Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Mister Current Events



Libya is in flames. Civilian protesters are being gunned down in the streets, and placards and banners are being met with death-dealing salvos from tanks and jets. Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi vows that he will "die a martyr" rather than step down, and says that the root cause of this bloodbath is "the tyranny of the U.S."

All of which might make you think that Barack Hussein Obama, who championed the cause of the Egyptian protesters as soon as they won, would have something - anything - to say about the explosive situation in Libya.

But nooOOoooo.


As the violence wears on, there has been no official word whatsoever from the alleged president, and the official Whitehouse spokesman says he doesn't expect there's going to be one anytime soon.

However, even Mr. Obama's silence is eloquent...and it clearly tells the world that the United States, at this particular moment, does not stand with any citizenry which rises up to throw off oppression, and we sure as hell aren't going to actually help by either word or deed.

Of course, if that's not the message that Barack Obama wants to send, he should speak right up and say so.

We're waiting.


-
Trivia Fun Facts: Barack Hussein Obama is the only American
president to shake hands with Muammar Gaddafi!


-

32 comments:

Pete(Detroit) said...

"Leadership" yeah, that's rich!
And I noticed that Rahm managed to poll enough graveyards to get elected. Honestly, I'm startign to think the people of Chicago DESERVE what they continually get. Then again, people probably feel that way about John Conyers, too...

Chuck said...

There are no words to adequately express my thoughts. I’m numb. Just when you think it can’t get more surreal, it does … again … and again. And yet according to the Rasmussen poll from yesterday, 44% of likely voters still approve of the job Obama is doing (21% Strongly approve). What is wrong with the 44%, and what possible combination of drugs could the 21% be on?

Suzy said...

There's a LOT going on in the news right now....the Prez is "silent" on all of it. Severe border problems, pirates killing Americans, uprisings everywhere.....

Hope Michelle had fun on her ski trip.

Earl said...

With Libya in flames, I wonder what happened to the Lockerbie bomber who went home to die and was doing quite well last we heard. Maybe someone can help him meet Allah sooner than later. Not that I wish him harm.

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

Chuck:
I believe the 21% who strongly approve include the socialists, marxists and fascists who truly love the path on which Obama has dragged us. It also includes what I call the "OJ jury"; the black racists who see their identity in Obama and support what he's doing to white America because it's pay-back time. It also includes willfully blind and ignorant, like my own mother unfortunately, who bought every bit of the hype and who, like her, have deep seated guilt over their own past racism and can only be cleansed by supporting a black anything. That type is separate from the standard white-guilt-tripper who voted for him in 2008 and now feel absolved.
As for the rest of the 44% who generally approve...liberals and other stupid people who still aren't paying attention. Yeah, they are out there. Some of them can be reached by 2012, but I think we should focus on the independents (not the moderates who cannot admit that they are liberals so they call themselves something else, like "independent"). I would love to see the independents support conservatives and not just Republicans who do run the gamut from Sarah Palin on the right to Lindsey (Goober) Graham in whatever universe he's floating. The hard part is that they have to "come to Jesus" on their own and figure out the truth about Obama through clear-eyed observation. They will get no honest examination of him or his Bam-caused disasters from the fluffers in the MSM.

Suzy said...

Hoosier, I think too, part of them are people who really do not like Obama but are too proud to admit they'd rather have someone else in office. So they go ahead and say "Obama" for the poll, but they know very well they'd not vote for him a second time.

StupidLiberal said...

Ok, I've got to speak up.

I voted for Obama, and approve of his performance as president. There are things I wished he had taken stronger stances on, like a single payer system, Afghanistan, and DADT, but in general I approve. He managed to get healthcare reform accomplished in this country. He ceased wartime activities in Iraq. He attemped to address the subsidies that qualify as corporate welfare, and making the wealthy pay their fair share of the tax burden. If I pay 30% of my income to taxes, someone who makes more then 500,000 shouldn't pay 25,000 after tax exemptions.

It seems that many of you are caught in the tax donut hole. You may not be poor enough to get the kind of exemptions that students and people that make under $20,000 make nor are you in the upper 5% who make more than 75% of the income in the country but pay less, in terms of percent, then the person who makes $45,000. That's who Obama is trying to take on with tax reform, but you idiots have bought into some weird pseudo-Randian dogma brought to you by the Murdochs.

Lastly, do any of you give a damn about the 600 American's in Libya? That's why Obama hasn't make any strong stances on the Libyan situation, because it's likely that these people would come to harm if he was critical of the regime. But, I get the feeling that many of you could care less about these American's since these are definitely the kind of bigoted, ignorant libtards that voted Obama into office and try to go outside the country to learn what things are like beyond Kentucky.

StupidLiberal said...

Sorry about the typos. The kind of ignorance that gets posted to this blog get's me so infuriated, and I seem to stumble over my words.

Earl said...

Suzy- I agree. Don't know what percentage that would be, but I'm convinced there are folks who would lie to a pollster because they fear being labeled racists.

Jim Hlavac said...

People, the reason Obama has not had the time to say anything about Libya is that he's busy hunkering down with Eric Holder to come up with "defenses" for the Ghaddafy-named, or God-awfully, or, well, OK, Orwellian named, "Defense of Marriage Act" in courts all across the nation. That takes a lot of time. Because he's "for" us he'll fight us in court, uh huh. He's not just doing this to you folks, or Libyans, trust me.

Anyway, we gay folks apologize for taking the president away from more important matters than sissy smooching, like the conflagration in Arabia and the destruction of the economy.

Though I will inform you all -- Obama is the reason we're falling in love with a woman for the first time in our lives: Sarah Palin.

Meanwhile, God Bless and preserve the people of Libya against the onslaught.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Jim - Sarah Palin - NICE one!

SLib - at least you're consistent. As for 'fairing' up the taxes, I'm all for it - a nice flat tax would be just spiffy, as far as I'm concerned. Not going to attempt to discuss right / wrong of "healthcare reforms" that were shoved on us, vs ones that might actually improve things - I suspect your mind is made up about as solidly as mine. As far as the '600' Americans in Libya, why yes, I *do* care. I'm just curious a) why they didn't leave a week ago, and b) what the heck are they doing there in the first place? But that's all water under the bridge at this point, and yes, let's get them the hell out of there asap.
Whether or not that has anything to do w/ the deafening silence we're hearing from the White House on all topics (Iran protests, Iran warships in the Suez, Somali Pirates, porous borders, etc, etc) remains to be seen...

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

StupidLiberal- First, let me say that I genuinely appreciate the fact that you state your contrarian view here instead of just laying out trollish statements intended to provoke. So let me address your points respectfully.

Obama didn't get "healthcare reform" passed, he got Obamacare passed. The difference is that "reform" word. Prices are going up, access to doctors is going down. Insurance rates are skyrocketing, and "friends of Obama" are receiving waivers to allow them to escape the punishing effects of this legislation.

He "ceased wartime activities in Iraq" by sticking to Bush's plan, Bush's people, and Bush's timetable (all of which gave him a CYA position if things failed).

Regarding taxes, what do you think "tax exemptions" are, and who do you think created them? Tax Exemptions occur when people invest money (or use it in other ways) that the government wants them to, and is generally stimulative to the economy or other governmental goals (for instance, the Evil Rich might get exemptions if they invest in risky "green energy" startup companies which the government has endorsed). In return for investing in these areas, people are given tax exemptions. Eliminate the exemptions, and you eliminate the government's ability to influence these investors. Although as Pete(Detroit) says, I'd also prefer a nice flat tax, with everyone paying exactly the same percentage with no deductions or exemptions. Even though math-impaired liberals frequently say that that's not "fair" either.

Regarding the idea that Obama's silence is somehow protecting the 600 Americans in Libya, the obverse would be that Hillary is trying to get them killed by speaking up. Right? Or is your point that Obama was willing to have Americans in Egypt (hello? tourist destination?) put to the sword every time he opened his yap? It doesn't wash; Obama isn't being prudent, he's being weak. And that endangers Americans far more than anything he might say.

And puh-leeze, do you really think that the Americans in Libya were there to "learn what things are like beyond Kentucky"? My guess is that most of these are (gasp!) capitalists involved in the oil industry... not liberals (or libtards as you call them) who've gone to Libya to experience the enlightenment and beauty of that magnificent culture.

drozz said...

given that gaddafi tried setting up terrorists in this country's jails, personally ordered the lockerbee bombimg, etc., shouldn't the pic above alnoe be everywhere right now?

oh, wait, thought this was a just and moral world.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

drozz- Let's be fair, at least Obama didn't bow...no matter how much he wanted to.

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

Suzy:
If those folks are too frightened to tell the truth to pollsters as anonymous responders, how can they be relied upon to do the right thing when they stand in that voting booth? I just can't assume they will vote wisely once that curtain closes.

Earl said...

I think Obama is spending his time trying to figure out how to turn the Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana stalemates into a crisis he can take advantage of. Any doubts he's consulting with Rahm about these matters? Rising fuel prices are only going to add to state and local budget problems.

Rick said...

StupidLiberal I bet you would approve of Carl Marx and Mao as well. Sad, truly sad.

Jim Hlavac said...

Well, well, Stilton: I stand corrected -- just hours after I said Obama "Our friend" was busy fighting gay folks in court -- he said (I think, if reports are true) that's he's now just today dropped the defense of DOMA. Could my sarcasm have made the difference? Does Obama read this blog? Did he get my point? >> Gay smooching just is not important to the nation. Hmm.

Apparently the president will no longer worry himself with us too much, and go back to the true problems. Like lowering his golf score. Somehow I'd rather we'd all think he fight us and do no more damage to the whole, for we're a resilient sort, and quite accustomed to disappointment, and we're willing to keep the man busy with us so that we can all make it to 2012 in one piece. But then, folks, we expect everyone to be nice for having done run the interference.

Meanwhile, anyone can cause a ruckus, StupidLiberal -- I am a professional ruckus causer, but sir -- egad, what mush.

Meanwhile, of our oil interests in Libya -- there's plenty of oil right here in Louisiana -- and Obama has turned off the exploration and such. So our jobless rate went up. So when he's not busy messing with gay folks he busy messing with every other American.

Still, now that we've fallen in love with Palin, we're not going back to that scrawny creep in DC.

StupidLiberal said...

And I'm the troll?

What is it about Karl Marx that you disapprove of Rick? Is it his idea of alienated labor? The relations of production? His critique of feudalism? Don't throw Fox News philosophy, someone might think you're uneducated.

Beyond that, a lot of the things that Mao did with his state communism was about as horrible as what happened in the Soviet state. I would say we're in agreement there, but I doubt that you really know what happened in either country.

In the end though, I'm more of a Bakunin man myself.

Stil,

Come on, now we're just splitting hairs. You call it Obamacare, I call it health reform. We could get into a discussion of semantics, but I don't think that's the point. He accomplished what he most of what he set out to do.

On Iraq, you're right he did follow Bush's plan and timeline, which was to leave it for the next guy. If you could find me one resource that said that Bush planned for US troops to cease military actions in Iraq in 2010 in the condition that Iraq was I will convert to conservatism that moment.

Since we're talking about Dubya, let's bring up his relationship with Gaddafi. Obama's hemming and hawing on the issue is definitely political wrangling, but what about when Bush granted legal immunity to the Libya from terrorism related lawsuits? Or when Condi declared the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (Libya for the rest of us) to be a model for other nation's to follow.

Man, I wish you had been around back in the Bush day's, you would have told them but good.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Actually, SLib, several have pointed out that your posts are most un-troll like, and have deemed you worthy of engagement. As far as O-care, agreed - he accomplished most of what he set out to. See also $T+ deficits and "re-dristribution of wealth"
That is precisely what has so many of us so annoyed - not only are we against his methods, we are against his goals.
As I understand Marx (which is, I admit, poorly) one of his fundamental flaws is the assumption that the VALUE of a thing is related to the amount of WORK involved. Easily demonstrably false. A skilled chef can take flour, shortening, fruit and spices and crank out a tasty desert in fairly short order. A person of lesser talents will, over considerably more time, and with much effort produce an utterly inedible mess, in effect lowering the value of the raw ingredients, having ruined them. Marx makes no allowance for skill, that I see. Or, take a health care example - appendectomies. Happen all the time, right? Well, State decides that they're to pay $50 each. Dr.Bob is GOOD, takes his time, never has complications and does 4/ day. Dr.Dave is fast, sloppy, horrible scarring, and nearly all his patients have complications (bleeding, fever, what ever) but he does 20 a day. The GOOD guy is making a fraction of the BAD guy. Who will be in business longer? Who is the hospital going to want? Who would YOU want to have work on you?
Ok, so 'to make it fair' we're going to pay them both the same - $500 / day, assuming they do at least 4 surgeries. Now, Dr.Dave is slacking, putting in his minimum, still not doing as good a job as Dr.Bob, and getting the same pay.
The problem w/ socialism (one of them, anyway, and certainly easy to demonstrate) is that it penalizes success, and rewards bad behavior.

Pete(Detroit) said...

And yes, I personally think Stilt WOULD have told W off - he was no kind of conservative either. But. like so many of us, it took a REAL joker to motivate us up off Top Dead Center and start marching in the streets - who KNEW that would be so much fun!

And Jim? don't feel too badly about falling for Sarah - she's got a bigger pair than more of the guys in DC
((-"pb

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

StupidLiberal- No, we're not splitting semantic hairs here. I call it "Obamacare" because it doesn't "reform" anything. Reform implies improvement - but that's demonstrably not happening. It bends the cost curve upwards (not down), makes no allowance for the "doc fix" and is - in fact - discouraging doctors from continuing practice. It's lowering access to doctors and, according to the CBO, will cause many providers of Medicare services to go out of business.

So I'll certainly grant you that Obama succeeded in doing exactly what he wanted, and passing exactly what he wanted... but it's a wealth redistribution plan (and government servitude plan) that has almost nothing to do with healthcare.

Regarding your skepticism ("ignorance" is such an unpleasant word) about Bush's Iraq exit timeline, here are the facts:

President Barack Obama told disabled veterans in Atlanta on Monday that he was fulfilling a campaign promise by ending U.S. combat operations in Iraq “on schedule,” by Aug. 31.

But the timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops in Iraq was decided during the Bush administration with the signing of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) by U.S. and Iraq officials on Nov. 16, 2008. The Iraqi parliament signed SOFA on Nov. 27, 2008.

The agreement, which had been in negotiations since 2007, set a timetable calling for most U.S. troops to leave Iraqi towns and cities by June 30, 2009, with about 50,000 troops left in place until the final withdrawal of all U.S. military forces by Dec. 31, 2011.


I know you said that this would cause you to immediately become a conservative, but actually you'll have to take some remedial courses in history and economics before you're allowed in. Sorry, but rules are rules.

And finally, quit deflecting criticism of Obama by trying to call attention to Bush. Did you even read/understand the point of today's cartoon? Let me spell it out: Obama is happy to shoot his mouth off to blame Bush for everything, but doesn't have the balls to speak to the world about Libya.

Bush was then. Obama is now. Try to focus.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

Pete(Detroit)- I think we posted at the same time. But yes, I would have had negative things to say about Bush had this cartoon been in existence at the time. But they wouldn't have been universally negative, because I also respect much of what he did and stood for.

Frankly, just once I'd like to find something positive to say about Obama, but he gives me nothing to work with other than being clean, articulate, bright, and (until Libya) "present." Then again, that was good enough to get his sorry ass elected.

pryorguy said...

Wow, great opinions! I would say the anointed one is pretty busy huddled with his minions deciding the best way to make the most of all the crises around the world and here at home!

Never forget he is ALLLLL about politics and getting relelected! Not gonna happen though, guarantee it!!!! Dude is TOAST!!

StupidLiberal said...

Stil,

I stand correct on several accounts. Reform is when things like S-Chip are expanded to cover more needy children. Reform is when insurance companies aren't allowed to drop people with "unprofitable" conditions. These things couldn't have possible been a part of the Affordable Care act, your Obamacare. (Hint it was)

But honestly, I was completely incorrect about Bush not having a plan about leaving it to the next guy. It was enshrined in law. The Status of Forces Agreement timeline is one that requires nothing of Bush other then to pass on a mess of an unnecessary war to the next person to take his office. Thanks for the correction.

So, now that I'm a conservative, where do I sign up for my historical revisionist class? The one where Reagonomics defeated the USSR, and it didn't collapse under its own bloated and corrupt fascist weight. Where do I pick up my gun to rail against big government, and serve in a "well-regulated" milita. Wait, strike the "well-regulated" part, that couldn't have been in the Bill of Rights. That would mean the founding fathers understood the importance of governmental regulation. (Hint, they did.)

I agree with you. Obama has made some serious blunders, and is not the cowboy president you want him to be. I talking about situations outside of the context that they came from is something that is done to ignore blame when it's warranted. That's the kind of thing the Hannity's and Cheney's and O'Reilly's of the world do. Wait, as a conservative, I'm not supposed to see their faults or horribly poor decisions, right?

Chuck said...

I was stationed at Ft. Bragg, NC in 1981 when the U.S. downed two Libyan jets. When asked what happened and what he was thinking at the time, one of the Pilots was quoted as saying, “They fired at us, so we shot them down”. A large poster was affixed to the Company Bulletin Board: Libya – 0, US – 2. Here is the incident information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Sidra_incident_(1981)

I wasn’t aware that Obama shook hands with Gaddafi, and the knowledge that he did disgusts me. I would refer to the Americans in Libya as ID-ten-T’s if they didn’t get out a week ago. They ought to have known the risks when they went there, just as I knew the risks of Military service. If they don’t make it, I will mourn their deaths … but it is important to remember that is was their decision to be there, and for reasons that did not involve defending the U.S.

Obama will “support” whoever comes out on top in Libya … when they are there. The uprisings in Iran were an “internal issue for the Iranians” because his administration knew darned well that the Mullahs would not fail in suppressing the people, but he could not very well endorse them. In Egypt, the administration kept thinking they had a handle on it … and changed positions 4 times. Libya? Wait and see. Obama is being silent for the same reason he waffled during the Egypt uprising … he needs to wind up in support of the winner, and he learned in Egypt that it can be difficult to predict the winner early on.

Stilton: you asked for something positive positive to say about Obama - already out there, dude:
"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy." (Biden).
Or if you prefer; he is a “'light-skinned' African American 'with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” (Reid).
Just two instances of “praise” - from his own political party!

SL: you really need to see a qualified psychologist to address your issues of regularly reading a blog you so vehemently disagree with. Masochism is not healthy. I, for one, have no patience for you “libtards”! Your ignorance is only exceeded by your civility which is conspicuous by its absence.

Earl said...

Ok. Just listened to Obama finally talk about Lybia. He was stern and frowny. In a nut shell, he voted "present."

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

StupidLiberal- The "reforms" you cite are financially unsustainable. So yes, in the world of rainbows and unicorns it would be great if no one could ever lose insurance, and all of the bills were paid, and everyone got transplants of every organ (for freeeeee!) until they were 300 years old. But it ain't going to happen. If Obama and the Dems passed a law saying pigs would (and must!) fly, it still wouldn't happen. Passing healthcare legislation saying that medical bills will be paid for out of thin air is the same thing. Reform? I think the actual word is "lies."

And regarding the SOFA agreement to get out of Iraq, and your sneering reference to the fact that the timetable extended beyond Bush's term, I'd point to your precious Obamacare, which doesn't become fully initiated until 2014... which will be, God willing, two years into the term of Obama's replacement. Or is your alleged president just leaving the messy job of implementation to the "next guy?"

Beyond those points, I'm not interested in sparring or taking any more of my time to try to educate you. It makes me sad knowing there are people like you who emote so much, and understand so little.

Earl said...

WTF? I meant Libya.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

Earl- Yes, Obama finally made a statement, which may or may not be a direct result of today's cartoon (which is included in his daily briefing).

Basically, he stepped to the podium, declared that he is standing firmly with the rest of the world and the UN, and he will absolutely consider options about things that we might do or might not do, with or without other global partners. Perhaps. He then forcefully declared that he's sending Hillary Clinton to a conference about Libya five days from now.

Oh sure, five days might seem like a long time to the people being shot down in the streets from helicopters... but if Barack Hussein Obama can get a good, strongly-worded resolution out of it, the wait will surely be worth it.

Pete(Detroit) said...

I might be tempted to vacation in Lybia - isn't that on Lesbos? NICE scenery!

Seriously...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesbos

Necron99 said...

Stupid Liberal, every time you type that fantastical libtard nonsense and defend your God-king's attempted systematic destruction of our Republic, you really live up to your name.

As for Hussien Obongo's lack of verbiage on the Libya situation? He's probably shocked to silence by all the Muslim on Muslim crime... LOL