Thoughts & Commentary on the Obama Administration

[PanzerJaeger]

It's as though the entire people of Earth have turned on the false Obamessiah! And you were there first, PJ!

And all I got was this crappy t-shirt...

[KukriKhan]

Let's see... 500bn remaining of 'stimulus' money. 132,618,580 voters last election (= people who cared enough to show up and be heard). Doing long division......

$3,770.21 per voter. Start cutting checks, I say. Wanna help pay down the Nat'l Debt? Endorse the check and send it back. Wanna pay off a credit card? OK, too. Throw it into your dismal 401(k)? No problem. Let the voters decide.

[Lemur]

You just can't win with some people: Bush Official Criticizes Obama for Killing Too Many Terrorists

At a panel on national security policy at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Friday, a prominent lawyer from the Bush administration's Department of Justice said he was concerned that the higher number of terrorist executions taking place under Obama was compromising U.S. intelligence operations.

"Why have executions increased?" asked Viet Dinh, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and one of the authors of the USA Patriot Act. Citing a recent Washington Post article on the increased targeted killing of terrorists, Dinh complained that "the president and vice president expound this fact as a fact that they are actually successful in war."

"That doesn't mean I think they are not illegitimate," he added. "No, we have every right to kill the other side's warriors. But at what cost? When we do not have an effective detention policy the only option we have is to kill them before we can detain them. And if we don't detain them, we don't know what they know and what they are up to."

The crowd applauded. Though, it should be noted, Dinh got a scattering of hisses and boos when he defended the Patriot Act.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Let's see... 500bn remaining of 'stimulus' money. 132,618,580 voters last election (= people who cared enough to show up and be heard). Doing long division......

$3,770.21 per voter. Start cutting checks, I say. Wanna help pay down the Nat'l Debt? Endorse the check and send it back. Wanna pay off a credit card? OK, too. Throw it into your dismal 401(k)? No problem. Let the voters decide.

No can do Kukri, they might remember that it IS their money.

[Xiahou]

You just can't win with some people: Bush Official Criticizes Obama for Killing Too Many Terrorists

The Washington Post covered this a while back.

The Nabhan decision was one of a number of similar choices the administration has faced over the past year as President Obama has escalated U.S. attacks on the leadership of al-Qaeda and its allies around the globe. The result has been dozens of targeted killings and no reports of high-value detentions.

Although senior administration officials say that no policy determination has been made to emphasize kills over captures, several factors appear to have tipped the balance in that direction. The Obama administration has authorized such attacks more frequently than the George W. Bush administration did in its final years, including in countries where U.S. ground operations are officially unwelcome or especially dangerous. Improvements in electronic surveillance and precision targeting have made killing from a distance much more of a sure thing. At the same time, options for where to keep U.S. captives have dwindled.

The concern is that assassination may be getting favored over detention/interrogation because the administration has no clear policy on how to detain/interrogate. Killing terrorists is well and fine, but we should also be squeezing them for intelligence wherever possible.

[Lemur]

Killing terrorists is well and fine, but we should also be squeezing them for intelligence wherever possible.

Given your side's take on unlimited executive power, I don't think squeeze was the best verb for that sentence.

For a less hysterical take on Obama and the GWOT, Lexington has a nice essay this week.

An anti-Obama bumper-sticker asked: “So you’re for abortion but against killing terrorists?”

Most of these barbs are bunk. Yes, Mr Obama favours trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of September 11th 2001, in a civilian court. But that is not a sign of weakness. Several terrorists were successfully prosecuted in civilian courts under George Bush. And though Mr Obama is willing to admit his country’s failings, he is quite ruthless about blowing its enemies to scraps. American drones fired missiles at suspected Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders in Pakistan’s tribal areas 55 times last year, killing hundreds of jihadists and who knows how many civilians. This year, the killing has accelerated; so far more than a dozen strikes have been reported. Mr Obama orders assassinations at a far brisker pace than George Bush ever did. For some reason, his habit of blowing up alleged terrorists and bystanders from the air causes less global outrage than the smothering of a lone Hamas operative, allegedly by Israel, in a hotel room in Dubai. But whether you think it justified or not, it is hardly evidence that the president is “against killing terrorists”.

[Xiahou]

So your response to concerns being raised that Obama is too quick to kill terrorist leaders instead of capturing them is to post a story that talks about how Obama is blowing terrorists and civillians to scraps? And then you call it "less hysterical"? Ok....

[Lemur]

Didn't read the article, didja? And I can only imagine what you'd be saying if Obama were capturing more terrorists suspects than killing them. Your line of attack would be both obvious and well-occupied.

Face it, Xiahou, if the current President transformed water into wine you'd complain about underaged drinking. If he walked on water you'd declare that he was violating aquatic rights. There's nothing he can do that will satisfy you, short of magically transforming himself into Sarah Palin.

And if you'd actually read the piece I linked, you'd see that he's doing rather better than your boy Bush did on the GWOT front. Not that I'd expect you to admit or acknowledge that much. Ever.

[Xiahou]

It must be therapeutic for you to transfer all of your pent up blind seething rage onto me. I guess I should feel honored to be the target of so large a proportion of your ad hominems and straw men.

And if you'd actually read the piece I linked, you'd see that he's doing rather better than your boy Bush did on the GWOT front. Not that I'd expect you to admit or acknowledge that much. Ever.

Of course, because one editorial would prove beyond a doubt that Obama's been a massive foriegn policy success.

"My boy Bush"

[a completely inoffensive name]

I like Obama.

[Lemur]

Of course, because one editorial would prove beyond a doubt that Obama's been a massive foriegn policy success.

Oh, so your response to a respectable editorial from The Economist is a screed from RCP? Poke your head out of the rightwing echo chamber every now and then, it'll do your mind some good.

"My boy Bush"

I love how no rightwinger ever supported Bush. Sure, you love the torture policies, the Patriot Act, the unlimited executive power, the Christian marketing themes, the preemptive war, the chest-thumping ally-infuriating foreign policy ... but he wasn't really one of you. No no no. Real conservatism is a Platonic ideal of purity that only exists in pre-media Palin and the fevered dream of a Fred Thompson presidency. But a guy like Bush? No, he must be some sort of liberal, 'cause we all know that bad things are liberal.

[Xiahou]

That's right, just let it out. It's not good to keep all that pent up inside....

[KukriKhan]

Abbott and Costello
Martin and Lewis
Gawain and JAG

Lemur and Xiahou

All classics.

[PanzerJaeger]

And if you'd actually read the piece I linked, you'd see that he's doing rather better than your boy Bush did on the GWOT front. Not that I'd expect you to admit or acknowledge that much. Ever.

I'm a little late to the party but I'd just like to point out that that is not at all what they piece said.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Update: I'm still liking Obama.

Will continue to update as the situation develops.

[Xiahou]

From Der Speigel: Obama Unites Israelis and Arabs in Disappointment

Hopes were high in the Middle East when US President Barack Obama took office last year. But instead of progress toward peace, he has shown indecision and hesitancy. With many in the region united against Iran, he is in danger of letting a golden opportunity slip through his fingers.

Obama can hardly count on gaining the support of allies, partly because he doesn't pay much attention to them. The American president doesn't have a single strong ally among European heads of state. "The president is said to be reluctant to take time to build relationships with foreign leaders," writes the Washington Post.

Just be glad we don't have "my boy" Bush around to alienate our allies anymore, right?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Fragony]

Muahahaha YES WE CAN http://www.prisonplanet.com/ron-paul...l-to-bush.html

lol@Nobel peace price commission and allllllllllllllllllll the others who judge someone on the color of his skin.

[Lemur]

Just be glad we don't have "my boy" Bush around to alienate our allies anymore, right?

This from a man who openly admits that he admires Sarah Palin, the closest thing we have to a Bush sequel. Yikes. If Bush isn't your boy, whose is he?

[Beskar]

Muahahaha YES WE CAN http://www.prisonplanet.com/ron-paul...l-to-bush.html

lol@Nobel peace price commission and allllllllllllllllllll the others who judge someone on the color of his skin.

I didn't know you followed some one who thinks Jews did 9/11 along with claiming to have predicted it and who said the apocolypse was coming in 2000 with Russia invading America, and all these sorts of things.

[Fragony]

Neither did I, link?

[m52nickerson]

There's nothing he can do that will satisfy you, short of magically transforming himself into Sarah Palin.

Even then he might be angry with Obama changing gender.

[Xiahou]

This from a man who openly admits that he admires Sarah Palin, the closest thing we have to a Bush sequel. Yikes. If Bush isn't your boy, whose is he?

Hmm, I don't know when I ever said openly or otherwise that I admire Sarah Palin.... but you've never let that stop you before. Project away.

For the record, I do like some things about Palin- but she's far from my dream politician. For starters, she still hasn't learned how to handle media relations at all....

[Lemur]

Hmm, I don't know when I ever said openly or otherwise that I admire Sarah Palin.... but you've never let that stop you before. Project away.

Ah, if only there were a search function for the Backroom. You stated quite clearly that you admired Palin in a thread some months ago, and it shocked me enough to lodge in my brain. You did note in the same thread, however, that you didn't feel she performed well with the media. If you want to dispute this, I'm willing to go through the tedious process of dredging up your quote, but you don't seem to really be disputing the point, just being a little cranky that I brought it up.

As I've said before, if our president ever does anything that you approve, that would be noteworthy. But as Margaret Thatcher, that socialist single-payer healthcare supporter said, "If I walked on water my critics would say it was because I couldn't swim."

[Xiahou]

Not cranky at all, Lemur. I actually think it's rather amusing how you seem to think that I'm some composite caricature of everything you hate about conservatives. What I say doesn't matter, anything that burns you up about the right is automatically what I strongly believe.

I'm sure I've said I liked things about Palin before. I still do like some things about her- but her lack of media savvy and tendency towards petty squabbling are really becoming off-putting. I don't know that I ever idolized her the way you seem to think I do now- even when she first came to the national stage. And since, my opinion of her has only cooled.

As I've said before, if our president ever does anything that you approve, that would be noteworthy.

And if he ever did anything you don't approve of....

[Beskar]

Neither did I, link?

Material is on Prisonplanet itself and it's surrounding sites.

http://www.infowars.com/alexjones.html

In July, 2001, Jones predicted the attacks of September 11, 2001, on his cable television show.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGtOFudmHG8

Also, he really likes to rant about the NEW WORLD ORDER. etc

You probably just browsed onto it, but it is full of all sorts of stuff like that. It is America's number 1 conspiracy central.

[Fragony]

What does Ron Paul have to do with http://www.infowars.com/alexjones.html <-this?

Pretty wild claim, not saying it isn't true but I would have found it by now.

[CountArach]

What does Ron Paul have to do with http://www.infowars.com/alexjones.html <-this?

Pretty wild claim, not saying it isn't true but I would have found it by now.

Ron Paul is a rallying point for 9/11 conspiracy theorists and is (from memory) the only candidate to say that 9/11 needs to be re-investigated. He himself is not a conspiracy theorist on this matter at least, though, but many of his supporters will blindly follow him because of his commitment to this re-investigation.

[Subotan]

Muahahaha YES WE CAN http://www.prisonplanet.com/ron-paul...l-to-bush.html

lol@Nobel peace price commission and allllllllllllllllllll the others who judge someone on the color of his skin.

First La Rouche and now Prison Planet? You really need to get credible sources Frag.

[Fragony]

First La Rouche and now Prison Planet? You really need to get credible sources Frag.

Does it matter who hosts the interview. It's about what's said. You can find the increase in military spending, and the more agressive approach everywhere.

Ron Paul is a rallying point for 9/11 conspiracy theorists and is (from memory) the only candidate to say that 9/11 needs to be re-investigated.

I see, that's not quite the same thing as jews being responsible for 9/11. Not at all.

[Lemur]

What I say doesn't matter, anything that burns you up about the right is automatically what I strongly believe.

Oh, I don't need to put ideas or words in your mouth, you do a splendid job of toeing the National Review party line on your own. You're plenty intelligent enough to see multiple sides to an issue, and yet you inevitably come out with the standard "conservative" line. And when I call you "conservative," I mean in that radical, tradition-ignoring, un-conservative social re-engineering sense that we Americans mean when we call someone "conservative." It's what the rest of the world would call, I dunno, "reactionary" or "rightist" or something like that. Certainly nothing that the father of modern conservatism, Oakeshott, would recognize.

And if [Obama]ever did anything you don't approve of....

He has done plenty that I don't like. What, you want a list? Shall we start with the most recent, his siding with the RIAA and MPAA on a "three strikes" law in the US?