge to complete the act by issuing a ruling that’s a hot mess of illogic. I was actually thinking of 9th Circuit judge Thelton Henderson who, in order to stay the CA Civil Rights Initiative which outlawed racial preferences, ruled the language of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Constitution unconstitutional. His opinion was an embarrassment; so much so that it was quickly overturned by a 3 judge panel of the 9th Circus. But that’s not the point. The legal consensus was that Henderson concluded the voters voted the wrong way, he decided his one vote was worth more, and he was willing to embarrass himself to overrule them. Actually, he demonstrated some judges are impossible to embarrass.

    Steve57 (43b783)

  123. Note that Coalition, illogical as it is, seems to follow from Romer. It’s taking the premise of Romer to its illogical “logical” conclusion. In other words it’s solidly based on Supreme Court precedent, albeit a stunningly stupid one.

    There is a very clear distinction between Romer and Coalition.

    CO Amendment 2 prohibited anti-discrimination laws for homosexuals, but not heterosexuals. Thus, quota prefgerences and protected status and claims of discrimination were still available on the basis of heterosexual orientation, conduct, practices, and relationships.

    By sharp contrast, the MCRI prohibits racial preferences for all races.

    Michael Ejercito (2e0217)

  124. The one great disincentive for a third-term for the Teh Won is that there have already been Black Presidents for Life.
    If he’s not first, it’s boring.

    askeptic (2bb434)

  125. 831214 wrote:

    Still, something tells me that every time a President tours Asia, George HW Bush hopes they do barf on some VIP.

    T’were this President to do so, someone would dutifully collect the material spewed, and the emesis of our emissary would soon find itself held as a Holy Relic.

    The Dana who actually understands those doofuses (f68855)

  126. Y’all are racists for hatin’ on Barack
    Just ’cause you don’t like that he’s black
    That’s all of you
    And our host, too
    But O will get us back on track!

    The Limerick Avenger (f68855)

  127. We know Barack will
    Fix all of the haters
    He’s better than you

    The Haiku Avenger (f68855)

  128. never before has
    so much smoke been blown so far
    up many asses

    Colonel Haiku (8190f0)

  129. 98. 99. 102.

    Is this the tweet some people are referring to?

    Tweet Text
    US Embassy Cairo @USEmbassyCairo
    @
    @dioscorusboles We never apologized. Why would we? USG had nothing to do with the movie. What did we do? We criticized it.
    about 13 hours ago

    Somebody tell USEmbassy Cairo:

    @USEmbassyCairo What you apologized for was freedom of religion and the fact blasphemy laws are unconstitutional. And you did that by criticizing the movie..

    Sammy Finkelman (344836)

  130. There is a very clear distinction between Romer and Coalition.

    Thst’s a distinction the court could have made, and since it couldn’t explicitly overrule Romer it should have. But it’s not a necessary or even obvious distinction.

    Milhouse (ea3f0d)

  131. We are looking at a man who clearly embodies the worst of Harold Stassen and Benedict Arnold.

    Assuming there IS an election in 2016, the nation may have by then come to realize the cost of the self-inflicted stupidity of the recent past…

    WarEagle82 (97b777)

  132. Thank goodness we have a distinguished and capable Vice President.

    Oh, wait. What was I thinking…

    WarEagle82 (97b777)

  133. @USEmbassyCairo More important, where did you get the idea that the protests Sept. 11, 2012 in Cairo were because of a YouTube video??

    Sammy Finkelman (344836)

  134. Assuming there IS an election in 2016,

    Cut the silly talk. It makes you sound like a moonbat. No matter what happens there will be an election in 2016, and a new president on 20-Jan-2017. There is nothing 0bama can do to prevent it, no matter how much he may want to.

    Milhouse (ea3f0d)

  135. I didn’t see that much focus on Romer, which was bad enough, they seemed to be relying on Hunter (which is more than 30 years old) and Seattle,

    narciso (ee31f1)

  136. Cut the silly talk. It makes you sound like a moonbat. No matter what happens there will be an election in 2016, and a new president on 20-Jan-2017. There is nothing 0bama can do to prevent it, no matter how much he may want to.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea3f0d)

    Have you heard the man talk IN PUBLIC about his views on opposition and admiration for authoritarian regimes? Take nothing for granted with these Marxist thugs in power…

    WarEagle82 (97b777)

  137. Have you heard the man talk IN PUBLIC about his views on opposition and admiration for authoritarian regimes?

    No, actually, but in any case it’s irrelevant. No matter what his views are, there is nothing he can do to extend his term by even a day.

    Milhouse (ea3f0d)

  138. I didn’t see that much focus on Romer, which was bad enough, they seemed to be relying on Hunter (which is more than 30 years old) and Seattle,

    I’m not familiar with those cases. I brought up Romer because the twisted argument cited from this decision seems similar to the one used in that one. If there are even earlier decisions with similar twisted logic, so much the better for my case, that this decision doesn’t represent a rogue court deliberately nullifying the constitution but rather an unwise court following bad precedents to an even worse place.

    Milhouse (ea3f0d)

  139. Both decisions that they rely upon, are frankly ‘blinkered’ like this one here;

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=458&invol=457

    narciso (ee31f1)

  140. No, actually, but in any case it’s irrelevant. No matter what his views are, there is nothing he can do to extend his term by even a day.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea3f0d)

    I think they were saying the same thing about “President” Morsi just the other day. Take NOTHING for granted, especially when you ADMIT you aren’t paying attention.

    WarEagle82 (97b777)

  141. WarEagle wrote:

    No, actually, but in any case it’s irrelevant. No matter what his views are, there is nothing he can do to extend his term by even a day.

    Comment by Milhouse (ea3f0d)

    I think they were saying the same thing about “President” Morsi just the other day. Take NOTHING for granted, especially when you ADMIT you aren’t paying attention.

    President Obama’s term ends at noon on January 20, 2017. If no one is inaugurated to replace him, and no one is inaugurated as Vice President on that day, the Speaker of the House automatically becomes President.

    Not even the most ardent of the Democrats would stand for President Obama trying to extend his term.

    The realistic Dana (f68855)

  142. WarEagle, this is the USA, not Egypt. The loyalty of those who count is to the constitution, and to the lawful president whoever that might be, not to Barack 0bama. The moment he is no longer the president, they will not obey his orders.

    Milhouse (ea3f0d)

  143. Thst’s a distinction the court could have made, and since it couldn’t explicitly overrule Romer it should have. But it’s not a necessary or even obvious distinction.

    It is obvious enough that someone with no legal training can see it.

    Michael Ejercito (2e0217)

  144. Obama is ONE Supreme Court Justice away from doing anything he wants to do, any time.

    You may believe anything you want but take NOTHING for granted.

    And don’t believe for an instant that scores of millions of mindless Democrats wouldn’t support Obama in a heartbeat if he did this…

    WarEagle82 (97b777)

  145. And don’t believe for an instant that scores of millions of mindless Democrats wouldn’t support Obama in a heartbeat if he did this…

    Did what?

    Michael Ejercito (2e0217)

  146. Did what?

    Why don’t you go back and read the thread, assuming you can read…

    WarEagle82 (97b777)

  147. WarEagle, he can read. He just can’t believe you are really floating such absurd nonsense.

    SPQR (768505)

  148. The President of the United States now believes he can order the extra-judicial killing of anyone, anywhere, any time. What makes you think he doesn’t think he can do anything else he wants? Come back and see me in 4 years and let’s see what else has happened by then…

    WarEagle82 (97b777)

  149. WarEagle, he can read. He just can’t believe you are really floating such absurd nonsense.

    Of course it is absurd. That anyone would even risk the shitstorm that would erupt is in itself absurd.

    Michael Ejercito (2e0217)

  150. The President of the United States now believes he can order the extra-judicial killing of anyone, anywhere, any time

    there were scores of extra-judicial killings by Americans on June 6, 1944.

    The targeted killings have precedent in the concept of outlawry.

    . The outlawed did not have any rights, he was exlex (Latin for “outside of the legal system”), in Anglo-Saxon utlah, Middle Low German uutlagh, Old Norse utlagr. Just as feud yielded enmity among kinships, outlawry yielded enmity of all humanity.[63] …”Yet that is but one aspect of outlawry. The outlaw is not only expelled from the kinship, he is also regarded henceforth as an enemy to mankind.”

    Michael Ejercito (2e0217)

  151. there were scores of extra-judicial killings by Americans on June 6, 1944.

    No, there weren’t. You obviously know nothing and eagerly demonstrate your profound ignorance on a regular basis.

    WarEagle82 (97b777)

  152. 148. WarEagle, he can read. He just can’t believe you are really floating such absurd nonsense.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 11/26/2012 @ 6:33 pm

    WarEagle may be barking up the wrong tree but that doesn’t mean his concerns are entirely groundless.

    It’s true that Obama wouldn’t engineer a coup that clearly violated the 22nd Amendment.

    It’s also clear that he wishes he could.

    But what’s equally clear is that he doesn’t have to to have a third term.

    Election Spurred a Move to Codify U.S. Drone Policy

    The fact that Obama thought he might lose the 2012 election spurred him and his administration to codify his drone assassination policy. So that Romney, should he have been elected, would have been saddled with Obama’s policies while Obama himself considered himself free to act as he chose.

    One might argue that a GOP president would be just as free as Obama to form his own policies.

    One would be wrong.

    If that were true than it would also be true that getting four Americans in the employ of the USG killed through a combination of incompetence, negligence, and hostility toward historical American interests would be a larger scandal than firing a number of employees in the justice department who serve at the pleasure of the President.

    Unfortunately, firing US attorneys remains a larger scandal than what can only be described as reckless disregard leading to murder.

    Only one side gets to be “fundamentally transformative.” The other side must follow precedent as established by their liberal betters.

    Steve57 (7a880e)

  153. there were scores of extra-judicial killings by Americans on June 6, 1944.

    No, there weren’t. You obviously know nothing and eagerly demonstrate your profound ignorance on a regular basis.

    Comment by WarEagle82 (97b777) — 11/26/2012 @ 7:43 pm

    Summary executions are the law, when one side violates the Law Of Armed Conflict.

    Summary executions are most definitely not “extra-judicial.” In fact, the world could use more of them.

    They could also use more reprisals. Again, specifically provided for in the LOAC. The LOAC recognizes that “pretty please” doesn’t work when one side decides it can violate the LOAC with impunity, and it’s only when the leadership recognizes that it will pay the price that it reins in its troops so they don’t target civilians, mingle with civilians, etc.

    Steve57 (7a880e)

  154. It is obvious enough that someone with no legal training can see it.

    More on Romer

    I am with the majority of the Supreme Court on this: the Colorado amendment was unconstitutional. This has nothing to do with minority status, affirmative action, or special rights. It has to do with whether they were equally protected under the law.

    The relevant provision of the Colorado Constitution is:

    Neither the State of Colorado, through any of its branches or departments, nor any of its agencies, political subdivisions, municipalities or school districts, shall enact, adopt or enforce any statute, regulation, ordinance or policy whereby homosexual, lesbian or bisexual orientation, conduct, practices or relationships shall constitute or otherwise be the basis of or entitle any person or class of persons to have or claim any minority status, quota preferences, protected status or claim of discrimination.

    Note that only heterosexuals are excluded from this amendment. This amendment would permit Colorado to grant heterosexuals “protected status or claim of discrimination,” but it would not permit Colorado to grant the same to homosexuals. By allowing the grant of protected status or claim of discrimination to heterosexuals, but prohibiting it to homosexuals, the state has violated the equal protection clause. On the other hand, if this amendment extended its prohibitions to all sexual orientations, it would be permissible.

    Michael Ejercito (2e0217)

  155. No, Obama will not become a dictator or cancel elections. No, the Supreme Court will not permit that if they get another liberal.

    Obama’s next four years will exacerbate the disaster of our economy, and one more liberal jurist on the Court will indeed be a disaster too, but let’s not ruin that message by overwhelming it with a crazy conspiracy theory.

    Unfortunately, while Romney would have been a better president, he would not have avoided either disasters. He would have appointed a liberal to the Supreme Court (my guess is based both on his appointment record as Governor and the record of moderate Republican presidents). He would not have balanced the budget.

    That’s part of the reason we lost. The GOP did not really try to present a solution to this mess other than noting Obama is making things worse. We offered a less awful alternative when the times called for a principled and honest solution.

    Of course the bigger reason we lost is that the moochers want to mooch, but those who are inspired to stop the mooching did not have much of a candidate.

    Dustin (73fead)

  156. Oh, and I owe Wareagle an apology for asserting that his caricature of an insane conservative showed he was a moby. I did not have sufficient basis to say that.

    Dustin (73fead)

  157. Article about the tactics of the Moslem Brotherhood in Egyopt:

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/egypt-at-a-crossroads-after-morsi-grants-himself-sweeping-powers-a-869291.html

    Sharnubi is a journalist and a Muslim — and he was a member of the Brotherhood for 23 years. He’s been familiar with the movement since he was 14, and he says that the Brotherhood could be the kiss of death for democracy in Egypt.

    Last year, Sharnubi, 38, left the Islamist organization. Since then, he says that his life has become a nightmare. “They tried to turn my family against me,” says Sharnubi. He’s sitting in a Cairo coffeehouse, keeping a careful eye on the front door: “They went to my home town and spread rumors about me, saying that I’ve become an atheist and that I drink alcohol. They told my wife that I frequent prostitutes.”

    As the former editor in chief of Ikhwan Online, the brotherhood’s website, Sharnubi went public shortly after his resignation. In talk shows he warned his fellow Egyptians that the movement was undemocratic and authoritarian, and that leading Muslim Brothers were no less corrupt than politicians from the old regime.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  158. No, the Supreme Court will not permit that if they get another liberal.

    It is amazing how you can predict the future. We need to PRAY INCESSANTLY for the health of 5 of the Justices. And we need to pray for the spines for two of the especially hard. Roberts has already demonstrated invites to the cocktail circuit in DC are more important that the Constitution.

    If something happens to Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Scalia or Kennedy ANYTHING GOES for Obama.

    WarEagle82 (97b777)

  159. there were scores of extra-judicial killings by Americans on June 6, 1944.

    No, there weren’t. You obviously know nothing and eagerly demonstrate your profound ignorance on a regular basis.

    Oh, really? Are you nuts?! Or are you just such a pig-ignorant fool that you use the word “extrajudicial” without the slightest clue what it means?

    Please explain exactly how you distinguish the thousands (not scores) of extrajudicial killings ordered by FDR on that day from the killings by drone that you seem so exercised about. Because to me they seem exactly the same: valid and perfectly justified acts of war.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  160. Summary executions are most definitely not “extra-judicial.”

    Um, excuse me? What bizarre language are you speaking, that so closely resembles English?

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  161. No, the Supreme Court will not permit that if they get another liberal.

    It is amazing how you can predict the future.

    Yeah, we’re regular Karnaks. Here’s another amazing prediction: the sun will rise tomorrow morning, and every morning for the next four years, and it will not skip a day on 20-Jan-2017. The moon will also rise and set according to its foreordained schedule, and the tides will rise and fall as they have always done. And even if 0bama appoints three more justices, the Court would still reject 9-0 any attempt of his to stay in office even one minute past noon on that day.

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  162. 162.

    Summary executions are most definitely not “extra-judicial.

    Um, excuse me? What bizarre language are you speaking, that so closely resembles English?

    Comment by Milhouse (15b6fd) — 11/27/2012 @ 10:53 pm

    It’s called English. That, plus sanity, prevents me from calling executions that meet the internationally-agreed-to standards “extra-judicial.”

    Seriously. If left to my own devices when I capture you disguised in a uniform not your own, your captivity will not be long.

    Steve57 (7a880e)

  163. It is amazing how you can predict the future. We need to PRAY INCESSANTLY for the health of 5 of the Justices. And we need to pray for the spines for two of the especially hard. Roberts has already demonstrated invites to the cocktail circuit in DC are more important that the Constitution.

    Thank you. You’ll learn I am correct.

    I agree that your prayers are well conceived. Unfortunately, Obama will likely be adding a justice to replace a conservative justice. That’s why I was frustrated with conservatives who did not support Mitt Romney in the general election, even though Romney would probably have nominated a Souter type.

    We will see the disaster that happens should the court get that additional liberal. This disaster is serious even without Obama becoming president for life (Which indeed I have forseen).

    Dustin (73fead)

  164. Via Hot Air:

    U.N. ambassador Susan Rice says in a statement that “I nor anyone else in the Administration intended to mislead the American people” regarding Benghazi.

    MMM kay.

    Given that the latest iteration of the excuse given for the administration’s lies about Benghazi is that they wanted to convince the perpetrators that they weren’t after them, then they intended to mislead everyone who heard their statements.

    There is no other way to interpret their language. If they, as they say, wanted to lull the perps into a false sense of complacency and then their statements were designed to achieve that goal, then their statements were designed to mislead.

    In the course of the meeting, we explained that the talking points provided by the intelligence community, and the initial assessment upon which they were based, were incorrect in a key respect: there was no protest or demonstration in Benghazi. While we certainly wish that we had had perfect information just days after the terrorist attack, as is often the case, the intelligence assessment has evolved.

    This is going to be interesting. I’m curious to see how any GOP pol is willing to put up with this insult to their intelligence. I can’t state for an absolute fact I’ve been going off about this since the 12th of September, but I’m certain I have been stating with certainty that the administration was lying well before Rice went on 5 Sunday talk shows.

    It was a stanky *** lie when they first told it and it hasn’t gotten better with age. You don’t even have to poke holes in it; it comes with holes. It was pre-effin’ drilled with holes.

    Yet this is what’s presented as a qualified Secretary of State. A dumb**** who can’t tell her elbow from a hot rock. Plus, PLUS!, any attempts to call her to account for her dumb***ery in the future will be branded as racist.

    Yet the McRinos seem to be lining up to sign onto this.

    Steve57 (7a880e)

  165. Senator Ayotte: I’m more troubled today…

    Certain minimum standards of sanity seem to be prevailing in some backwaters of the US. If I ever leave Tejas it’ll be so I can vote for this woman in New Hampshire.

    Steve57 (7a880e)

  166. It’s called English. That, plus sanity, prevents me from calling executions that meet the internationally-agreed-to standards “extra-judicial.”

    What else can you possibly call it? Which court tried and sentenced these people to death?

    Milhouse (15b6fd)

  167. Dude,I’m having somewhat of a problem calling what the laws that govern my behavior specifically allow for “extra-judicial.”

    Help me out.

    Steve57 (7a880e)

  168. I’m Italian. I will gleefully engage in reprisals. It sounds like “vendetta.”

    Reprisal. Prosecuting a LOAC violation may not be possible or practical if the enemy who violates the LOAC remains engaged in armed conflict. However, there is no statute of limitations on a war crime. Moreover, the LOAC permits combatants to engage in acts of reprisal to enforce an enemy force’s compliance with LOAC rules. Reprisals are acts in response to LOAC violations. The act of reprisal would be otherwise forbidden if it was not for the prior unlawful act of the enemy. A lawful act of reprisal cannot be the basis for a counter-reprisal. Reprisals are always prohibited if directed against POWs; wounded, sick, or shipwrecked persons at sea; civilian persons and their property; or religious or cultural property. To be lawful, a reprisal must:

    Timely respond to grave and manifestly (clearly) unlawful acts.
    Be for the purpose of compelling the adversary to observe the LOAC and not for revenge, spite, or punishment.
    Give reasonable notice that reprisals will be taken.
    Have had other reasonable means attempted to secure compliance.
    Be directed against the personnel or property of an adversary.
    Be proportional to the original violation.
    Be publicized.
    Be authorized by national authorities at the highest political level. Only the President of the United States, as Commander in Chief, may authorize US forces to take such an action.

    I’m cool with it.

    Steve57 (7a880e)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6921 secs.