She is hardly what I would call a classical liberal. A classical liberal would want the individual freedom and less government inteference and that is not what she is for.
On the current subject she is still trying to peddle the "Mission Accomplished" BS when it was the crew that put that up because they had accomplished their mission. I bet she would tell you all about the plastic turkey served to the troops as well, yet another lie from the libs.
Meanwhile if it had not been for the Bush administration interrogation, including waterboarding, something that Zero in his very very brief service as senator before he decided to run for president (guess he did not like being a senator because he surely did not do that job any better than what he has done as president) was kicking and screaming about and voting against every chance he got. Now he is trying to take credit for the results of that interrogation as if it were all done by him. Personally the story that makes the most sense is that Panetta gave the SEALs the go-ahead and then pulled Zero from the golf course when it was too late for him to stop it. That would fit his MO a whole lot better than the original story he peddled and also the second and third and fourth stories as well. Wonder which story they will finally try to pass off as the truth in the end. Bet it will be a lie as well.
On 05/08/2011 02:34 PM, MJ wrote:
Bush Would Have Used The BLU-82
written by Ilana Mercer on 05.07.11 @ 8:25 pm
Incredibly, some Republican Party media megaphones have been making the case that Bush deserves credit for the actions of Obama in eliminating Osama bin Laden. There is something particularity rank about this tack. It is one thing to credit the operatives in the field, but quite another to commend a far-removed gas bag like Genghis Bush with the kill. That is if you support what some are calling an extra-judicial killing. A Gallup survey indicates that "More than 9 in 10 Americans approve of the U.S. military action that killed Osama bin Laden on Sunday."
What will it take for certain Republicans to give credit where credit is due? Would BHO need to switch parties (a minor ideological conversion, really).
The same Gallup poll shows , however, that, "Thirty-five percent say he deserves a great deal of credit and another 36% say he deserves 'a moderate amount' of credit. More than a quarter say he does not deserve much or any credit at all."
This is probably a function of the general antipathy toward Obama's policies, and not an objective assessment of the operation in Abbottabad, Pakistan.
Rest assured that if something had gone wrong, the sitting president would have been blamed. "Former President Jimmy Carter knows about that," notes the Huffington Post. "In 1980, Carter approved a plan to rescue the American hostages in Iran that ended in failure and left eight American servicemen dead. The botched mission was cited as one factor in Carter's defeat when he ran for re-election."
The attempt to drag Bush into this says something about the convergence of the two parties on matters of foreign policy. Obama has "embraced his inner neocon." As a consequence, Republicans have few bones to pick with the president on the foreign policy front. What remains in their bag of political tricks is to make hay of his exotic origins (birth certificate), or to claim that his predecessor paved the way for (what they perceive to be) his recent success.
In any event, Bush's military signature is the Daisy Cutter.
http://barelyablog.com/?p=37658 --
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
