Didn't this "phone the White House first" kind of thing get a buttload of guys killed in Vietnam?

Just wondered if anybody else remembers that.

God forbid the Americans ever have to pay Somolian pirates a ransom.

They got enough pirates on Wall St.

Almost all of those pirates live in fancy mansions. Retaliatory strikes with a few unmarked F-18's could cure the problem in a hurry.

Not only that, but as both bloggers have pointed out, the FACT that there were TWO phone calls to the White House, suggests only one thing.

That Obama was, as these bloggers point out, not allowing lethal force but restricting it. As noted, any soldier has the right to use force to protect himself. Admittedly, Phillips is not in the navy and this was not a military action but it was a criminal action, and the Constitution allows the use of force to protect one's life and property.

The phone calls were to ask Obama to remove the restrictions on the use of lethal force. And with a successful operation - the WH and Obama leapt in to take all credit. Heh.

I don't think I've seen, ever, such a manipulative and 'ad campaign' processing of information in the N. American political arena. The Obama agenda is always the same: misinform, manipulate, disable the freedoms of the individual. To gain power.

Is it just me or is Obama a black Jack Layton?

The Maersk Alabama was in imminent danger the moment the pirates boarded the ship replete with AK47s.

Usually pirates are armed to the teeth, so when exactly was it that the crew and captain were ever out of imminent danger? All you need is one twitchy finger.

If you need special authorization for Rule of Engagement (ROE) over and above regular standards of engagement no wonder this escapade took 5 days.

But hey it didn't take slow the pirates down a bit as they took another 4 ships the following day, albeit without American flags.

The four pirates who attacked the Alabama were between 17 and 19 years old, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said.

"Untrained teenagers with heavy weapons," Gates told students and faculty at the Marine Corps War College. "Everybody in the room knows the consequences of that."

U.S. officials were now considering whether to bring the fourth pirate, who surrendered shortly before the sniper shootings, to the United States or turn him over to Kenya. Both piracy and hostage-taking carry life prison sentences under U.S. law.

Cheers

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group "True North"

"Is it just me or is Obama a black Jack Layton"

both are useless, empty , ballsacks

Sure you have ET. President Johnson. Remember those guys? Calling yea or nay on air strikes from the White House situation room? Oh yeah.

But Obama does seem to be reaching for new lows here, if only because Johnson's crew of worthless d1ckheads have already blazed this trail. The One follows this path knowing full well exactly what the results are going to be (dead soldiers) and not caring a damn.

Johnson at least had the stupidity excuse. He was just too dumb to figure out what was going to happen.

I think the US did the right thing. The goal is to get the captain back alive and they succeeded. They tried negotiating and it bought them enough time to understand the pirates, do some planning and to sneek 3 snipers onboard (it probably took a few days to figure out how to get them there and get them there undetected. Saying repeatedly that the captain was in danger is just good PR in case you have a bunch of nuts trying to defend the pirates. Saying that Obama made the decision is also a good thing because he is still in everyone's good books.

In the Battle of Mogadishu, 1993, the Americans killed an estimated 1,000 members of Somali militia at a cost of 18 American lives. This prompted Bill Clinton to withdraw U.S. troops from the mission. In a country where life is cheap you can draw your own conclusions as to what lesson Somali warlords drew from this. It should also be noted that Osama Bin Laden specifically mentioned this engagement and withdrawal as an example of the West's lack of resolve in one of his "weak horse/strong horse" pronouncements.
FBI negotiating teams be damned. The U.S. Navy should take a page out of history books and attach a sufficient number of hangnooses onto their davits and announce their intentions to use them to their fullest at the earliest opportunity. Mind you, I'm also fine with the use of snipers, 5 inch cannons and Vulcan gatling gun systems also.
Of course, they could take a page instead from the Canadian Navy and fly a helicopter overhead hanging a sign that read "Stop". How is that Canadian government literacy program in Somalia doing anyways?

Micromanaging a military operation from thousands of miles away by an individual with no military experience is a recipe for disaster. The only role of the CIC should be to ask the military to act to perform a given mission and then leave all the details of how that operation is conducted to the local commander. Seems very straightforward to me but democratic presidents seem incapable of understanding this principle.

"Is it just me or is Obama a black Jack Layton?" Or a black Jimmy Carter.

Obama's only passion is the redistribution of wealth based upon taking it away from "them" and giving it to the people who adore him.

Who said, "Money can't buy me love"?

Everything else is a "distraction" that can only be judged by the degree to which it enhances or degrades his image.

Let's see:

Bump off a couple of funky Somalian teens?

Hell, the Captain's from Vermont ... they're with us ... it'll offset the military budget cuts ... sure ... why not?

Now ... um ... let's get back to the important stuff ...

Shite I have to do more than say present? Ok I'll hmm..eh..I... Is it above the captain's pay grade? hmm..eh..I will show that American lives are sacrosanct but hmm..I.. gotta do it so he takes the fall if it goes wrong. Rahm get out the spin dryer just in case someone should blame me for anything.
Who knows maybe he learned something. People that do this kind of stuff are very very good at it and you should pretty much stay out of the way 'till it's over..then take credit.

The only way the Military will look up to this Obama prick is from a grave. Hopefully they and everyone else can get the hell out of Iraq and Afghanistan as quickly as possible. With Bozo in command you know Afghanistan will become another political/Viet Nam War with Pakistan the politically untouchable supplier of arms and insurgents as was China and Russia in Viet Nam.

All the right I felt and still feel about that area is no more, get out before this black Alfred E Newman commander in chief lets has roof fall in. I with draw any and all my support for the cause in Afghanistan with this idiot in charge, bring our guys home ASAP. Harms way is about to become a highway.

maybe obama should be in a lifeboat.

et, this was an act of war.

Good field work.

Bad office work.

Again.

R Clarkson, if I remember the story correctly, the stop sign was hanging out the helicopter... directly beneath the door gun.

And the pirates ran away, too.

Its like I always say, you can get more with a smile and a door gun than you can with just a smile.

...Canadian Navy and fly a helicopter overhead hanging a sign that read "Stop" ~ R Clarkson

That would have to be: "Arrêt / Stop"

"Shite I have to do more than say present?"

Yes BO's voting history in the Senate reminds me of the "Flight of the Concords"(highly recommended) and a meeting with their manager: "Jermaine present, Brit present, Murray present"

It seems the American electorate has the combined IQ of the three chaps from New Zealand. BONGGGG!

WRT micromanaging military operations, I’m reminded of the ship that threatened the American war ship during the American Primaries. Fred Thompson said something about “meeting them virgins”. The question was “do you approve of how the Captain handled the situation”. Each GOP respondent stated only the Captain is in the position to make that decision, and they would defer to his training/expertise(and the fact he’s f’n there). I sure would have liked to hear how the Democrat candidates would have answered this same question; but, if I remember correctly during the Democratic primaries, they didn’t have discussions about things like policy.

glas

Don't know if that will work. There ain't too many muzzies named Art.

>>The four pirates who attacked the Alabama were between 17 and 19 years old, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said.

That's an average age of 18. As we were repeatedly reminded at the time, that was also the average age of US soldiers in Vietnam. So, what's the problem?
I was able to join the Canadian Militia at the age of 15 by lying about my age, a fact that the persons who signed me up were well aware of. Did that make me a "child soldier"? At that time, shortly after the end of hostilities in Korea, there was a distinct possibility that my unit might have been called up and sent there, if the fighting broke out anew.

Albertaclipper,

Child Soldier?...as I have been pointing out repeatedly....NO...you would have had to have been under 15 to be a child soldier. Now whether you were legal under canadian law is a different matter, but by Geneva and by statutes used to convict Charles Taylor and others it is under 15 not 15 and under. Omar Khadr was not a child soldier.

As for the issue, well I heard a day or so before the incident that the UN navy was beginning to chafe under White House restrictions. It was quiet unattributed sources, so clearly the Navy got it done.

I have less toruble with Obama wanting to be careful, he is new at this after all....but one hopes he has learned his lesson that the US military is actually pretty good at there jobs and just because the RoE under Bush gave them significant freedom of action doesnt mean they were bad.

I think Obama is actually liking the kudos he is getting, so maybe some trust has been built. Nothing wrong with civilian control, it is civilian meddling that the issue is.

Let's face it somebody has this event on video. I'm definitely looking forward to a YouTube of the headshots.

YO HO HO and a bottle o'rum.

Agree with several points. First, having military operations directed from the White House is a formula for disaster. Second, the pirates will respond to what pirates have responded to down through the ages i.e. hanging from the yard arm. Third, although we can't be absolutely sure, it seems that Obama is all politics all the time.
But you've got to admire the snipers. Hot Damn! Three co-ordinated shots, at sea i.e. targets moving on the swells, at dusk, with the hostage under imminent threat. Well done!

You never know. Perhaps one of the Pirates is a family member of Obama. Obam with his minions cannot wait for the day of Americas fall. He holds a gun to the Republics head. The bow before a King of Islam has proved his loyalties.

Phantom

You may be right but I'm pretty sure I read a National Post article a few days ago stating that the chinooks deployed in Afghanistan are deploying the first air gunners since the 2nd world war. Might be Air Force specific but I don't recall.

Phanton

Beg yer pardon I think that should be Army specific.

a couple of years of spin and the "dear leader " himself will have wrestled these pirates to the ground.

four legs good, two legs better. ever notice how closely North Korea parallels Animal Farm. and now the MSM has Obama on the same path.

The one certainty is that there are three less pirates to worry about.

Someone mentioned it took three days because it took that long for the seals to get there. I don't think so, Tim. Those lads, and probably the JTF and other elite groups, have a plan and a contingency plan for every likely or unlikely scenario of the face of this planet. I'm willing to be the Great "O" hasn't a clue where all his special black ops groups are.

The issue of the missing birth certificate aside....I thought the ultimate in misinformation was a commentator remarking on the signifigance of a "descendant of slaves" being POTUS.
Actually because OBAMA hails directly from Kenya there are no american slaves in his ancestry but specifically he is the ancestor of a signifigant chief know as a MAJOR SLAVE TRADER.
The obscenity of an inexperienced poser micro-managing a military operation a world away is obvious.

edit:

specifically he is the ancestor of a signifigant chief know as a MAJOR SLAVE TRADER.

ancestor---change to descendant and know for known.

I'm willing to be the Great "O" hasn't a clue where all his special black ops groups are.~Texas Canuck

Despite the gaping opportunity to make a joke of colour, I'm actually curious whether (and why) this hostage rescue incident would be categorized as black ops.

Funny the birthplace of the "Dear Leader" of North Korea is in dispute as well.

Soviet records show that Kim Jong-il was born in the village of Vyatskoye, near Khabarovsk, in 1941,[2] where his father, Kim Il-sung, commanded the 1st Battalion of the Soviet 88th Brigade, made up of Chinese and Korean exiles. Kim Jong-il's mother, Kim Jong-suk, was Kim Il-sung's first wife. During his youth in the Soviet Union, Kim Jong-il was known as Yuri Irsenovich Kim (Юрий Ирсенович Ким), taking his patronymic from his father's Russified name, Ir-sen.

Kim Jong-il's official biography[6] states that he was born in a secret military camp on Baekdu Mountain (백두산) in northern Korea on 16 February 1942.[7] Official biographers claim that his birth at Baekdu Mountain was foretold by a swallow, and heralded by the appearance of a double rainbow over the mountain and a new star in the sky. so Obamessiah like I could puke.

cconn: "it probably took a few days to figure out how to get them [the Navy Seals snipers] there and get them there undetected."

Well, uh, these are Navy Seals. I'm pretty sure these guys could have figured out this manoeuvre pretty quick -- they've had lots of top-notch training, they can swim underwater, they're really cool under pressure, otherwise they wouldn't be Navy Seals -- and were just waiting around, with twitchy fingers, for the OK from the White House.

Does anyone know just how it is that Obama had the last word? What's the process? I've read the links, I've read how the Navy had to ask TWICE for Obama to reinstate their authority to act if the hostage was in imminent danger.

Like other posters have pointed out, the MINUTE the pirates boarded that ship, not only was the Captain in imminent danger, his whole crew was.

I just want to commend the actions of the Seals, which in no way reflect Obama's hesitations.

Wow, I made a funny and didn't realize it (black ops, eh).

Seriously, while the rescue wasn't "black ops", there are Seal teams all over doing stuff who's stories might never see the light of day. Their plans and whereabouts aren't in the Social Register section of the NY Times. Some stories that do make it to public are incredible.

We should rather be reaching out to the moderate pirate community.
Actions like this radicalise pirates and will just recruit more callow youth to the pirate worldview.
We will be creating millions of little Eichpirates (to paraphrase Ward Churchill)
Our gurnards will be swimming home to roost.

I read (can't remember where} the Seals HALO jumped in at night , the ship sent out boat to collect them ,they were stationed on the fantail and waited for the opportunity (and permission).

Of all the things that BO has done to discourage me about his fitness as president this micro managing of the rules of engagement is theist sickening and worrisome thusfar.

LBJ has been mentioned above an he was similarly affli ted with this disastrous tendency. When the enemies of the US firghre out that just holding one American hostage gets you a direct line to the WH then the whole adminstrations leadership can be effectively taken hostage at will.

Sickening.

"And with Obama at the helm, not Bush, the reporters don't have to spend the rest of the weekend trying to prove that the three dead pirates were just three guys who happened to be on the boat"

Borrowing from a guy named Rodger......

Its like he wanted to be able to vote "Present" and yet call himself a man of action.

"What should have been a standoff lasting only hours — as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its team of NSWC operators to steam to the location — became an embarrassing four-day-and-counting standoff between a rag-tag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship.

Initially Phillips escaped his captors and bravely jumped into the water. The Navy commander could have fired on the pirates but Commander in Chief Obama, safely ensconced in the White House and still all warm and fuzzy from the cynical applause he received on his expensive--but futile--overseas trip, denied the Navy permission to mount a rescue operation because--oh dear!--the pirates might be injured"

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/04/who_gets_credit_for_the_rescue.html

Did anyone see the original breaking news report on CNN when the Phillips rescue was announced to the crew waiting on the Maersk Alabama?

The crew members castigated the press for endangering their lives and the captains as well as the military.

Prior to the rescue the international media were blabbing about the arrival of the Navy and reporting on their proximity to the scene. Giving information to the Somali scumbags far and wide.

Seems that CNN has put that video down the memory hole!

I initialy thought that they would send in divers but probably the visibility would have been too good therefore the divers would have been spotted.

So, the next alternative is several snipers, one target each, firing simultaneoulsy.

This is what happened.

It's a pity that central political control was asserted, for vain PR, not military, reasons. This can give our enemies an idea of how to approach future "negotiations".

First test of the presidency: Obama ices 3 miserable losers and rescues the captain. Obama aced it. Can you say "Hero"?

Compared to: "alright you covered your ass" to the CIA briefer warning of imminent attack; 3000 people killed in the biggest mass murder on US soil as a result; a war fought not against the mass murderers but for a bullshit oil-looting neocon plan; a war that goes disastrously as Osama Bin Laden continues making tapes; and a US city obliterated from the earth.

Gee, no wonder you guys give off the odour of sour grapes all the time!

ET Don't forget the One comes from that region. He is not reliable in times of crisis.

Hey bleet, I've yet to see the US service stations serving up Saddam Heussien brand high octane. It's been almost 8 years too. Did this alleged theft of Iraqi oil suddenly end when Barry O took the oath of office, or is it still flowing?

Obama 'ices' the pirates? Yeah right. Barry couldn't figure out a slingshot let alone find the business end of a Marine's rifle.

You'll be waiting for some time to come for that unicorn that Obama promissed you.

God, I wish I was squeezing that trigger. Hoping the pirates were blasted with mighty 50BMG and not with puny 7.62x51!

"First test of the presidency: Obama ices 3 miserable losers and rescues the captain. Obama aced it. Can you say "Hero"?"

Bleet, the First Mutt didn't do any of that. He sat in the oval orifice and told the guys to do what he knew they were going to do anyway. He did't make that call, his military chief of staff did. The man's no hero. I understand he still can't straighten up without putting his back out.

You know why he had to get a purebred dog eh? The title of First Mutt was already taken...

Hey eskimo

Just because Bush & co. were/are corrupt liars, no-one said they were competent ones. The revenue from that oil was also supposed to pay for the war, they said.

Nope! 4000 dead for no reason and the US public are paying the trillions of dollars for the purposeless war, thereby precipitating the current economic crisis.

Heckuva job, Bushie.

"Bleet, the First Mutt didn't do any of that. He sat in the oval orifice and told the guys to do what he knew they were going to do anyway. He did't make that call, his military chief of staff did. The man's no hero. I understand he still can't straighten up without putting his back out"-

SKIP

So do these same set of rules apply when you brain turds say that Bush kept America safe?

You guys are so desperate it really is sad.
I think you would rather they would have died than the troops succeeed you guys dont support the troops.

Works both ways doesnt it?

Yes, right of centre, it really is sad isn't it?

It's like their cheerleader saying he wants the President to fail.

They're 'party over country' traitors.

Patterico.com Post: Poll - August 19, 2006 -

"Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not?" Dem = 51% No.

P.S.: "Dissent is patriotic."

"So do these same set[sic] of[sic] rules apply..."
To the effect that W. didn't micro-manage the battlefield from the White House, yes.

"...3000 people killed in the biggest mass murder on US soil as a result"

Thank heavens 9/11 was entirely attributable to Bush, and that clinton's previous half-dozen or so worthless responses to terrorism against the US had absolutely nothing to do with it. Oh, and you forgot to mention Bush was reading "My Pet Goat" when the planes hit. And fire doesn't melt steel, either.

"It's like their cheerleader saying he wants the President to fail. They're 'party over country' traitors"

You mean traitors like democrats who sabotaged the war in Iraq at every convenient opportunity, for political purposes? Or harry reid who traitorously proclaimed "The war is lost", before the successful surge was engaged? Those kinds of traitors?

Oops! I forgot. Hillary clinton can say, "It's not un-American to proclaim you disagree and protest against your president", and it's certainly not treasonous. Treason only surfaces when people speak out and it's the democrats and obama in power, right?

Actually, it's surprising you can see events on earth at all, bleet, from whatever planet or terrestrial body upon which you live. It's a long way to look, eh?

mhb23re
at gmail d0t calm

"I'm willing to be the Great "O" hasn't a clue where all his special black ops groups are." Texascanuck

He wouldn't. Neither would any other politician, and for good reasons:
a) politicians are genetically unable to STFU and some of them think it would be a great thing to get their own soldiers killed doing something to which they object, like taking out scumbags (that pretty much covers all of the left side of the spectrum and a fair chunk of the right as well); or to get some political mileage
b) to cover the boss' butt through something called plausible deniability.

Any black ops whose details are known to anyone outside the chain of command are by definition blown. The only thing the Prez or our PM needs to know is that a) there is the capacity to take action, and b) they need to make the call as to whether or not the action needs to be taken (Special Forces are a strategic asset and thus their employment is held at the strategic, i.e. top military leadership advising the political leadership level). The rest is up the military chain of command to execute, and with SF, that chain of command is very short indeed.

I don't believe that the big Owe did anything in regards to this crisis except claim the credit at the end of it. My speculation is that no one actually asked Owe and the lower echelons worried about what to do. After waiting for the dithering to end the officer in command took it upon himself to dispatch the pirates and dare Owe to fire him or take the credit. Owe took the credit and the officers in the military have taken note. It wouldn't surprise me if similar actions spring up in other places where the US military is faced with a put up or shut up situation.

mhb:

When Clinton got word a bombing plot was planned for LAX on the turning of the millenium he brought the heads of the CIA, FBI & everyone else into his office, they brainstormed, and the miserable sacks of sh*t were caught at the border before they could carry out their plan.

Bush got his briefing, said "Okay you covered your ass" and continued with his vacation. Result: 9-11.

End of conversation.

mhb:

I believe the original quote by Rush was: “If Obama's plan is to remake America into a socialist state, I hope he fails."

Having seen how socialist, national socialist and other totalitarian states suck creativity out of human beings, I would agree with the sentiment.

Truth of the matter is, Obama would be content to turn America into a Trudeau-like Canada and that's bad enough.

bleet, here's a precis of anti-US terrorism while on clinton's watch:

26FEB93: Terrorist 1st attack on WTC, killing 6 and wounding over 1,000. Clinton's response to this: treat as criminal activity vs terrorism

13NOV95: Terrorists attack US training facilty in Saudi Arabia, killing 5 Americans and 2 Indians.

25JUN96: Terrorists attack a Marines barracks (the Khobar Towers apartments) in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. Outcome: 19 dead Americans and 300 wounded.

7AUG98: Terrorists strike at (3) separate US Embassies in Africa - Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam. Total 224 dead and thousands wounded.

12OCT00: Terrorists bomb the USS Cole, killing 17 sailors and wounding 37 others. Unless I'm mistaken, this was when clinton bombed a sudan aspirin factory as a bait/switch from his impeachment trial.

And let's not forget clinton had bin laden on a silver platter, but let him go. Clinton's deputy AG jamie gorelick was responsible for the intelligence "wall" erected in the 90s that hampered domestic counterintelligence and was a major factor leading up to 9/11, although her co-authored 911 Commission report denies this (quelle surprise!). She should've been testifying in front of the Commission, rather than sitting on it.

All these useless responses to terrorist attacks on US soil by the clinton administration emboldened the islamists to prepare and execute 9/11. If the clinton administration had any useful intel pre-911, why did they not act on it themselves? Apparently you are correct, bleet: but the CYA was done by clinton & pals on their way out the door. And the Bush admin was entirely at fault for 9/11 for not rushing hither & yon on this "intel" that the clinton admin couldn't rouse themselves from their torpor to act on? Clinton was far more effective incinerating a compound full of whack-job cultists than he ever was in dealing with islamic terrorism.

The hated and reviled Bush, on the other hand, prevented attacks on US soil from 9/11 to 2009.

"End of conversation", indeed.

mhb

Bleet is a genius. Wile E Coyote is also a genius. It says so on their business cards!

bleet - (gee I hate to do this...),

When the Arab with the black hair, beard, sunglasses and body odour showed up at the border wearing a "I'm gonna blow up LAX" t-shirt was detained, I'm pretty sure Clinton and Obama were too busy setting up the fall of the financial system through ACORN and other similar socialist epiphanies to even notice.

And, even I am not arrogant enough to suggest the discussion is over. I'll leave that little gem to you and your ilk.

A few corrections, mhb:

The USS Cole bombing occurred, as you say, in 2000. Clinton's bombing of the apsirin factory occurred in 1998, back when, yes, his impeachment trial was happening. Just two years' difference, mhb.

It wasn't until a little bit into Bush's term that it was ascertained that Al Queda was responsible for the Cole bombing. No retaliation was planned however, for as Condoleeza Rice explained "The President doesn't want to swat at flies."

Talk about "emboldening the Islamists to prepare and execute 9/11!" This, coupled with "You've covered your ass" makes GWB's culpability undeniable.

But salute your 'Mission accomplished'-codpiece hero, mhb! He prevented attacks on US soil throughout his term of office....uh....except for the biggest mass murder in US history....

(and then used it to mount a diastrous war that he couldn't finish off, and left office as the most hated President in history)

Aside from all that, though, whoooh - what a record!

Obama is getting lots of kudos for authorizing the use of lethal force. Maybe these atta-boys for decisive action will embolden him to forsake his Jimmy Carter inclinations in dealing with the thugs of the world. The next incident will reveal if he has learned from this one.

a diastrous war that he couldn't finish off

Do you still maintain the Surge was ineffective? As Limbaugh predicted, the closer the dems came to winning the presidency, Iraq faded to the background. Now that it's obama in charge, when was the last time you heard the shrill cries of "defeat" in iraq? Bush finished it successfully, whatever revisionist history you subscribe to, bleet. There are many blue-thumbed voting iraqis no longer in fear of living under a tyrant who might agree with that.

So clinton bombed the aspirin factory in 1998? Thanks for the correction - it was diversionary bait & switch from the embassy bombings at that time.

I see there is little point debating your views of the causes of 9/11, bleet, and I've no desire to educate those who would prefer to remain ignorant. That's your right, so please exercise it as you see fit. Do keep in mind that you appear to be one of millions still in the thralls of the pathology known as "Bush Derangement Syndrome", and it manifests itself even now, when - pssst! - Bush is no longer president. As for Bush as the "most hated President in history", certainly those on the far left - yourself included - will despise him until the bitter end. No harm there; the you and the michael moore crowd hold less sway over ordinary folks than you'd likely care to admit, and it's certainly your prerogative to simmer in your own bile. Nobody really cares.

However, bush governed by his principles and what he thought was best, as opposed to what his coterie of anti-american racist baiters, felons and terrorists would have him do. Bush didn't govern by the polls, nor did he need a teleprompter to guide his every public utterance. History will be kinder to GW Bush than you and your hating pals will want to admit, bleet.

And as for "most hated president", let's just wait until 2012 before passing complete judgement, shall we?

mhb

bleeeeet is a trooooooll and will say -anything- no matter how ridiculous.

Back under the bridge with you.

During WW II the Germans came up with a clever idea for harassing Allied merchant shipping. This was the armed merchant cruiser. They were regular fast freighters with concealed gun batteries which could be a handful even for warships up to the tonnage of a light cruiser. They would pose an interesting dilemma for your garden variety pirate. Escorted convoys are also an excellent idea as well as attacks on shore bases. The worst option is Obama's theory of inviting the pirates aboard for milk and cookies followed up by dialogue.

Did she pick these needles up ? or Did she call the Fire Department ? or just left them. That is my question? Or did she just take a picture of them.

"God forbid the Americans ever have to pay Somolian pirates a ransom."

You will go far in electoral politics with a slogan like that.

"When Clinton got word a bombing plot was planned for LAX on the turning of the millenium he brought the heads of the CIA, FBI & everyone else into his office, they brainstormed, and the miserable sacks of sh*t were caught at the border before they could carry out their plan" - the delusional bleet.

The only reason those Canadians were caught at the border is because they were sweating like stuck pigs, and the border guard, with no orders from above, only his training, noticed it and took them aside.

Yes MHB

The 'surge' was effective at bringing levels of violence down to where they had previously been before. As you feel the sacrifice of US life was justified by that, and by the necessity of removing Hussein, one wonders whether you consider that your own life should be sacrificed to that end as well.

63% of ameican do not feel the sacrfice has been worth it, but then, they're only the people doing the sacrificing. And they support President Obama taking the troops out by 2011.

I'd like to remind you mhb that it isn't 2003, so the theorem you far-right types devised to impugn anyone who had criticisms of your feurher - BDS - really doesn't apply anynmore. Sorry again to upset your little teaparty with facts, but by your own logic, the majority of the American people now have BDS.

They're the 'ordinary folk' you speak so touchingly of, and no, they're not under the influence of Michael Moore, but under the influence of the facts of one of the most disastrous presidencies in memory.

The sad theme of denial running through your post is exemplified by your quoting Limbaugh as an authority. Though I understand he's a god to your brand of frothing-at-themouth far-right zealots, you must be aware that among the American people at large - those 'ordinary folk' - his approval rating is at 19% - Dick Cheney territory.

Your disturbing ease in quoting him as an authority on anything shows how very much you exist in a bubble of unquestioned assumptions. Yes, with your right-wing coterie it might carry weight to reference the wisdom of Limbaugh, to remark on the smashing success of the Iraq war, and to presume that the 'ordinary folk' revere Bush - no matter what those pesky facts, and that pesky ol' reality says.

But outside of that bubble mhb, you just come off as...sad, really.

bleet, there's really no point in debating you, because like most of you on the left, you are not interested in facts. You're not interested in "debate", either, but only in fueling fires of adversity. That's fine if it floats your boat, but it's a wee bit tiring, and belies a deeper pathology, I think.

I've one question for you, bleet.

Why do you hate so much?

You guys won the election; your man-child is president and you control both houses. Your man is doing his best to implement radical socialism in the USA, and his foreign policy is one of appeasement that Chamberlain himself would approve. Perhaps the day will come yet where rogue and terrorist nations are welcomed openly by obama, and the US position as Policeman of the World is consigned to the dustbin of history. Certainly the US economy and the incredible success of the American Experiment are failing outright with current economic policies, and we're seeing for the first time in US history the nationalization of key industries. It will only be a matter of time before crippling carbon taxes push what's left of the american economy over the brink of collapse.

So why, bleet, are you not dancing in the streets? Why so glum?

Why do you hate, bleet? Why are you and your lot not on top of the world? You still rail about Bush II, and he's now consigned to the history books. Why do you fear, and therefore hate, Limbaugh & other conservatives? Can you hardly wait for the day of the Fairness Doctrine, whereby the last possible outpost of conservative free speech is shut down? Is it outrageous to you that there are forums for non-liberals to espouse their views, where liberalism is held in contempt? Doubtless you would love to see censorship of the internet, too; I'd wager my last dollar you are one of the vanguard who defend the "human rights" commissions with all your soul.

Because in the end, bleet, as sophisticated as you try making yourself, you are... just another angry, bitter liberal. You consider yourself an intellectual, but tend to re-hash the same tired old, leftish boilerplate. Doubtless you proclaim to friends that you are - as a true liberal - "tolerant", but in this blog the real you emerges: completely intolerant of anyone or anything not conforming in mindless lockstep with a ruthless ideology that brooks no criticism and demands unswerving loyalty at the pain of ridicule, marginalization and punishment.

Ask yourself another question, bleet: how far would you go, personally, to ensure all others share your views? To what extent would you like to see this blog shut down in order that conservative viewpoints never see the light of day? Do you really honour liberty and freedom: the right of others to speak their minds and hold their own views, even if they conflict mightily with your own? This is the behaviour and ideology of the conservative: they value true "diversity" of thought, rather than stifling it. This is why you are allowed to post unfettered at SDA, bleet; you are not censored by its host, but you do collect the opposing viewpoints you see based on your opinions.

Contrast this to your brethren at leftwing sites, bleet. How many right-of-center contrarians do you see at rabble, for example? There you see true liberalism at work: it's a left-wing bubble chamber that brooks no contrarian opinion, and it is banned should it rear its head.

As a conservative, bleet, I find most of your posts lacking in logic, rife with moral relativism, evasiveness and an angry, snide undertone of condescension for those with whom you disagree. And know what? That's fine with me, friend. I would no more attempt to refuse you your viewpoints or squelch your opinions as I would wish for anyone to do likewise to myself. I understand the importance of a democratic and free society to permit all manners of opinions, even those it feels are politically incorrect, or possibly counter-intuitive to the principles of freedom and democracy.

Can you, bleet, and your angry, self-righteous liberal hordes, say the same?

mhb

Meh.. bleet is typical of the far-left: perpetual entitlement-minded adolescents who have never thought about, let alone experienced anything other than their own egos. His kind is about as relevant to society as... well... irrelevant people whose life is predicated upon sponging off the thoughtful, productive members of said society. His hate and resentment comes from knowing that he is irrelevant and could not make a decent living without the government safety net, let alone prosper as a free citizen, so he seeks to pull down everyone to his small, mean, pathetic level.

Tell me bleet, what service have you ever performed for your fellow humans, or your country - you know, unselfishly putting yourself out there for the greater good? Your kind is good at telling everyone else how great your ideas and feelings are, and how primitive those who disagree with you are, but at the end of the day, your kind is not among the people who keep this country going, who protect you, feed you, pay for your entitlements. We are the quiet people who despair at the idiocy of our politicians, the dishonesty of our media and the mulish blindness of our fellow canadians who refuse to face reality and take charge of their lives. We are tired of you bleet, and your ilk. Do us a favour and grow up already.

mhb, that was a marvelous post. You are a saint.

But, pearls before swine unfortunately.

"I understand the importance of a democratic and free society to permit all manners of opinions..."

See, the problem is that bleet and his fellow travelers don't really want a free and democratic society. They want a society where they get to do what they want, and YOU get to do what they want as well, namely pay for it.

Freedom is scary, because it means you are free to refuse to buy bleet's toothpaste for him. You are free to tell him "no" when he begs for money to save the whales, or save the Earth, or free needles to save the poor junkies, or save General Motors and all those union jobs, or whatever shiny thing has caught his magpie attention today.

He knows you don't want to give up that money, and so he A) hates you and B) supports anything that takes the choice away from you. Pay your taxes and shut the hell up, this is the Liberal message.

Getting his ass in gear and making his OWN money is not an option, because as a proper Leftist he's completely unequipped to do anything useful. Plus, he knows he won't be able to keep it anyway. Taxes.

bleet is left with no option other than to post irritating things on other people's blogs. He is that lowest of internet denizens, the troll.

Thanks for the kind words, Phantom.

What I see more and more is an increasing anger and resentment in many people when they compare themselves and their life situations to others. This is not a comment against bleet, but - unfortunately - against many of those living in our society. How often do you hear people grumbling the tired old marxist mantra "make the rich pay more"? These people need to ask themselves how much better their own lives will be when higher earners are taxed more disproportionately than now. Does that get them a bigger house, or a nicer car? No, it doesn't. By doubling the income taxes on somebody making twice as much as me, it improves my own situation exactly... zero. The only thing it gives me is the smug "satisfaction" that - somehow - the higher earners are penalized and "brought down to size". What kind of life attitude is this, where I can only be happy when somebody else is made miserable? But that is the essence of socialism: the equal distribution of misery.

It really boils down to the sin of envy, and now, with politicians like obama, we are witnessing the wholesale social re-engineering of the US based on envy politics. Obama and the democrats are literally stealing the hope of a generation of young americans, and perhaps older ones, too. Not only are they told regularly that they cannot possibly make a life for themselves without government intervention, but they are undergoing quasi-pavlovian conditioning to detest the producers and entrepreneurs who make it possible for people to have the trappings of life that they enjoy today. As Mark Steyn writes, the government establishes itself as a "pusher" of ever-increasing social services, and more and more able citizens are set up as willing "addicts", with no hope (or worse, desire) to break the habit.

How many jobs are created by people on government subsidies? What capital do they invest to spur innovation, production and economic growth? That is not a shot at those who have fallen on bad times, but illustrative of the simple fact that it takes money to make money... and employ the vast majority of us who aren't able or willing to go into business for ourselves. When government controls the wealth-generating capacity of the nation (socialism), who can be surprised when business falters and hard times arise? When did governments actually spend tax dollars on projects with real economic return, rather than ballot box return? As Friedman said, we must judge all government programs on their results, not on their intentions. This, unfortunately, never happens, and thus we end up with billion dollar gun registries, HRDC fiascos, Adscam, ad infinitum...

We are witnessing the orchestrated sabotage of capitalism in the US by obama and the politics of envy. And in the end, whom does it hurt? It harms the the very people whose jobs rely upon business that is demonized by the demogogues of the left. Example: it's not the highly-paid US senators or congressmen who lose when companies cancel their corporate jet orders: it's Joe Sixpack working at the aircraft plant, and his family. Ditto all those working in the hospitality industry who are losing jobs because of cancelled conferences and meetings that are deemed "unnecessary" spending by the controlling US government (for TARP recipients), and perhaps by others who don't want to appear on the radar screen. These are real jobs that add to the country's GDP, not some make-work short-term government boondoggle that won't be sustainable a year from now. It was Cessna that even ran a newspaper ad after negative remarks from Congress on private business plane ownership, encouraging its customers not to be discouraged by government pressure and to believe in their capital justifications for corporate jet purchases ("Timidity didn't get you this far. Why put it in your business plan now?") Imagine that: private industry pleading with the private industry not to be intimidated by government pressure over asset purchases... !

I tell my children quite often that the most important thing for them in life is to be in charge of their own self-destiny, and to be responsible for their own lives. That there is nothing wrong in taking any form of employment to support themselves, especially when a job is possible over receiving government aid. The time may come when they too need a bit of a hand-up from the government; when the day comes that they believe that their only salvation is to become permanent or semi-permanent wards of the state in order to meet their needs... that will be a very sad day in my life.

mhb
The

"End of Discussion".
"The Science is Settled."

Hmmm, interesting similarity there, eh?

MHb

You'll pardon me if I detect a certain dissonance within your post. You begin my telling me I am immune to facts, yet my last post was concerned chiefly with correcting several of your (purposeful?) misstatements of fact.

To wit: 1) your assertion that Clinton bombed Sudan in retaliation for the Cole bombing in 2000, when he bombed Sudan in 1998, and 2) your statement that the dislike of Bush is confined only to types like me and Michael Moore, and is unshared by 'ordinary folks', which is clearly disproven by the polls of the last several years.

You seem to be angry that I have proven you wrong, or perhaps you are angry with the facts for proving you wrong. In any case, I think it can be seen that it is not I who am "not interested in facts".

I'm much obliged for your psychoanalysis of me based on my posts, MHB - sorta like Frist's diagnosis of Terry Schiavo via videotape. And with about as much integrity and insight, as well.

There are several problems with your definition of me as a 'hater' however.

First of all, do you see no irony that you're posting this accusation in a thread which swells with contempt for Obama and "leftards"? Do you also not see the irony in making such an accusation on a site which is occasionally jaw-dropping in the racist crap it carries?

When I stumbled on SDA I was shocked by the level of racism I saw in the comments. This is quite apart from Kate's posting of racist cartoons in her "Frankly My Dear..." series, and the stuff to be found on compatriot Kathy Shaidle's site, i.e., her labelling of Arabs as "violent retards" and of Muslim children and Native Canadians as "parasites".

I gather they believe they're posting such stuff against the forces of political correctness. Yet surely racist remarks aren't the only "offensive" stuff they could post. That they do so suggests they are rather in sympathy with such remarks - and are conscious that their readership may find communion in the posting of such remarks as well.

What do you call such expressions if not hateful? Are they open-hearted expressions of love and tolerance? If you are so concerned about hate, why do you not repudiate them, call them out on it when they post such trash?

The answer is that you're not concerned at all about hate. You merely think that anyone who disagrees with you is a "hater" - or rather, you can't win an argument based on the facts so you try to impugn your opponent's motives instead (the ol' BDS schtick). A standard, stale, debating trope.

A similar logic is at work in your bizarre statement that I am interested in censoring you or limiting your freedom of speech. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have no desire to censor anyone.

In fact, I invite you to search any of my posts here to find the evidence for you to make such an assertion. It doesn't exist - you have made up the smear out of whole cloth, because 1) you are so unused to anyone challenging your presumptions in the airtight Limbaughian bubble you live in, that if anyone does so with healthy debate you freeze and somehow believe they're shutting you down (oh, my! debate!), and 2), it's just another manner by which to impugn my motives, by assigning to me objectives which I don't hold. But really, such inventions enter the realm of the fantastic. Where's your integrity, mhb?

So, go ahead: continue to impugn the motives behind my arguments, or better yet, make stuff up out of whole cloth that's entirely unsubstantiated by anything I've ever said. Call me any name in the book, but it won't change the fact that GWB is the most hated president in US history or that the majority of the US populace believes that the Iraq war was a terrible mistake.

BTW, thanx for the chuckle you provided when you chided me for talking about Bush since he's "now consigned to the history books" in the same thread where you brought up Clinton's culpability in 9-11, who was president nearly a DECADE ago. Good one!