Gay Patriot Header Image

President Bush Congratulates Successor on Getting Osama

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 2:45 am - May 2, 2011.
Filed under: Credit to Democrats,War On Terror

Via a variety of text from readers and friends, on Sunday night, I learned that good news that Osama bin Laden has been dispatched to join Saddam Hussein and Adolf Hitler in the lowest circles of Hell. I join former President Bush in congratulating President Obama and the men and women of our armed forces who accomplished the deed. In a statement, Bush said:

Earlier this evening, President Obama called to inform me that American forces killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of the al Qaeda network that attacked America on September 11, 2001.

I congratulated him and the men and women of our military and intelligence communities who devoted their lives to this mission. They have our everlasting gratitude.

Our intelligence community and the Navy SEAL Team Six who carried out the operation deserve the bulk of the credit, but they could not have done it without the authorization of the President of the United States.  This one Barack Obama got right.

Good job, Mr. President.

UPDATE:   Over the Washington Examiner, Philip Klein has some background on the operation that go Osama.  The president has met five times with his national security team since they learned about the compound last February and gave the go-ahead for operation this past Friday.  (Read the whole thing.)

Sorry, couldn’t get a copy of this song with actual footage from the Wizard of Oz. Still it does express the sentiment of all Americans tonight:

UP-UPDATE: From the president’s speech:

As we do, we must also reaffirm that the United States is not –- and never will be -– at war with Islam. I’ve made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam. Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims. Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.

Indeed.

UP-UP-UPDATE:  “Evil,” John Podhoretz writes, “has been met, and defeated.” On the same blog, but in a different post, Abe Greenwald reminds us, “It is not in the American DNA to waver, to give up, or to shirk its responsibilities. The U.S. meets its challenges.

UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: In a similar vein, Victor Davis Hanson contends “the death of bin Laden reminds us that the U.S. can still take the war to the enemy in his own backyard, and act with confidence and audacity rather than ‘leading from behind.’ Let us hope that Dr. Zawahiri is next — though the al Qaeda generation of 2001 seems almost enfeebled now, and are nearly all scattered, killed, or captured.” Yes, let us hope he is quaking in his boots even now, knowing what the U.S. can do.

UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: Daniel Pipes calls his killing “a body blow to Islamists.

UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: The roots of this operation go back at least to 2005, possibly earlier. (Again, read the whole thing.)

UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: On this one, Lindsey Grahamis right. The South Carolina Republican told the National Review that the United States “‘must stay on offense’ following the death of Osama bin Laden.” “This”, he added, “is not over.”

UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: Bryan Preston asks, “Did Gitmo terrorists provide the crucial leads to bin Laden?” (He’s not the only one). Here’s Ace on the matter, “So, the Guantanamo suspects that some people wanted to release and some people didn’t want to interrogate harshly actually gave up the courier. Four years ago. Ahem.

Share

68 Comments

  1. Did you just say Barack Obama got something right?

    OMG… can I get this post framed so I can hang it on my wall over at LGR?

    Comment by Paula Brooks — May 2, 2011 @ 2:51 am - May 2, 2011

  2. Paula, if you’ve read this blog and paid attention to our posts, you’d know this is not the first time we’ve praised the president.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 2, 2011 @ 2:58 am - May 2, 2011

  3. […] GayPatriot » President Bush Congratulates Successor on Getting Osama Tweet (function() { var s = document.createElement('SCRIPT'), s1 = document.getElementsByTagName('SCRIPT')[0]; s.type = 'text/javascript'; s.async = true; s.src = 'http://widgets.digg.com/buttons.js'; s1.parentNode.insertBefore(s, s1); })(); Share […]

    Pingback by OSAMA BIN LADEN DEAD, KILLED BY US FORCES IN PAKISTAN >> Osama Bin Laden Dead 2011 | News12.US - US News and Trends — May 2, 2011 @ 3:44 am - May 2, 2011

  4. ‘We will never tolerate’ – I have never been a fan of Obama, but those words make me happy.

    Comment by Manawyndan — May 2, 2011 @ 3:59 am - May 2, 2011

  5. Good hit America.

    Comment by Ben — May 2, 2011 @ 5:06 am - May 2, 2011

  6. 4.‘We will never tolerate’ – I have never been a fan of Obama, but those words make me happy.

    Meh. Maybe if he’d add “victory” to his vocabulary and grow a pair re: Afghanistan and whatever Libya is about. Also, the DoJ could actually investigate CAIR and friends.

    Comment by TGC — May 2, 2011 @ 5:57 am - May 2, 2011

  7. Not to disagree with Mr. Podhoretz, whom I respect, but evil has not been defeated. Killing one man… no matter how vile… will not end Islamic Terrorism. In fact, it may well, for a time, exacerbate it.

    Comment by V the K — May 2, 2011 @ 6:05 am - May 2, 2011

  8. Now this is the kind of news I like to wake up to in the morning! 🙂 Thanks indeed to President Obama, former President Bush and all the men and women who participated in this operation and/or have served during the past decade to nail this bastard. So… Obama is dead now let’s get Zawahiri and then bring our boys home.

    Comment by John — May 2, 2011 @ 6:56 am - May 2, 2011

  9. Osama Burns In Hell…

    Trackback by Rhymes With Right — May 2, 2011 @ 7:05 am - May 2, 2011

  10. Hot Damn.

    I’m just amazed the SOB was still alive.

    Hopefully this is more real than Paula’s “Tea Party Plants” we’re still waiting to hear about. 🙂

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 2, 2011 @ 7:35 am - May 2, 2011

  11. A job well done. Excellent news in a seemingly endless stream of bad news. Kudos to Obama for seeing the hunt through.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — May 2, 2011 @ 8:11 am - May 2, 2011

  12. Dadgummit….he’s buried at sea already. We missed our chance to wrap him in bacon for his eternal sleep–let him find those virgins through all that grease! Nevertheless, mega bravo zulu to our intelligence community and armed forces for a job well done!

    Comment by EZVZ — May 2, 2011 @ 8:42 am - May 2, 2011

  13. Revenge is a dish best served cold, …and it’s very cold at the bottom of the Ocean.

    Battle Hymn of the Republic

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — May 2, 2011 @ 8:46 am - May 2, 2011

  14. Following President Bush’s policies, Bin Laden is dead, although Obama will never give Bush credit. Obama also sounded stilted reciting the Pledge of Alligence given the context he’s running for POTUS for 2012. He’s got to do more to get re-elected.

    Comment by Sebastian Shaw — May 2, 2011 @ 9:24 am - May 2, 2011

  15. #1: “Did you just say Barack Obama got something right? OMG… can I get this post framed so I can hang it on my wall over at LGR?”

    Paula, do you believe that George W. Bush got anything right during his presidency?

    Comment by Sean A — May 2, 2011 @ 9:33 am - May 2, 2011

  16. On May 1 (Communism’s major holiday,) the Vatican announces that Pope John Paul II is in heaven, and the White House announces Osama bin Laden is in hell.

    Comment by Louise B — May 2, 2011 @ 10:03 am - May 2, 2011

  17. Sorry I don’t follow this blog more… but I am not a big fiction reader

    Comment by Paula Brooks — May 2, 2011 @ 10:16 am - May 2, 2011

  18. Not to be a wet blanket or anything, but how do we know it’s really him? I want solid proof before cheering this.

    Comment by Jim Michaud — May 2, 2011 @ 10:18 am - May 2, 2011

  19. Ah, so Levi again shows he doesn’t really care about the environment, since he can’t thank President Bush for his work there.

    Levi isn’t comforted by the fct that Osama is fish food, because he’d have to admit Gitmo was part of the eventual demise of the terrorist leader.

    Is anyone surprised that his hatred overwhelms his decency?

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 2, 2011 @ 10:46 am - May 2, 2011

  20. Looks like I jumped the gun by being skeptical. This happened a week ago & the DNA test confirmed it was indeed Osama. YAHOOO!!!

    Comment by Jim Michaud — May 2, 2011 @ 10:58 am - May 2, 2011

  21. Mark Twin once spoke about the power of the lowly comma thus: “Good God, he’s dead!” or “Good, God, he’s dead!”

    Paula and Levi do not seem care much, if at all, that the continuity of our military training the responsibility to the nation of our current President has wiped Osama bin Laden from the face of the earth. What a pity, that in the misery of their partisanship, neither can applaud the military and the Commander-in-Chief for a job well done.

    Progressives really can not take joy in positive news.

    Comment by Heliotrope — May 2, 2011 @ 11:23 am - May 2, 2011

  22. Not to disagree with Mr. Podhoretz, whom I respect, but evil has not been defeated. Killing one man… no matter how vile… will not end Islamic Terrorism. In fact, it may well, for a time, exacerbate it.

    Agreed V the K. I am glad that bin Laden finally got some of what he deserved, but this is far from over. There are too many that are willing to follow his example, and are out there actively doing so. Attempted terrorist attacks will spike in the short term, but most of them will be half-assed attempts by those who regarded bin Laden as some kind of hero.

    I’m just amazed the SOB was still alive.

    Livewire, me too. I thought that he was blown up in one of his caves or some other cowardly hangout, but there just seemed to be overwhelming evidence that he was still alive, and apparently was. At least he’s dead for sure now!

    Comment by Pat — May 2, 2011 @ 11:43 am - May 2, 2011

  23. The news is good, the post is celebratory. Yet at least 2 lefties manage to snark (and show off their stupidity). They must be… unhappy with the news?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 2, 2011 @ 11:49 am - May 2, 2011

  24. The news is good, the post is celebratory. Yet at least 2 lefties manage to snark (and show off their stupidity). They must be… unhappy with the news?

    The news is good, and President Bush had nothing to do with it. You might as well thank the greeter at Wal-Mart or the guy who cuts your hair. The Bush administration and its policies were the biggest impediment to this happening and almost exclusively responsible for the boom that Al-Qaida and Bin Laden enjoyed after 9-11. Bush decided we needed to invade Iraq. Do any of you remember that? The false links between Saddam and Al-Qaida? The promises of WMD?

    Hey, what was George Bush saying about Osama Bin Laden a few short months after 9-11? Something about being “TRULY NOT THAT CONCERNED ABOUT HIM?”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PGmnz5Ow-o

    Oh. Yeah. The internet has recordings of things that people said before.

    The post isn’t ‘celebratory.’ It’s just another example of the conservative movement making excuses and rewriting recent history. Yes, I see the kudos up there for President Obama, but I know they are offered begrudgingly. It kills you guys that this occurred under a Democratic President, so you’re pretending that Bush was a big part of getting it done. He wasn’t. I mean look at the post directly preceding this one. You guys were accusing Obama of being insecure and pathetic less than 24 hours ago because he showed Donald Trump to be making an ass of himself. You want me to believe you’re all excited for him now?

    I’m not so gullible.

    Comment by Levi — May 2, 2011 @ 2:16 pm - May 2, 2011

  25. The news is good, and President Bush had nothing as much to do with it as Obama, if not more.

    FIFY. As Rove put it:

    “I think President Obama needs to be complimented on his handling of this operation. But he did make one minor misstatement last night in that he said he gave the order to the C.I.A. to make the capture of Osama bin Laden. That was to reaffirm an order given to the C.I.A. by President Bush in the aftermath of 9-11.”

    Such orders are matters of public record (when declassified). Rove appears to me that:
    – There is a specific document wherein Bush ordered OBL killed as a top priority of the CIA.
    – Obama re-affirmed that existing order, when he took office.
    – Obama misspoke, when he made it sound like he had originated that order.

    Bush decided we needed to invade Iraq. Do any of you remember that?

    No Levi, what I remember is that:
    – Congress passed a law in 1998 saying that the U.S. President was OBLIGATED to pursue regime change in Iraq.
    – In 2002/2003, Democrats in Congress got on TV saying we would find WMD in Iraq (Sen. Jay Rockefeller did that), and authorized the war in Iraq.
    – In other words: given that Congress has the sole Constitutional power to make war, it decided that we should have a war in Iraq. And Democrats were a big part of that.

    Seriously, Levi: How dumb are you?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 2, 2011 @ 2:33 pm - May 2, 2011

  26. Levi, go read the reports on how we got bin Laden. The incumbent president continued a plan his predecessor launched. Both men deserve credit.

    At this blog, we acknowledge both. Sorry to see that on a day like today when all Americans are united, you have to remind us of your rancor and animosity.

    Post not celebratory? Huh? Including a video clip of a celebratory song about a dead wicked witch? If you’re going to claim, we’re rewriting history, please reference particular points I made that are inaccurate. Thanks!

    And no, my kudos aren’t offered begrudgingly.

    Ask yourself this, why must you attack conservatives on a day like this and make assumptions about our words of praise for the president.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 2, 2011 @ 2:35 pm - May 2, 2011

  27. #19: “He was apparently able to feed, clothe, and bathe himself. Oh, and he dodged those shoes. That’s about it.”

    Well, my question was directed to Paula, but Levi’s response proves exactly the point I was trying to make. Paula expressed shock and disbelief when she read conservatives expressing approval for Obama taking a course of military action that was (based on what I’ve read so far) well planned for the specific mission and successfully executed.

    Paula was shocked (shocked!) because what she read conflicts with her core, unshakeable belief that conservatives oppose anything and everything Obama has done or will ever do because we’re racists out to destroy him and we are so crazy and irrational we are incapable of seeing that we should agree with EVERYTHING Obama says and does because whatever it is, it’s always super-awesome. Liberals routinely call conservatives bleating, ignorant sheep that do and believe only what we are told by the GOP and that no deviation—even on a single issue or candidate—will be tolerated.

    In contrast, liberals describe themselves as highly intelligent, intellectually curious people who make decisions and form beliefs based on logic and reasoned analysis supported by facts. Of course, they would NEVER allow their opinions and beliefs be dictated by decree of the Democratic Party.

    Hmmmm. Conservatives—nothing but bleating partisan drones doing whatever the GOP tells us—sincerely commend Obama for the success of the OBL operation. Democrats—rational, intelligent, open-minded beings, governed solely by reason, logic, and emotionless analysis of facts—in 8 years, Bush did NOTHING right except feed, clothe, and bathe himself.

    What’s that Coulter line? Whatever liberals accuse conservatives of doing, it’s actually what they are doing?

    Comment by Sean A — May 2, 2011 @ 2:58 pm - May 2, 2011

  28. Sean,

    Should we be surprised? Levi would rather the Marsh Arabs be starved to death and the environment destroyed, than give Presiden Bush credit.

    Levi’s upset that a terrorist got wet, and that Osama Bin Laden is now fish food (bacon flavoured).

    It must gall Levi’s little heart, that President Bush is more generous and has more grace than Levi.

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 2, 2011 @ 3:10 pm - May 2, 2011

  29. Levi, go read the reports on how we got bin Laden. The incumbent president continued a plan his predecessor launched. Both men deserve credit.

    How does Bush deserve credit for not catching the bad guy and diverting all of our attention and resources into an unnecessary war that only made Osama’s capture massively more difficult? By most accounts, we were weeks away from catching up with Bin Laden 8 years ago, but Bush chose to invade Iraq instead. Did you watch that video I linked? Bush basically says that he didn’t give a shit about Osama. The neo-cons wanted to invade Iraq and 9-11 was a good excuse to do so. They didn’t need to kill Osama to do that, and it’s more likely true that capturing/killing Osama would have made their pitch to invade Iraq more difficult. Would Americans have supported the invasion in the numbers they did if we caught Bin Laden right away? I think we both know the answer to that.

    At this blog, we acknowledge both. Sorry to see that on a day like today when all Americans are united, you have to remind us of your rancor and animosity.

    I’m unapologetic. I certainly don’t feel any more united with the people who giddily seized upon 9-11 to ram through a bunch of draconian surveillance bills, launch needless wars, and start torturing innocent people. It was inevitable that the man who masterminded 9-11 would die, so you expect me to be all buddy-buddy with the Republicans today?
    That Osama is dead today helpfully underscores how much of a failure the Bush administration was.

    Post not celebratory? Huh? Including a video clip of a celebratory song about a dead wicked witch? If you’re going to claim, we’re rewriting history, please reference particular points I made that are inaccurate. Thanks!

    And no, my kudos aren’t offered begrudgingly.

    Well, it’s just that you mentioned President Bush in the title of the post and not President Obama’s. Kinda seems like you’re trying to carve out a little slice of the glory for your guy, I would say. Kinda seems begrudging, if you ask me.

    Ask yourself this, why must you attack conservatives on a day like this and make assumptions about our words of praise for the president.

    I’m still unapologetic. I don’t really understand some of these images I’m seeing of people celebrating like their team just won the Super Bowl. In a lot of ways, Bush’s reaction to 9-11 was more devastating to this country and the world than 9-11 itself. We’ve been moving in the wrong direction for 10 years, and while I’d like to hope that Osama’s death means we can bring our people back, I’m not going to hold my breath.

    Comment by Levi — May 2, 2011 @ 4:00 pm - May 2, 2011

  30. Levi, please try not to blinded by your hatred of conservatives in general and George W. Bush in particular.

    The facts show that that good man set in place the policies that led to the successful operation this weekend. Please address those in next comment. Thanks!

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 2, 2011 @ 4:04 pm - May 2, 2011

  31. Levi is hilarious.

    Levi and Barack Obama opposed taking terrorists prisoner, interrogating terrorists, wiretapping and tracking terrorists, the use of special operations forces in other countries, and assassinating terrorists.

    Right now, Levi, conservatives are having a field day throwing across the Web line after line after line of Candidate Obama repudiating and condemning the very tactics that he bragged about using last night.

    The fact that bin Laden was killed and the way in which he was tracked down and killed soundly repudiates everything that Levi and Barack Obama supported — and if Levi and Barack Obama had had their way as they demanded on the campaign trail, would never have happened.

    bin Laden is dead, Levi, not because you and your Barack Obama got your way, but because George W. Bush was adult enough to ignore screaming, bleating, and uninformed children like you and your Barack Obama.

    Obama has made the first intelligent decision of his Presidency in this — namely, to ignore you, Levi, and your fellow “progressives” like Paula who are too busy screaming “God damn America” and calling the people killed in the WTC “little Eichmanns”, and do what is right instead.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 2, 2011 @ 4:05 pm - May 2, 2011

  32. Levi’s upset that a terrorist got wet, and that Osama Bin Laden is now fish food (bacon flavoured).

    I don’t know about Levi specifically. But, in a general way, let’s say that some of the lefties out there who today join with conservatives in being pleased about OBL’s death and who give credit and praise to Obama for presiding over it, are/were some of the same lefties who have claimed the U.S. can do no right, terrorists are freedom fighters, Bush (whose policies laid the groundwork for OBL’s death) is a criminal, waterboarding (which provided crucial pieces of the groundwork) is inherently criminal torture, Guantanamo must close, blah blah blah.

    They must hate themselves on some level, for praising OBL’s death today (and Obama with it).

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 2, 2011 @ 4:21 pm - May 2, 2011

  33. Levi, please try not to blinded by your hatred of conservatives in general and George W. Bush in particular.

    The facts show that that good man set in place the policies that led to the successful operation this weekend. Please address those in next comment. Thanks!

    The facts are that Bush never caught Osama, said he wasn’t all that concerned with him, and got the American military mired in a hopeless military conflict in Iraq, effectively playing right into Bin Laden’s wildest fantasies. Bush’s torture and eavesdropping programs flooded the intelligence community with a bunch of coerced, dead-end leads that never went anywhere. Our security apparatus is still recovering from his terrible leadership and backwards policies, and it’s no coincidence that we got Bin Laden after Bush left office.

    And you don’t get to title a post “President Bush Congratulates Successor on Getting Osama” and then start castigating somebody else for being too partisan about this. You’re framing the news with a positive spin on your guy. If I were trying to be partisan, I might title a post “Obama Does What Republicans Failed To Do, Kills Bin Laden.” And if I were trying to be objective, it would be a simple, succinct, “Osama Bin Laden Killed.” Can you recognize these differences?

    Comment by Levi — May 2, 2011 @ 4:53 pm - May 2, 2011

  34. Levi, the facts are that President Obama got Osama through an operation begun by President Bush.

    If you can dispute this, please provide the facts to do so. Thanks!

    And I’m framing this issue to praise both Bush and Obama. Both, Levi. Can’t you get the fact that someone can praise Obama without criticizing Bush?

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 2, 2011 @ 4:55 pm - May 2, 2011

  35. I love how Dan’s responses force Levi further and further into meltdown.

    Case in point:

    Bush’s torture and eavesdropping programs flooded the intelligence community with a bunch of coerced, dead-end leads that never went anywhere.

    Good Lord. So Levi is now stating that anyone who scares up, follows, and tracks down leads is a failure if they turn out to be dead ends?

    Isn’t Levi the stupid idiot who screamed that Bush “should have known”? Isn’t Levi the moronic fool who screamed and cried that Bush should have followed up on more leads and possibilities? Isn’t Levi the one who whined that Bush should have engaged in MORE intelligence activity?

    You could not present a better example of Levi’s utter hypocrisy and irrational hate. Levi attacks Bush for not gathering intelligence and following up on leads. Levi attacks Bush FOR gathering intelligence and following up on leads. There is no rationality, consistency or logic, just sheer, unadulterated, insane hatred of Bush.

    Has Levi never watched ANY type of FBI, intelligence, or law enforcement documentary? Police officers, FBI agents, intelligence officers, anyone in a similar function sift through, turn up, and go through literally hundreds of leads REGULARLY. They hit a lot of dead ends. But if you do not investigate, you never find these things. You do not know if a lead is live or dead unless you investigate it. You do not find leads unless you are looking for them.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 2, 2011 @ 6:30 pm - May 2, 2011

  36. lefties who have claimed the U.S. can do no right,

    This is not something that leftists claim. Intelligent people sometimes say that we can be our own worst enemies, and conservatives deliberately misconstrue that perfectly reasonable axiom to say that liberals think America is the root of all evil. No one believes that.

    terrorists are freedom fighters,

    Same as above. This is not something that leftist claim. Intelligent people recognize that when a country is invaded, sometimes people take up arms against those invaders. This is a situation that requires almost no creativity to imagine yourself in, and again, conservatives misconstrue this perfectly reasonable observation about human nature to say liberals claim that all terrorists are freedom fighters. No one believes that.

    Bush (whose policies laid the groundwork for OBL’s death)

    Bin Laden should have and could have been killed within a year after 9-11. That he was at large for nearly ten years is completely unacceptable, and the fault for that lies solely with the previous administration. Bush’s desired policy was to invade Iraq, and one of the opportunity costs of that invasion was to let Bin Laden escape and reorganize.

    [Bush] is a criminal,

    Yes.

    waterboarding (which provided crucial pieces of the groundwork)

    Wishful thinking. Why should I even argue this point? Conservatives have been asserting for the past decade that the wateboarding policy was inherently justifiable, and that the policy has been vindicated a thousand times over all ready. Of course there was no evidence for that aside from the say-so of the persons who implemented the potentially criminal policy, which is not exactly credible.

    And when did we waterboard those people? 6, 7 years ago? That’s the turnaround time on this supposedly effective policy of randomly incarcerating and torturing people? Arguing with conservatives about the effectiveness of torturing people for intelligence is a complete non-starter, and you’re just terrible at cost-benefit analysis if you think that ten years is an acceptable timeframe to produce results. So much for those ticking time-bomb scenarios, huh?

    is inherently criminal torture, Guantanamo must close, blah blah blah.

    There are undoubtedly people in Guantanamo who have useful information and who belong in custody. It is not at all surprising that crucial information in this operation came out of Gitmo. The issue is how inefficient and hugely expensive this method has been. The bottom line is that we should have gotten to Osama much quicker, and the scheme set up by Bush, which involved us kidnapping, detaining, and torturing random people (many of whom were subsequently released), prevented that from happening.

    Comment by Levi — May 2, 2011 @ 6:31 pm - May 2, 2011

  37. This is not something that leftist claim. Intelligent people recognize that when a country is invaded, sometimes people take up arms against those invaders. This is a situation that requires almost no creativity to imagine yourself in, and again, conservatives misconstrue this perfectly reasonable observation about human nature to say liberals claim that all terrorists are freedom fighters.

    Wrong, Barack Obama and you both believe it, Levi.

    You just keep trying to rewrite history, don’t you? Just like all liberals, you can’t stand the ugly truth of your ideology being revealed, so you lie.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 2, 2011 @ 6:42 pm - May 2, 2011

  38. Also, notice the sheer amusement value of Levi insisting that Bush never did anything right, that no person captured by Bush was guilty, that no useful information was ever gotten out of people in Gitmo — in the same paragraph as he acknowledges that the right people WERE in custody AND they gave up useful and crucial information.

    You see, this is what happens when a moral relativist has to explain why he suddenly supports what he insisted were human rights violations and why valuable information came from a place where he insisted there was none.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 2, 2011 @ 6:47 pm - May 2, 2011

  39. Good Lord. So Levi is now stating that anyone who scares up, follows, and tracks down leads is a failure if they turn out to be dead ends?

    Isn’t Levi the stupid idiot who screamed that Bush “should have known”? Isn’t Levi the moronic fool who screamed and cried that Bush should have followed up on more leads and possibilities? Isn’t Levi the one who whined that Bush should have engaged in MORE intelligence activity?

    Good intelligence methods should result in good leads. Bad intelligence methods should result in bad leads. Torturing people at random is a bad intelligence method, because people will say anything when they’re being tortured. When fundamentalist Christians were burning people at the stake, you realize that each and every one of their victims confessed to being spell-casting, shape-shifting witches, don’t you? Because people will say anything when they’re being tortured. And if you’re allocating resources to chase down leads that are generated in this manner, you’re not getting any close to resolving the problem.

    The goal of the intelligence community is to sort the good intel from the bad, and all torturing people does is clog up the system with tons of bad intel. How does that not make sense to you?

    Comment by Levi — May 2, 2011 @ 6:50 pm - May 2, 2011

  40. Also, notice the sheer amusement value of Levi insisting that Bush never did anything right, that no person captured by Bush was guilty, that no useful information was ever gotten out of people in Gitmo — in the same paragraph as he acknowledges that the right people WERE in custody AND they gave up useful and crucial information.

    You see, this is what happens when a moral relativist has to explain why he suddenly supports what he insisted were human rights violations and why valuable information came from a place where he insisted there was none.

    You’re arguing like a 4th grader, avoiding the question and trying to catch me in a trap that only exists in your mind. I’m fully capable of recognizing that detaining and interrogating people is an appropriate counter-terrorism tactic. The problem with Bush’s detention and interrogation policies is that they were ineffective and devoid of ethics. Guantanamo is such an impossible dilemma because Bush was putting people in there that both did and did not belong there, and then he kept it (and the other black sites) shrouded in secrecy. Regardless of whether or not useful intelligence actually made it out of Gitmo, the policy remains unjustifiable because the ultimate objective of killing Bin Laden could have been attained earlier and at significantly lower cost.

    Comment by Levi — May 2, 2011 @ 7:11 pm - May 2, 2011

  41. Is anyone surprised that his hatred overwhelms his decency?

    What decency?

    Comment by bastiat fan — May 2, 2011 @ 8:31 pm - May 2, 2011

  42. And of course, the little child has to dig himself in even deeper.

    Good intelligence methods should result in good leads. Bad intelligence methods should result in bad leads.

    Let’s see; normal police practice is, when a crime is committed, to interview and investigate multiple suspects. Several of those leads turn out to be dead ends, or “bad leads”.

    Therefore, under Levi’s impeccable “logic”, the normal police process of interviewing and investigating multiple subjects is “bad” because it invariably generates “bad leads” and wastes resources. Levi thus states that the normal police process of investigating multiple leads is “bad” and that it’s a “waste of resources”.

    Now, any experienced and intelligent adult would tell you the opposite — that in fact this is a GOOD practice, because the investigation of multiple leads helps eliminate uncertainties and make for a better and more effective case. But again, we are dealing with childish and immature Levi, whose only hope is to blame Bush and who thus makes patently-infantile arguments like this.

    And then more hilarity.

    When fundamentalist Christians were burning people at the stake, you realize that each and every one of their victims confessed to being spell-casting, shape-shifting witches, don’t you?

    Nope. Because that’s not a true statement. It is a made-up absolute, completely unrelated to the topic at hand — a sure sign of a poor argument that lacks facts.

    How do we know? Because, as the idiot Levi forgets, he and his fellow Obama Party leftists, including Barack Obama, were shrieking that John McCain was a traitor who gave up true information under torture.

    Levi and his fellow Barack Obama Party members, including Barack Obama, insisted that torture worked when they used it to attack McCain. Now they flip-flop and try to spin using drivel about witches.

    Your lies keep tagging you, Levi. First you insisted Bush caught nobody of value, then acknowledged he did. You whined that imprisonment and interrogation were human rights violations and worthless, then acknowledged they’re a valid and useful counterterrorism tactic. You screamed that Gitmo provided no information of value, then acknowledged that it did.

    Again, you keep bouncing back and forth from wall to wall, unable to make a coherent argument or statement.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 2, 2011 @ 9:05 pm - May 2, 2011

  43. Oh, Levi, one more thing. Yes, you were right to note that I did mention George W. Bush in the title, but check the title again. Do you see what I quote him doing? Yep, that’s right: congratulating President Obama. Do you know what it means to congratulate? It means to “to communicate pleasure, approval, or praise to”.

    Ponder this. On a day like today when most conservatives are praising President Obama, you’re spending lots of time on a conservative site (which has praised Obama in at least 5 posts) badmouthing George W. Bush.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 2, 2011 @ 9:07 pm - May 2, 2011

  44. Dan,

    Levi can’t handle that Gitmo (which he opposed) held a man (which he shrieked didn’t give any info that saved lives) exposed him to EIT (which he says doesn’t work) and got information (Which Levi says we shouldn’t use) that led our soldiers (who he holds in contempt) to kill Bin Laden (Who he says is a freedom fighter).

    We have to feel sorry for Levi. He’s just been shown that President Bush is clearly more intelligent than him and has the obligation to drag Levi kicking and screaming into the future.

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 2, 2011 @ 9:18 pm - May 2, 2011

  45. Oh, Levi, one more thing. Yes, you were right to note that I did mention George W. Bush in the title, but check the title again. Do you see what I quote him doing? Yep, that’s right: congratulating President Obama. Do you know what it means to congratulate? It means to “to communicate pleasure, approval, or praise to”.

    Yes, I can see that’s what you did. But who cares? This is one of the biggest news stories in years, and you decide that your angle is going to be the previous President’s thank you note? Look,

    I don’t mean to tell you how to run your blog, you can write about whatever you want. But your choice of words is very revealing here. Republicans routinely attack Obama and Democrats as weak-in-the-knees, afraid to make the tough decisions, naive about security threats, bleeding hearts, coddling the terrorists, don’t support the troops, etc., etc., and now you’re having to reconcile all that propaganda with the fact that Obama got the guy that Bush couldn’t. I know it’s just killing conservatives that they don’t get to be the guys to take all the credit on this one, and you’re really overcompensating by trying to give Bush his due. He deserves none.

    Ponder this. On a day like today when most conservatives are praising President Obama, you’re spending lots of time on a conservative site (which has praised Obama in at least 5 posts) badmouthing George W. Bush.

    I’ve lost almost all of my enthusiasm for having Obama in the White House, but I must say he handled this extremely well. George Bush would not have been capable of this kind of operation, what with his cowboy persona, bullshit tough-guy talk, arrogance, stubbornness, and generally low intelligence, and it’s a relief to know that we have someone that can be really buckle down and be competent and collected in these kinds of serious situations.

    I know you want to focus exclusively on the success today. If I had as lousy a track record as the Republicans do on matters of recent national security, I would, too. But Bin Laden’s death yesterday is just as much about our collective failures in the past decade as it is about him finally being dead. So yes, I’m criticizing George Bush, whose bumbling incompetence in the wake of 9-11 cost us more than we’ll be able to recover.

    Comment by Levi — May 2, 2011 @ 11:09 pm - May 2, 2011

  46. That Osama is dead today helpfully underscores how much of a failure the Bush Clinton administration was.

    Guess you forgot that BJ was too busy shtuping interns than dealing with terrorism, attacking Saddam Hussein to distract from it, and launching a war based on a manufactured genocide.

    Suck it, dipshit. You’re done.

    Comment by TGC — May 2, 2011 @ 11:54 pm - May 2, 2011

  47. Please provide your evidence, Levi, for your contention that George W. Bush would not have been capable of this kind of operation.

    And please address the issue of how the intelligence we gathered and the procedures put into place in that good man’s administration led to yesterday’s success.

    Once again, I wonder at how much bile you have against George W. Bush.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 3, 2011 @ 12:29 am - May 3, 2011

  48. Again keeping it general, the hypocrisy of the Left on this matter is astounding. As noted by Powerline:

    Nancy Pelosi, press conference, September 7, 2006:

    [E]ven if [Osama bin Laden] is caught tomorrow, it is five years too late… even to capture him now I don’t think makes us any safer.

    Nancy Pelosi, earlier today:

    The death of Osama bin Laden marks the most significant development in our fight against al-Qaida… [T]he death of Osama bin Laden is historic….

    And no less a source than Wikileaks (i.e., if you are a leftist and Wikileaks supporter, you should absolutely believe the following and be duly impressed, or else you are merely the hypocrite that everyone always suspected) has revealed that the efforts were ongoing for 10 years, taking that long just because of the interference of Pah-kistan:

    02 May 2011

    American diplomats were told that one of the key reasons why they had failed to find bin Laden was that Pakistan’s security services tipped him off whenever US troops approached…

    The claims, made in leaked US government files obtained by Wikileaks, will add to questions over Pakistan’s capacity to fight al-Qaeda…

    [One secret, leaked] document stated: “In Pakistan, Osama Bin Laden wasn’t an invisible man, and many knew his whereabouts in North Waziristan, but whenever security forces attempted a raid on his hideouts, the enemy received warning of their approach from sources in the security forces.”

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 3, 2011 @ 1:06 am - May 3, 2011

  49. (continued) I think it’s more funny, than anything. Whenever I think, yeah, maybe space aliens would find humanity kind of disgraceful… I think first of the modern, American narcissistic-hippie leftist.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 3, 2011 @ 1:09 am - May 3, 2011

  50. Please provide your evidence, Levi, for your contention that George W. Bush would not have been capable of this kind of operation.

    This is my assessment of the man. I know you like to think he’s some kind of secret genius who was misunderstood, but he was a stubborn moron that was obsessed with his image, and that made him a terrible leader. He doesn’t have the temperament to be a gas station attendant, let alone the President of the United States, and his 8 years of abject failure in that position (especially in the area of foreign policy and counter-terrorism) are all the evidence one should need.

    And please address the issue of how the intelligence we gathered and the procedures put into place in that good man’s administration led to yesterday’s success.

    You’re not listening. 10 years is too long. For 10 years, Bin Laden was plotting with Al-Qaida, carrying out other attacks, and recruiting new members. This is after Bush decided he needed to build himself a legacy by invading Iraq, which has turned out to be the greatest foreign policy disaster in American history. If the intelligence community was able to piece together Bin Laden’s whereabouts at long last, it wasn’t because of George Bush’s policies, it was in spite of them.

    I mean how simple was this operation? Our guys were on the scene for less than 45 minutes. We were in and out. This is how terrorism is supposed to be dealt with, this is how you get the bad guys. George Bush had us invading countries and attempting to rebuild entire societies. We ended up losing thousands of soldiers, our wars killed and maimed hundreds of thousands of civilians, and we’ve spent a trillion dollars and made virtually no progress in nearly a decade.

    Once again, I wonder at how much bile you have against George W. Bush.

    Don’t mind me. I just, you know, would prefer to hold people accountable for their shitty ideas. If you’re going to deceive your countrymen into invading a country for no good reason, I’m going to write you off and I’m going to call for your arrest. You might want to try to find the silver lining in all of these terrible policies, but that’s your problem, not mine.

    Comment by Levi — May 3, 2011 @ 2:38 am - May 3, 2011

  51. No, Levi, I never called him a secret genius.

    Levi, are you aware of all the bad guys we caught or killed when W. was in office? Yeah, it took 45 minutes to carry out the operation. But, have you read any of the articles on how we got the intelligence to carry it out?

    So, please once again, address how we gathered that intelligence, beginning back in 2003 and then we can talk. But, right now all you’re doing is hurling insults.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 3, 2011 @ 2:41 am - May 3, 2011

  52. Again keeping it general, the hypocrisy of the Left on this matter is astounding. As noted by Powerline:

    Nancy Pelosi, press conference, September 7, 2006:
    [E]ven if [Osama bin Laden] is caught tomorrow, it is five years too late… even to capture him now I don’t think makes us any safer.

    Nancy Pelosi, earlier today:

    The death of Osama bin Laden marks the most significant development in our fight against al-Qaida… [T]he death of Osama bin Laden is historic….

    Where is the problem? It’s entirely reasonable to describe this as a significant and historic event that comes far too late. I don’t think Bin Laden’s death makes us any safer and that was true back in 2006 as well. And the reason we’re not any safer is because we’re still embroiled in these nonsensical wars of George’s. Invading countries and plopping your military within their borders for a decade only invites danger.

    And no less a source than Wikileaks (i.e., if you are a leftist and Wikileaks supporter, you should absolutely believe the following and be duly impressed, or else you are merely the hypocrite that everyone always suspected) has revealed that the efforts were ongoing for 10 years, taking that long just because of the interference of Pah-kistan:
    02 May 2011
    American diplomats were told that one of the key reasons why they had failed to find bin Laden was that Pakistan’s security services tipped him off whenever US troops approached…

    The claims, made in leaked US government files obtained by Wikileaks, will add to questions over Pakistan’s capacity to fight al-Qaeda…

    [One secret, leaked] document stated: “In Pakistan, Osama Bin Laden wasn’t an invisible man, and many knew his whereabouts in North Waziristan, but whenever security forces attempted a raid on his hideouts, the enemy received warning of their approach from sources in the security forces.”

    And wouldn’t ya know, it was the Bush administration that was pumping billions of dollars into Pakistan every year!

    What exactly is the point you’re trying to make?

    Comment by Levi — May 3, 2011 @ 2:45 am - May 3, 2011

  53. No, Levi, I never called him a secret genius.

    Levi, are you aware of all the bad guys we caught or killed when W. was in office? Yeah, it took 45 minutes to carry out the operation. But, have you read any of the articles on how we got the intelligence to carry it out?

    So, please once again, address how we gathered that intelligence, beginning back in 2003 and then we can talk. But, right now all you’re doing is hurling insults.

    You can’t just keep invoking ‘the articles.’ What articles? Do you have links?

    I’ve read stories that said crucial information came from detainees in Guantanamo. This is not surprising, it does not justify Bush’s detention/torture policies or his wars of choice, and it does not mean that George Bush has earned a share of credit for Bin Laden’s death. I’ll repeat myself; I am sure that there are people we have held and are holding in Gauntanamo that have useful intelligence. That there are people we have needed to capture and interrogate has never been in dispute.

    What has been disputed is the effectiveness of George Bush’s methods. It is well understood that torturing people does not produce good intelligence. The Bush administration was also in the business of incarcerating perfectly innocent people for years. It makes it hard to find the good intelligence when you’ve got thousands more people in the system who tell thousands more stories when you apply different pressures to them. Bush’s policies delayed Bin Laden’s capture by giving intelligence analysts far too much bad information.

    And as well know, the Bush administration is notorious for being terrible at selecting quality intelligence. Remember when they invaded Iraq, and they promised us stockpiles of chemical weapons and mobile weapon labs, based on reams and reams of conclusive evidence? All of that was based on nothing. They quite literally had no evidence whatsoever. They beat the bushes until they found someone who told them what they wanted to hear. That’s also how they handled interrogations, and they ended up with similar results. When Bush left office, there was still no timeline for withdrawal in Iraq or Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden was still at large. That’s failure, plain and simple.

    Comment by Levi — May 3, 2011 @ 3:12 am - May 3, 2011

  54. Levi, the links are in this post and the other piece I wrote on the matter.

    I took the time to research the operation. So, why don’t you take the time to follow my links.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 3, 2011 @ 4:29 am - May 3, 2011

  55. Well, Levi, if Bush were so terrible at selecting quality intelligence, how come the intelligence used to nab Osama was first “selected” in 2007 — when Bush was president? And if Bush were so bad with intelligence, how come Obama continued this operation begun under Bush? And how come this operation begun in the Bush administration led to the capture of Osama.

    How come you can’t even this guy a modicum of credit? What must you continue to convince yourself that the man was entirely bad, evil, malevolent and incompetent?

    Please note, Levi, you may criticize us for “hating” Obama, but we’ve been praising him for this operation ever since we learned of its results.

    Maybe you must needs attack us because we don’t fit your stereotype of what you believe a conservative to be.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 3, 2011 @ 4:38 am - May 3, 2011

  56. Dan, Levi’s already admitted that it’s his opinion of President Bush that he couldn’t do this. He can’t back up that statement. Because it’s not true.

    Just file it under the same heading of ‘Arabians can’t handle democracy’ ‘the Job of the Supreme Court is to determine if a law is good or bad’ ‘People should be allowed to amend the constitution when I allow it’ and other stupid things Levi says.

    Or just ban the coward already.

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 3, 2011 @ 7:55 am - May 3, 2011

  57. Well, Levi, if Bush were so terrible at selecting quality intelligence, how come the intelligence used to nab Osama was first “selected” in 2007 — when Bush was president? And if Bush were so bad with intelligence, how come Obama continued this operation begun under Bush? And how come this operation begun in the Bush administration led to the capture of Osama.

    I don’t know what else to tell you. If you can consider it a success that it took six years for Bush’s system to produce a piece of information that proved useful four years after that, then you and I clearly have different ideas about what constitutes a successful operation. Bush’s policies directly prevented information like this from being recognized as valuable, which allowed Bin Laden to remain at large for a decade killing more Americans.

    How come you can’t even this guy a modicum of credit? What must you continue to convince yourself that the man was entirely bad, evil, malevolent and incompetent?

    He doesn’t deserve credit. He let Bin Laden escape because he wanted to start a war, and his medieval torture policies had our government spinning its wheels for years. Incompetent doesn’t even begin to describe George Bush.

    Please note, Levi, you may criticize us for “hating” Obama, but we’ve been praising him for this operation ever since we learned of its results.

    Maybe you must needs attack us because we don’t fit your stereotype of what you believe a conservative to be.

    Nope – you’re confirming the stereotype again and again. You’re always a little disorganized when these things first happen (remember this blog’s reaction to the Somali pirate standoff? Or how about the Shirley Sherrod affair?), but eventually, you’ll settle on some narrative about how Obama is taking too much credit and not being respectful enough to Bush or the GOP. A fairly straight-forward story about a Democrat correcting a Republican’s mistake will just become another conservative fable about how Obama is arrogant and hyper-partisan. This is already well underway.

    Conservatives will also take this opportunity to insist that every aspect of George Bush’s foreign policy has been completely vindicated. That’s the exact wrong message to take, but you’ve already been making that claim for the better part of the decade and I don’t expect it to stop. You’ll use that false sense of satisfaction to continue with the typical Republican taunts about liberals and national security; that we’re naive, that we blame America for all the world’s problems, that we want to coddle the terrorists and don’t support the troops, etc.

    Indeed, these reactions are already coalescing on right wing blogs, including this one. You guys are like clockwork.

    Comment by Levi — May 3, 2011 @ 8:45 am - May 3, 2011

  58. Another pointless Levi Rant.

    In the real world, actionable intelligence takes time to gather, verify, and act on. Levi’s just upset that the intel was gathered by EIT, in Gitmo, from a man he’s already admitted he was upset got wet.

    Bin Laden’s death by High speed lead poisoning validates everything he opposes. He’s just terrified to admit he was wrong.

    Now hush Levi, Adults are talking.

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 3, 2011 @ 9:30 am - May 3, 2011

  59. That there are people we have needed to capture and interrogate has never been in dispute.

    Liar. Barely a month ago you were screaming that it constituted “torture” and was wrong under every circumstance.

    If I was being held in a cell, given three meals a day, time to exercise, and not being physically abused in any way – I would consider that torture, wouldn’t you?

    By the way, that’s also the thread where it was demonstrated conclusively that liberals like Levi smear, attack, and try to destroy our troops at every opportunity in support of terrorists.

    Reality isn’t something Levi is capable of understanding. He’s like Barack Obama, living in his own little deluded world, having to insist up is down, white is black, and that, like Livewire put it, everything that he and Barack Obama have been opposing for the last ten years in fact works.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 3, 2011 @ 11:55 am - May 3, 2011

  60. NDT,

    Edumacate me, please. Levi so often takes the most obtuse understanding of a simple set of words as to seem to be an idiot savant, but very, very light on the savant.

    What perplexes me is how he is consistently unable to follow simple logic, but to then forget his own previous semantic gyrations when confronted with his own words.

    There must two levels of cognition at work which are mutually exclusive of one another but do not confuse his synapses as they randomly misfire. You would imagine that such discontinuity would make him nearly unintelligible, yet I can get glimpses of what he is grasping at.

    Do you know any names for this syndrome, besides “moonbat?”

    Comment by Heliotrope — May 3, 2011 @ 2:32 pm - May 3, 2011

  61. Levi, you have yet to address the facts raised in the articles I linked on how the initial intelligence for this operation was gathered when W was president and on how Obama continued a program the Bush team put into place.

    Please refrain from insulting conservatives and address the issues raised in the posts to which you attach your comments. Thanks!

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 3, 2011 @ 2:45 pm - May 3, 2011

  62. Levi, this timeline should help. Now, at the click of your mouse, you have ready access to the facts about the operation.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — May 3, 2011 @ 3:26 pm - May 3, 2011

  63. Levi, this timeline should help. Now, at the click of your mouse, you have ready access to the facts about the operation.

    Facts? That was a list of conjecture and assumptions.

    And even if it’s true, if it played out exactly as you Ace described, this does not change the fact that torture is a terrible means of gathering intelligence, and that Bush’s torture/detention program was ultimately an impediment to our capturing of Bin Laden.

    Do you understand?

    The problem with coercing information out of people with physical pain is that there is no way for you to tell whether or not they are saying something that is true. Normal interrogation methods are more reliable because we are better able to assess the veracity of information if people are lucid and calm. Torture most assuredly causes people to give up useful information, but Bush’s torture program was far too indiscriminate. People were being rounded up based on hearsay and for having Muslim-sounding names. Many of these people had no useful information but they said they did because they wanted the pain to go away.

    The result of this policy is that you have tons and tons of information with almost no way to tell what is valuable and what is not. Do you investigate this lead you acquired while beating someone? Do you arrest this other guy whose name was shouted out, and then do you torture him? How do you allocate your assets and resources? How do you filter the good information from the bad?

    In your view of these events, Bush’s torture program paid off because we eventually got some information that lead to Bin Laden’s death. You breezily gloss over the fact that this took ten years to accomplish, during which time Osama was plotting additional attacks and killing people, and refuse to acknowledge that there was probably a more efficient way of getting this done. Do you think that a policy ostensibly designed to catch bad guys is an effective one if it takes ten years to do so?

    Well, of course you do. We wouldn’t want to say anything bad about George Bush now, would we?

    Comment by Levi — May 3, 2011 @ 3:53 pm - May 3, 2011

  64. The result of this policy is that you have tons and tons of information with almost no way to tell what is valuable and what is not. Do you investigate this lead you acquired while beating someone? Do you arrest this other guy whose name was shouted out, and then do you torture him? How do you allocate your assets and resources? How do you filter the good information from the bad?

    Suffice it to say, neither Langley nor the DIA will let Levi deliver pizza within five miles of their compounds.

    Levi, you have tons and tons of information about the Obamessiah with almost no way to tell what is valuable and what is not. Do you investigate this lead you acquired while reading someone’s views? Do you read about this other guy whose name was shouted out, and then do you cross examine him? How do you allocate your assets and resources? How do you filter the good information from the bad?

    H-m-m-m-m. You seem to be on the sharp horns of a two-pronged dilemma. Perhaps you just blindly follow the Obamessiah and leave the heavy lifting to others.

    After all, it is far easier to come here and pound away like you have something remarkably approaching intelligent thought than to actually debate and issue.

    Comment by Heliotrope — May 3, 2011 @ 4:13 pm - May 3, 2011

  65. After all, it is far easier to come here and pound away like you have something remarkably approaching intelligent thought than to actually debate and issue.

    So is copying and pasting my comments and changing the names, places, and pronouns and passing it off as a response what you consider debating the issues?

    Comment by Levi — May 3, 2011 @ 4:58 pm - May 3, 2011

  66. Well someone has to address your words Levi. You’re too much of a coward to accept what you said.

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 3, 2011 @ 5:14 pm - May 3, 2011

  67. Levi is oblivious to irony. He screams out of the left side of his mouth while simultaneously damning himself out of the right side of his mouth with the same argument. Too stereotypical to carry a believable character in an average farce. Stepnfetchit looked like Einstein compared to this poor soul.

    Comment by Heliotrope — May 3, 2011 @ 8:29 pm - May 3, 2011

  68. Do you know any names for this syndrome, besides “moonbat?”

    I often think that, if Gumby were to be magically transported to our world, his point of view would be very similar to Levi’s.

    In Gumby’s world, reality is what one makes of it. Nothing is or remains what it starts as being; everything is constantly being reshaped, molded, and twisted to suit whatever scene is needed. There is no permanence, no sense of reference, merely an expediency of the moment.

    Such is Levi’s worldview and that of his owner, Barack Obama.

    In the case I suspect for Levi, and definitely in the case of Barack Obama, their worldview comes, not from all that is around them being clay, but from being constantly surrounded by people willing to contort and twist themselves into the most astonishing pretzels to avoid any semblance of reality from interfering with the wild desires of their precious.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 3, 2011 @ 9:31 pm - May 3, 2011

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.