The voters of Illinois’ ninth congressional district are an interesting lot. How else do you explain electing this kind of yenta to Congress every two years? Here she is talking about how great the “murder” of Osama bin Laden was, for the benefit of our nation’s youth and their precious egos:
It was huge, according to Illinois Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowsky, who said the bin Laden operation helped change some Americans’ perception of their country. On Wednesday’s “Hardball” on MSNBC, Schakowsky made her case.
“I agree with you,” Schakowsky said. “I think that that was seminal event in their lives, you know? This is the big deal for them growing up. And so I think that there is just a feeling now, not just with young people but getting over this feeling that maybe America’s kind of a loser. And now that we’re a winner, I think it’s very important.”
She also explained why she agreed with President Barack Obama’s decision not release the Osama bin Laden post-mortem photos, suggesting that doing so would be bragging about a kind of “murder.”
“I can’t imagine — what service would it be to the public to provide those kinds of photos,” Schakowsky said. “[T]hat kind of chest-thumping and you know, being — bragging about this kind of murder, no I think the president has handled it just right and most people absolutely believe that he is dead and certainly, those who don’t are not going to be convinced.
In Jan Schakowsky’s world, murder is good when Democrats are doing the murdering and it helps the young people of our nation to feel patriotic and proud of our country. But Republicans are dumb rubes because they want proof. Is it any wonder that this country is slipping into decline, with “leaders” like this in Washington?
People deserve the politicians they deserve I guess.
So let me get this straight.
The Professional Left, the morons in the media, idiots like Keith Olbermann and Ed Schultz and the rest, and all the other pearl-clutchers now APPROVE of waterboarding brown people at a military detention center outside of US legal jurisdiction, in order to gain information for clandestine raids into countries with which the USA is not at war to kill people without trial?
Do I have this right?
Because it seems that the same people who wanted to string Bush/Cheney up for “war crimes” not even three years ago, are now claiming that Obama is a virtuous patriot and fearless leader.
As Republicans in Congress use the Easter break to make their case for Paul Ryan’s entitlement reform to the American people, liberals would love it if constituents would start “raucous” town-hall meetings, a la the anti-Obamacare Tea Party events that took place during the summer of 2009.
Yes they would absolutely if that would happen. Too bad for them, because it isn’t:
How did things go for Republicans in their initial defense of the Ryan budget? Well, consider the intensity of the Left’s desire for an anti-GOP, anti-Ryan, “Town Hall Backlash” narrative. And then consider the relatively small number of “incidents” reported in the news, the sensational headlines that were never written. [...]
It might be too soon to say Republicans are winning the budget debate, but they definitely aren’t losing it, and that’s a real slap in the face for liberals who were absolutely convinced that Americans would never accept a plan as bold as Ryan’s.
Meanwhile, look at this “outrage” at Paul Ryan’s most recent town-hall (via):
These people are outraged I say. Outraged!
President Barack Obama has approved the use of armed drones in Libya, authorizing U.S. airstrikes on ground forces for the first time since America turned over control of the operation to NATO on April 4.
It also is the first time that drones will be used for airstrikes since the conflict began on March 19, although they have routinely been flying surveillance missions, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters at a Pentagon briefing Thursday.
Do we get to call Obama out on the lies about this Libyan war yet? Wasn’t NATO taking over the Libyan operation? Is our national media even paying attention?
Here is your chart for the day:
Burn this chart into your brain. Revert back to it whenever you hear the line of BS coming from the Obama administration, Democrats in general, and their propaganda stooges in the media, about how they and their policies “averted disaster” during the mortgage crisis, and how they saved our lives.
[Hat Tip: Zero Hedge]
So much for the “humanitarian” kinetic whatchamacallit:
The Obama administration has sent teams of CIA operatives into Libya in a rush to gather intelligence on the identities and capabilities of rebel forces opposed to Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi, according to U.S. officials.
The information has become more crucial as the administration and its coalition partners move closer to providing direct military aid or guidance to the disorganized and beleaguered rebel army.
Although the administration has pledged that no U.S. ground troops will be deployed to Libya, officials said Wednesday that President Obama has issued a secret finding that would authorize the CIA to carry out a clandestine effort to provide arms and other support to Libyan opposition groups.
In President Obama’s “we are not at war although we are bombing Libya” speech on Monday night, he assured us that our involvement would be extremely limited and short-lived. With boots on the ground in Libya, I guess that makes Obama somewhat of a liar.
Everyone knows this, or should know it anyway:
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that Libya did not pose a threat to the United States before the U.S. began its military campaign against the North African country.
On “This Week,” ABC News’ Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper asked Gates, “Do you think Libya posed an actual or imminent threat to the United States?”
“No, no,” Gates said in a joint appearance with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “It was not — it was not a vital national interest to the United States, but it was an interest and it was an interest for all of the reasons Secretary Clinton talked about. The engagement of the Arabs, the engagement of the Europeans, the general humanitarian question that was at stake,” he said.
How does the White House reconcile this with the fact that President Obama has authorized the use of US military in the war on Libya? The War Powers Act allows for the deployment of our military when the country is threatened. Our Secretary of Defense has acknowledged no such threat exists. So exactly when did we elect Barack Obama as King?
From the same Jake Tapper interview, this time from Secretary of State Clinton:
Tapper asked Clinton, “Why not got to Congress?”
“Well, we would welcome congressional support,” the Secretary said, “but I don’t think that this kind of internationally authorized intervention where we are one of a number of countries participating to enforce a humanitarian mission is the kind of unilateral action that either I or President Obama was speaking of several years ago.”
Clinton jumped in to offer an extended justification for going to war. “Did Libya attack us?” she asked. “No, they did not attack us. Do they have a very critical role in this region and do they neighbor two countries — you just mentioned one, Egypt, the other Tunisia — that are going through these extraordinary transformations and cannot afford to be destabilized by conflict on their borders? Yes. Do they have a major influence on what goes on in Europe because of everything from oil to immigration?”
At that point, Clinton suggested that the U.S. went to war to repay NATO allies for support in Afghanistan. “We asked our NATO allies to go into Afghanistan with us ten years ago,” she said. “They have been there, and a lot of them have been there despite the fact that they were not attacked. The attack came on us…They stuck with us. When it comes to Libya, we started hearing from the UK, France, Italy, other of our NATO allies…This was in their vital national interest…”
This is the real Obama Doctrine of American non-exceptionalism in action. Having no sense of exceptionalism means not having to take action, and not having to take any leadership role in what goes on. Oh, but we will send our military when other countries interests are at stake.
Isn’t it amazing how this new brand of non-exceptionalist, leftist Democrats suddenly have the backbone to use our military, the same military they loathe so much, at the drop of a hat? Or at least, when there’s an election in less than two years?
Are there protests in the streets yet calling for an end to this imperialist Presidency?