Federalist Paupers

Murdering a Man Who Needed Murdering

The following fact is becoming apparent: Using information gained from waterboarded Gitmo prisoners, our president ordered Navy SEALS to to invade a foreign country, engage in a firefight at a private residence, and shoot an unarmed man.

Had I taken the most right-wing genes from Dick Cheney, John Bolton, Blackbeard, and Darth Vader, and created a child who I then forced to attend Hillsdale, I would have still been slightly surprised when Winston McThathereagan ordered this assassination. That an Alinskyite Marxist community organizer did it? Priceless.

It makes me giddy to think about the sinking feeling the “We-are-the-change-we’ve-been-waiting-for” crowd will feel in their guts as the reality of the situation sinks in. In 2007 and 2008, they poured their hearts and souls into getting Hopey McChange elected president. And after the attempts at socialized medicine, cap and trade, turning the Supreme Court into a bunch of living constitution types, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, this – THIS - will be without a doubt the single most popular thing he ever does.

I love this country!

Posted by Apollo in Amer-I-Can!, That's Not Change!

7 Comments »

This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011 at 10:10 pm and is filed under Amer-I-Can!, That's Not Change!. You can follow any responses to this entry through the comments RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

7 Responses to “Murdering a Man Who Needed Murdering”

math_geek says:

“Using information gained from waterboarded Gitmo prisoners”

Only true in the sense that they used information from prisoners, some of which were waterboarded. We’ll never know if the monstrous practice was actually effective. The practice stopped before Obama became President.

And of course, once we have the intelligence, it seems stupid not to use it.

I also think you underestimate liberal bloodthirstiness. Sure, there are a lot of pacifist liberals, but Osama Bin Laden had the unique capacity of being completely unlikeable to Americans of just about any political persuasion. Taliban Afghanistan pretty much embodies liberal hell.

In the end your title gets it just right.

May 4th, 2011 at 10:40 am

Rocco says:

Only Nixon could go to China. Only an “Alinskyite Marxist community organizer” could “order Navy SEALS to to invade a foreign country, engage in a firefight at a private residence, and shoot an unarmed man”.

May 4th, 2011 at 6:30 pm

Conor Friedersorf says:

What Apollo fails to point out is that it wasn’t only Obama supporters who were wrong about the man – ever since he tool office, prominent voices in the conservative movement, on talk radio, Fox News, National Review Online, and everywhere else, as been advancing a wrongheaded narrative about the man grounded more in their prejudices and cynical attempts at character attacks than the reality of how he would respond to actual events. If fundamentally misjudging the man that dominates your attention isn’t deeply discrediting of the conservative movement establishment I don’t know what is.

May 7th, 2011 at 6:25 am

Apollo says:

Gimme a break, Conor. “Deeply discrediting of the conservative movement”? Let’s see: we had a candidate with no foreign policy record beyond giving some speeches opposing a war; we had a candidate who was being backed by the dovish wing of the dovish party; we had a candidate who quite freely condemned his opponents as warmongers; a candidate who time and time again emphasized the importance of foreign cooperation and making certain that America followed international law.

Given that – a candidate without a record and whose most ardent supporters were borderline pacifists and unquestionably post-American – is it really “discrediting” of the conservative movement that many of us took him at his word? The president has done something that both his supporters and his opponents believe is incongruous with his words – I’ll grant you that that discredits someone, but if you think it’s the conservative or leftist movements, I question your judgement.

No, Obama said some things and both conservatives and leftists were in agreement about what those things meant. Now he has acted, and there is a shared shock on the left and right. Either Obama’s actions are incongruous with his words – in which case he has been dishonest – or everyone in the country misunderstood what he was saying – in which case we should file this under “Barack Obama Couldn’t Persuade a Bear to Crap in the Woods.”

May 7th, 2011 at 2:24 pm

Tom Meyer says:

Apollo,

Silly as his Afghanistan-Is-The-Good-War-Unlike-Iraq-Which-Was-Like-You-Know-Bad schtick, Obama never campaigned as a dove and sure hasn’t acted like one. Yet, as Conor would point out, people like Gul McCarthy claim that he’s secretly allied with the terr’sts. What gives?

May 9th, 2011 at 9:41 am

Independent George says:

The counter-example is Libya – our actions there exhibit exactly the kind of confused policy conservatives expected from Obama. Giving the go order on Bin Laden is indeed an unexpected surprise, and I’m more than willing to credit him on it (the downside risk on a botched raid was rather high, and they did indeed have to resort to ‘plan B’ almost at the outset when their Blackhawk was forced to land).

May 9th, 2011 at 11:09 am

FormerSwingVoter says:

Just to add to the “Holy Shit Quotient”, check this out:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/10/world/asia/10intel.html?_r=2&hp

Obama insisted that the force to take out Bin Laden be large enough and heavily armed enough to fight their way out of the country had the Pakistani army interfered.

May 10th, 2011 at 1:45 pm

Blogroll

News

Only For Fun

Murdering a Man Who Needed Murdering

7 Responses to “Murdering a Man Who Needed Murdering”

Leave a Reply