Blogmocracy in Action!
Guest post by: Richard Mather!
Obama’s failings threaten six million Jews
With new figures showing that the Jewish population of Israel has reached the ominous figure of six million, President Obama needs to stop prevaricating over the issue of Iran and commit himself to a US-led mission or give Israel the green light to attack unilaterally.
Obama, however, seems relatively unconcerned about the fate of six million Jews and the 1.5 million Arabs who live in Israel, preferring instead to worry about how the issue is effecting his campaign for a second term in office.
Perhaps this is not surprising. According to a poll by Chicago Council for Global Affairs, the majority of Americans are against a US-led attack on Iran. The shadow of the Iraq war and the domestic economy no doubt explain this attitude of caution.
But Obama – as leader of the free world – also has a duty of care towards those who are threatened by belligerent regimes. Despite international condemnation, George W Bush was right to come to the aid of Iraqis who were oppressed by their own leader. Now, it is time for Obama to assist Israel in the destruction of Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Of course, there is a big difference between helping the dispossessed people of Iraq and assisting the technologically-advanced Israelis. But the truth is, Israel has a limited ability to destroy Iran’s weapons capability, whilst the US is unhindered by such limitations.
But it’s not just about weapons. It’s about providing reassurance to Israel. Obama has failed to guarantee the security of the Jewish state, which only serves to strengthen Iran’s hand.
By refusing to draw red lines, Obama is sending out the signal that Israel’s security is less important than the niceties of diplomatic talks. Obama’s personal dislike of Netanyahu and his reluctance to meet the Israeli leader is also a sign of the president’s weakness.
The Islamic regime has made it absolutely clear what its intentions are towards Israel and is accelerating its nuclear program. And yet Obama continues to argue that sanctions and soft diplomacy are the best way forward.
This is hardly reassuring for Israel, which faces its first major existential threat since the Yom Kippur War of 1973. Israel cannot afford to wait much longer. While it would be preferable for the US to lead the way, Israel still has the capability to at least slow down Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Obama should not stand in the way.
Obama’s lack of clarity and direction needs to be replaced by some clear and hard thinking. If he is not willing to assist Israel, then he must allow the Jewish state to take action on its own. Otherwise, six million Israeli Jews face the prospect of a deadly attack from an Islamic regime armed to the teeth with weapons of mass destruction.
Put simply, Obama has a moral duty to help prevent a second holocaust.
-Richard Mather
Tags: Richard Mather
Obama sees his “moral duty,” not as preventing a second Holocaust, but as rectifying what he wrongly believes is the “holocaust” of the “Palestinians” not having a second state in addition to Jordan.
He clearly supports Iran obtaining nuclear weapons, though he has used the uselessness of “sanctions” to cover his support for them; his plan has always been to use Iran’s nuclear capacity as a stick to force Israel to grant massive concessions to the “Palestinians” as the price for “protecting” whatever is left of Israel post-concessions from Iranian attack—at least for as long as he is in office.
It is for this reason that he sat on his hands during the Iranian “Green Revolution” that was the precursor to the “Arab Spring”; he did not want to upset the possibility of a deal with the mullahs to hold off on a nuclear attack on Israel for the duration of his term in office.
Talking of “moral duty” and Obama in the same sentence is foolish.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Obama is not reassuring Israel nor putting significant pressure on Iran.
Iran will develop a nuclear weapon if they are not stopped. And, as an apocalyptic cult, will use it on Tel Aviv.What is to stop them?
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Couldn’t agree more. Obama isn’t going to do anything …he has repeatedly snubbed Bibi. His actions make it loud and clear he is no friend of Israel and Israel knows this. As far as to which side of the line he will land on is very obvious..he will land on the side of the Islamist. Even our Embassy’s being attacked didn’t spark much outrage from him. All that was according to him ..is a youtube video *offended* muslims. When that film had really nothing to do with it. It was only an excuse to carry out these attacks right around 9/11. He should be outraged. Nope he isn’t. That is who we have in the White House.
One of our Ambassador’s is murdered because muslims were offended. Right. Last time I looked being offended is when someone cuts in line before you. This wasn’t beinig offended these Embassy’s were attacked. I am sure Israel is paying verying close to our election in November because they know they will get NO HELP from this administration.
@ BatGuano:
There is nothing to stop them. But Obama believes that the existence of Israel is “the problem” in the Middle East and, like all too many American presidents, dreams of being “the” person to “solve” the problem.
He probably believes that it is only “fair” for Iran to have nuclear weapons if Israel has them; he certainly believes, despite all evidence to the contrary, that his personal eloquence will persuade the mullahs to do as he wishes—and, of course, he doesn’t really care if Israel gets wiped off the map in the process.
He is, however, willing to pretend to “save” Israel from Iranian nukes in exchange for brutal Israeli concessions, for his own self-aggrandizement—and, when Iran reneges on the deal after he leaves office, and attacks Israel anyway, well, tsk, tsk. Terribly unfortunate, utterly unexpected. Who could have possibly foreseen it?
BatGuano wrote:
Certainly not the obama administration! Good grief he would rather have the muslim brotherhood in the White House than Bibi! How many times did representives of the muslim brotherhood visit the White House under obama??? Yet he snubs Bibi every chance he gets. And the media continure to cover for him.
@ Lily:
Cover for him? They agree with him.
Obama will leave our armada of naval power in the Persian Gulf & ask the other countries to stay too until the day after the election. I have a feeling he’s set up a blockade to deter any Israeli flyovers.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I think it is worse than that. I think Obama doesn’t give a rat’s ass if there is a nuclear exchange between Israel and Iran. Israel gets wiped out and Iran loses a couple of cities. The mullahs consider it cheap at that price, and I think Obama agrees with them. He wants Iran to nuke Israel. He is that much a Third World anti-Semite.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
This is excatly what he believes. That him just entering in the room will settle the problem. Not to mention he does believe that it is only fair that if Israel has nukes why not Iran. Problem is anyone who thinks Iran should have nukes is insane. We are dealing with a rogue president who has done much more harm in the middle east than can be imagined in such a short time. I do believe this is what he wanted..this isn’t from being just ignorant (he is that) but combine it with willfull desire to flare up the middle east. A dangerous combo in my opinion.
lobo91 wrote:
Well that is mainly what I meant. They cover for him because they agree with him. Just should have added a few more words to get my point across.
Yesterday it was B of A & today it’s JPMC that has it’s entire online banking network shutdown.
Is this the Chinese playing with us?
http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/14/technology/Chase_online_service/index.htm
Israel is in its gravest danger since 1973 and Bibi is trying to get that point across to Obama. Obama doesn’t want to listen because Israel is an annoyance and he has a re-election campaign. He will have to deal with it now or in (god forbid) his second term.
lobo91 wrote:
And natch you caught one of spelling mistakes. Again.
Iron Fist wrote:
I agree with you—except that I think he first wants to force Israel into deep concessions to the “Palestinians,” for two reasons:
1) He wants to be lionized as the Man Who Created the Palestinian State; and
2) He wants to stick it to Israel, and be seen to be sticking it to Israel, for his own personal gratification.
After these things are accomplished, he’s perfectly OK with the exchange you describe—and, if the “Palestinians” are vaporized in the process, he won’t care. He just wants to hand Jerusalem over to the Muslims first.
BatGuano wrote:
When you come down to it, Obama agrees with Helen Thomas when it comes to Israel. If those pesky Jews would just go back to Poland, Russia, or Brooklyn, there wouldn’t be any problems in the Middle East.
Lily wrote:
Spelling, Schmelling, we get it.
John Difool wrote:
If the Israeli Air Force is blocked then the only remaining option becomes a missile attack…
BatGuano wrote:
I think Bibi already knows what obama is like especially concerning Israel. He has been reaching out to the American people not the president. Trying to get across this is a very dangerous situation that they are in. Obama doesn’t care.
BatGuano wrote:
Confirmed in first person with Obama’s open mic with the Russian president
@ BatGuano:
Things are just getting worse. I get pamphlets from Horowitz once every couple months or so, the one I got a couple weeks ago is titled “The Muslim Brotherhood in America”. The situation is far worse worse than it appears on the surface.
I highly recommend people get over to his site and order a copy if it’s still available.
@ Da_Beerfreak:
And the only way Israel can successfully attack those sites with missiles is if they’re armed with nukes.
Their missiles aren’t accurate enough to accomplish the mission using conventional warheads.
John Difool wrote:
Or forward an alert to Tehran
reprise:
Jerusalem
—apologies to William Blake and “Jerusalem”
And did those feet, ere election
Once walk before the Western Wall?
And did the president-to-be
E’en then plan Netanyahu’s fall?
Did his anti-colonial mind
Then clench the fist of his left hand
And dream Jerusalem held entire
By murderous Palestinians?
“Bring me my club of foreign aid!
“Bring appeasement to the UN!
“Bring a blind eye now to al-Qaed’!
“Bring the old borders up again!
“I will not cease to temporize
“Nor oppose nuclear Iran
“Till Arabs wrest Jerusalem
“From Israel’s devastated land.”
waldensianspirit wrote:
That was the former French president, but yeah.
@ Mars:
Horowitz was on with Megyn Kelly earlier today talking about just that topic, including Huma Abedin.
lobo91 wrote:
Ah yea the other open mic
waldensianspirit wrote:
Indeed!
lobo91 wrote:
Completely agree. Blocking the IDF Air can only make things a lot worse.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Sad but true. He still will not recognise that Jerusalem is the captial of Israel. He simply refuses to do this.
waldensianspirit wrote:
Wouldn’t surprise me at all. However if i were the fleet Admiral that would be one 3 a.m. phone call that wouldn’t make it through to the Whitehouse.
Lily wrote:
Well first he’d have to recognise the State-hood of Israel
Lily wrote:
So many of the people who celebrated the reunification of Hitler’s capital have been avidly seeking the re-division of the Jewish capital.
waldensianspirit wrote:
“I cannot bear Netanyahu, he’s a liar,” Sarkozy told Obama, unaware that the microphones in their meeting room had been switched on, enabling reporters in a separate location to listen in to a simultaneous translation.
“You’re fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you,” Obama replied, according to the French interpreter.
@ lobo91:
He views it as a US/European colonial state. It’s part of his 3rd World Ideology.
@ waldensianspirit:
Obama’s not very careful about those open mics is he? I get the impression he doesn’t really care if he is overheard. He probably thinks that the sheeple will still vote for him. Who knows? He may be right.
@ lobo91:
The mask slipped…again.
Da_Beerfreak wrote:
I was going to say this also. imagine if you’re in a command & control bunker within a few thousand miles say in Russia or China when the Israelis light up some boosters.
By Dawns Early Light scenario.
I was told the Muslim Brotherhood is an secualar movement by Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper//////
@ waldensianspirit:
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Frankly it just horrific in my opinion how openly this anti-semitic president we is. It’s like he doesn’t care if people know..and that may be a good thing. He really doesn’t care if everyone knows how anti-Israel he is. I would just hope the people of the United States gets this and how dangerous he is concerning Israel and the middle east..they got a little taste of it last week. He sides with offended muslims over our own people’s deaths!
@ John Difool:
When that happens, the Russians and Chinese will know exactly where those missiles are headed. They know the Israelis have no reason to attack them.
@ lobo91:
The Israeli Airforce doesn’t have the logistics nor the heavy load to take out Iran’s nuke sites. Only the US does and we know the god-king will not do it.
Rodan wrote:
It is an attitude widespread in the black community; even the allegedly-conservative Condoleezza Rice has compared “Palestinian” children to the four girls killed in the Birmingham church bombing. It is the result of so many in the Civil Rights Movement making common cause with the “Palestinians” from the time the PLO was formed in 1964, three years prior to the Six-Day War.
Allen West is one of the few who mercifully does not wear these blinders.
Iron Fist wrote:
The greater his mandate that way. Second term Obama is going to be just awful. Boehner will be an emotional patsy
Iron Fist wrote:
He doesn’t care! He doesn’t care if people know his true intentions. The problem is the people of the United States need to wake up and realize excatly who and what he is. I mean he isn’t hiding it at all!
@ Lily:
Despite all the feigned outrage over Romney’s comments, the reality is that Obama is using the exact same calculation. He knows that he has exactly 0 chance to get the votes of about 47% of the populace, so he basically doesn’t care what they (meaning we) think.
The part that will vote for him basically share his views.
lobo91 wrote:
Doesn’t necessarily mean they won’t fire back. Keep in mind even a non-nuclear strike on nuclear facilities will eventually cause a lot of radiation & fall-out to go into their territories since they are down-wind.
waldensianspirit wrote:
…and his a a dandy.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
That’s because Allen West understands Islam.
Lily wrote:
The Jews I know who are in the tank for Obama will go to any lengths whatever to deny and ignore this.
A friend of mine told me yesterday that he’d had a friend of his over for Rosh HaShanah, and this guest, a liberal Jewish academic, was “furious at Netanyahu for trying to influence the US election.” According to my friend, his guest ended up espousing a fundamentally antisemitic position. To his credit, he told his guest—a specialist in “Holocaust studies”—to his face that if he wanted to know “how the Holocaust could have occurred” all he needed to do was look in the mirror, because it was the denial of people like him that permitted Hitler to come to power and permitted the US, even though it knew what was happening in the camps, from bombing the railways that led to them.
My friend is nonconfrontational to a fault. But his parents were Holocaust survivors and he was really ticked off.
@ Guggi:
nice, now I’m stuttering
Rodan wrote:
Short of using nuclear weapons, complete destruction of those facilities by air is basically impossible, even for us.
The IAF can do sufficient damage to them to take them offline for a significant length of time, though.
Guggi wrote:
He’s a fancy boy.
lobo91 wrote:
That outrage over what Romney said..just didn’t get the traction obama would have liked it would have in my opinion. Romney knows 47% will either vote the party line or vote for obama because they agree with him period. Hopefully that 47% might erode a bit. Because some of the ones that have to vote the party line are not happy with him and may not vote at all.
BatGuano wrote:
Isn’t that the same ?
Rodan wrote:
I think a lot of our military understand Islam..Allen West being the most vocal and very smart. He understands the enemy whether or not our presidents does..because actually our president sides with the enemy which is just disgraceful.
Guggi wrote:
Yeah. It’s from a Seinfeld episode.
@ Lily:
Most of our military has spent years with a front-row seat to see Islam in action.
When some idiot politician or academic goes on TV and talks about how peaceful and tolerant Islam is, they just laugh.
lobo91 wrote:
You can take out the actual nuke plant making the fuel since that is where the sausage is getting made but that baby is above ground & doing that will make Chernobyl look like a day in the park.
The Chinese, Russians & Pakistanis are downwind of that.
@ lobo91:
The problem for Israel is getting there and back.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Good for your friend. My goodness it is unbelieveable how people have their heads buried in the sand over obama! What exactly has obama done good???? All he has done has made matters extremely much worse in every area. Every area! I simply do not understand this ….
@ John Difool:
They should have thought about that before they built it for them and spent years throwing up roadblocks in the path of everyone who tried to stop them.
Rodan wrote:
It can be done.
Rodan wrote:
If I were to put together the strike package for the IDF the nuke sites would be low on my list.
First: destroy Iran’s ability to produce and distribute clean water and electricity
Second: destroy Iran’s ability to store and transport food and fuel.
Third: do as much damage as possible to Iran’s gulf ports.
Fourth: let the chips fall where they may…
Cry Haddock and let slip the Cats of War…
@ lobo91:
How?
lobo91 wrote:
I bet they do! Because they see them up close and personnal …there is nothing peaceful about Islam.
lobo91 wrote:
They did give a lot of thought to it which is why they believe that it was not only a deterrent but an excuse to retaliate if needed.
@ Da_Beerfreak:
They don’t have enough planes to hit multiple targets.
Rodan wrote:
According to whom?
Says a lot ….of course al-qaeda isn’t scared of obama.
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/09/19/poll-americans-think-al-qaeda-more-scared-of-romney-than-obama/
Rodan wrote:
You are allowing ‘perfection’ to become the enemy of ‘good enough’.
@ lobo91:
The Israeli inventory.
Rodan wrote:
That’s not an answer.
@ lobo91:
@ Da_Beerfreak:
The Israelis have 160 F-15 Eagles,136 F-16 & 13 707′s . Not sure what the split is on how many of those 707′s are airborne command posts & aerial refuelers but that seems to be enough to get the job done.
The problem of course is getting there & back & the element of surprise.
Don’t fall for the media lie. Romney and Ryan are winning.
http://www.unskewedpolls.com
lobo91 wrote:
How (serious question) ?
@ Lily:
All of these polls indicate that the American people suffer from an appreciable level of schizophrenia and Obama just exacerbates that condition.
btw.: where is taxfreekiller ? Haven’t seen him for quite a time.
John Difool wrote:
Apples and Oranges.
The Bushehr I reactor is of a completely different design than the one that was used at Chernobyl. Bombing the Bushehr I reactor would make one hell of a mess, but it wouldn’t come close to being another Chernobyl.
@ The Osprey:
Bad link.
But I don’t believe the media’s lies anyway…if most people think that al-qaeda is more scared of Romney than obama that says a lot to me. Not to mention the poor handling of last weeks Emabassy’s attacks and that is exactly what they were attacks…not offended muslims over a damn video they probably have never seen.
Of course even with close to 300 fighter aircraft & only 13 707′s the numbers are very not in favor of the Israelis even being able to launch a third or a quarter of those with current refueling capabilities in a single surprise attack, so we’re looking at maybe 25-40 fighters in the first strike & the high end is being generous.
@ John Difool:
The IAF has 102 F-16I an 25 F-15I long range strike aircraft, all of which have the unrefueled range to hit those targets, and they have the ability to refuel them on the way back.
Guggi wrote:
He got really pissed-off at us after the Texas primary election and left.
Lily wrote:
Let’s try that link again!
MacDuff wrote:
Yes it does. For one have you talked to anyone who will not vote for Romney…lets say a obama voter? They don’t agree with 99% of what obama is for but they simply have to vote the party line. Why? I don’t get an answer. What is this hold obama has on some people? Certainly not what he has done as president of the United States. Not to mention these people also are getting fed up with Islamist’s they are actually getting the point these people are not our friends and never will be. They are getting fed up with their protests and killing of our people. They are sick of them….yet they can’t vote for Romeny because well he is rich. So is obama and he is rich with our tax money.
@ lobo91:
See #74 for their inventoryIsrael has to refuel. The element of surprise is gone as well. All this talk of Israel hitting Iran, they are ready for it. It would be a suicide mission.
We are just going to have to disagree on this.
Good Lord, the dude looks like the subject of an episode of Criminal Minds”.
Rodan wrote:
I’m sure the Israeli Defense Ministry will be crushed to hear your view.
Da_Beerfreak wrote:
Is that what happened?? I imagine he will be back..give him time to get over being mad.
lobo91 wrote:
Yes & how exactly are they gonna put up that much airpower & noone see it happening? Even in the Osirik strike & the Syrian one a few years ago only a few fighters were used & those were straight line attacks afterburners blazing.
@ Rodan:
BTW, I realize that you were in elementary school at the time of the Osirak raid, but popular opinion was that that was impossible, too.
@ Lily:
@ The Osprey:
I was at a Republican meetup and they told me this election is not certain
North Carolina is with Romney.
In Florida, Romney is barely ahead.
PA is gone for Obama.
Mi is gone for Obama.
Wisconsin is slipping away
Obama is head in Virginia and Ohio.
@ Lily:
Ask CW…
@ The Osprey:
Might just be me…but I still can’t get that link. But I get what you are saying. All these polls showing obama ahead of Romney is a load of crap. Obama is in trouble just by the way he is handling things. In my opinion. His internals must really suck.
lobo91 wrote:
Apples and oranges. Iraq was closer and it was a one strike deal. Iran is farther, more targets and there is no element of surprise.
But if you think Israel can pull it off somehow, there’s no convincing you.
Da_Beerfreak wrote:
Him and TFK got into it? That’ll probably pass. Most of those type of things do. Just saying. But really because I don’t know..my thinking it will pass may be wrong.
@ John Difool:
Seeing it happening and doing anything about it are two different things.
The Syrians saw that attack coming. Their vaunted S-300 SAM system (like most Russian built garbage) didn’t do squat.
@ Lily:
I hope it passes too. I liked TFK.
@ Rodan:
I think you’ve missed the point.
It really doesn’t matter what either of us believe, since neither of us is the Israeli Defense Minister.
There was a report a while back that Israel was getting some bases, or basing rights, in either Uzbekistan or Tajikistan. I’ve no idea whether that is true, but if so it might make an air raid more feasible.
MacDuff wrote:
Heres what he reminds me of.
http://laithemslabyrinth.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/strangers-with-candy.jpg
Rodan wrote:
Oh trust me I have no misgivings that this election will be tight. I know it will. Like I have said before I will not give a sigh of relief till it’s over … anything can change on a dime with this one.
If I were a betting person …I wouldn’t lay down any money on who will excatly win. Because I don’t know and this election to me could go either way to be honest. The only thing I do know is the bloom is off the rose concerning obama…but that may not make much of a difference.
Rodan wrote:
No election is certain until the votes are counted—and this election will be close whatever happens.
@ Lily:
“Over” meaning we actually see him and Mooch get on the plane headed for Chicago, Hawaii, Zimbabwe, or wherever the hell they plan to go after Romney takes office.
@ lobo91:
That’s very true we are just specualting here.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
These days, no election is over until the lawsuits are finished.
Da_Beerfreak wrote:
Maybe closer to the election we will see him back. Hopefully.
@ Lily:
It just stuns me with a bad economy and the Islamic meltdown, that Obama is in the running. It shows the power of the media and entertainment industry.
lobo91 wrote:
I’m not saying they can’t pull it off, I never bet against Israelis or the IDF but imo this is going to be an Independence Day type raid, all or nothing & I don’t think they’ll be getting many of those aircraft back.
I believe the Jordanians & Saud’s will let them use airspace in a straight line attack, not like anyones going to see refueling above the skies of the southern Arabian peninsula.
Any attack by Israel no matter where it comes from will no doubt result in retaliation against the Sauds from Iran so they’re probably just going to say to hell with it anyway & give them airspace.
MacDuff wrote:
Oh yeah I saw that. He is creepy looking indeed.
@ lobo91:
Maybe he can fly to an Arab country and practice his “Muslim faith.”
@ John Difool:
Israel should not trust the Saudis.
Rodan wrote:
Rodan wrote:
How long before he can’t resist puffing a peter over there & gets swung by the neck from an Iranian crane?
Rodan wrote:
I like to speculate…why is everyone seem focused on airstrike?
Why not submarines and cruise missiles, that Israel does (allegedly) posses?
@ John Difool:
That’s very possible, which is something most people don’t take into account. You’re talking about an existential threat, which is something we’ve never faced.
That does change the math.
lobo91 wrote:
Excatly. This country doesn’t need another 4 years of him ..good grief …
@ Daffy Duck:
Their sub-launched cruise missile capability isn’t sufficient to destroy those targets without using nukes.
Rodan wrote:
Yes it does. But a lot of people are seein that even though the media has always leaned democratic…the MSM is really just another arm of the obama re-election campagin. Even normal people are noticing that. Of course some people just spew the talking points of MSNBC like it’s the gospel too.
@ MacDuff:
It’s just crazy.
@ Lily:
The media needs to be treated as a hostile entity.
@ Lily:
The main function of MSNBC at this point is to give conservatives something to laugh at.
Tonight’s Rockies game will have more TV viewers than their primetime shows will.
Rodan wrote:
Yeah really they do.
lobo91 wrote:
I guess I’m speculating by combining multiple posters thoughts:
1. DaBeerfreak suggested the nuke sites would be low priority for him, I’ll go w/ that.
2. If IDF uses IAF in one-off ‘kamikaze,’ then Israel is totally defenseless to counter-strikes, that I would assume would come from all corners of the ME, not just Iran.
3. Ergo, conventional SLCM against soft / infrastructure targets, and retain IAF for wiping out Arab air strikes that are sure to come.
@ lobo91:
That channel is full on batsh*t nuts to be honest. How anyone could watch it is beyond me.
Rodan wrote:
Very true.
However should Israel trust the United States?
Sorry to throw a bomb like that and run, but I have to go pick up the car the mechanic, dinner, and prepare for another round of night work.
@ Daffy Duck:
All sub-launched cruise missiles aren’t created equal.
The Israelis have a handful of small diesel-electric subs that can each launch a handful of missiles. They were designed to be a nuclear delivery system, not for conventional strikes.
They probably can be fitted with conventional warheads, but they’d be fairly small (1,000-2,000 lbs). It’s not worth using them in that configuration.
@ citizen_q:
With obama as our president …no. And I think Israel knows that can’t trust us with this administration to be honest.
@ citizen_q:
I think that if the Israelis have learned one thing over the decades, it’s that when it comes to their own security, they really can’t fully trust anyone but themselves.
@ citizen_q:
That’s the sad part.
@ lobo91:
Even though Israel could possibly do this on their own our help would help greatly in the mission being successful. This is the way I see it.
But they aren’t going to get that help with obama at the helm.
Lily wrote:
It’s the TV version of Democratic Underground.
I watched a few hours of it when I was in Kuwait, only because AFN runs their programming a few hours a day.
It was pathetic.
Lily wrote:
No, they’re not.
@ lobo91:
That is probably true, but I would think that “throwing away” their air force, in what most here conclude would not be successful in eliminated Iran nuke program, well, that would also seem “not worth using them (IAF) in that configuration.”
Hopefully, things stay stagnate over there for a few months, and we elect some adults to the lead us…
@ lobo91:
I can only imagine. I have youtube clips of MSNBC and frankly they are disgusting I don’t watch that channel ever.
@ Lily:
No, they are on their own right now.
lobo91 wrote:
I imagine they are going to be watching our election in November as closely as we are. Could be a game changer…and hopefully obama is voted out …. that would make my day.
@ Daffy Duck:
Yes they are. Very much so.
@ Lily:
If Obama is reelected, the odds of an Israeli attack go way up.
They’ll basically have nothing to lose at that point.
@ Da_Beerfreak:
I suspect that even if Obama were to order U.S. Navy fliers to block an Israeli air raid on Iran, that they would prove to be woefully under-equipped, and totally surprised.
At least, that’s how the reports would read.
@ Lily:
Of course, with the spineless appeasor in office, I guess it’s safe to say that Japan is on it’s own (re: China), or Taiwan, or probably anybody that historically has figured on USA having their back.
The world “blowing up” is the fruits of leading from behind.
@ Daffy Duck:
I don’t agree with the idea that they would lose their whole air force.
They would probably suffer some significant losses, but by no means crippling.
@ lobo91:
Agree.
lobo91 wrote:
Yep and hopefully they don’t let the obama administration know how or in what way they will do it..because for obama will leak that information in a nano-second. They may could use him to leak the wrong information though.
@ Daffy Duck:
.
Including the 47% of Americans who didn’t vote for him.
@ John Difool:
Text of Telex sent from Jerusalem to Moscow and Beijing: “Put up your lead-lined umbrellas, boys, it’s going to be raining radioactive mullah-dust.”
Daffy Duck wrote:
Yeah I have heard some information about China going after Japan..don’t know how much truth is in them though. All of our Allies have been dissed by this president. Even our enemies are rather stunned we have this jellyfish as our president. That says a lot there. We have a jellyfish as our president. A rogue jellyfish.
@ Daffy Duck:
People seem to forget that the Israeli military establishment is used to fighting where they’re outnumbered and the fate of their nation hangs in the balance.
We’re not.
@ lobo91:
At #117, you agreed w/ John that catastrophic IAF losses were a possibility. I inferred John was talking about a one-way ticket to Tehran.
Of course, if IAF can arrange re-fueling, then IAF is not a write-off, but in my post, I was suppossing that they would have no co-operation from USA, Saudi, anyone, and that once IAF is in the air to Iran, all of Middle East becomes hostile airspace.
@ John Difool:
Little of that will make it to the Russian or Chinese heartlands. Probably the bulk of it will fall on places like Afghanistan, the islamic former SSRs, and the Uighur regions of China. Sucks to be them; but then again, it always did.
lobo91 wrote:
They are completely surrounded by enemies we are not. They have to be on their toes. A no brainer.
@ Daffy Duck:
I think it’s possible, but not necessarily likely.
My real point is that that possibility wouldn’t necessarily prevent them from launching the attack anyway (unlike our own military, which would never do so).
This is great! Congress just passed the Buffet Rule Act which makes it perfectly legal for anyone, not just billionaires, to pay more taxes if they feel they are not taxed enough. I hope the IRS will set up a separate account for all the money they collect under the new act so that we can see how much extra revenue those folks from the “I’m not taxed enough” set kick in.
lobo91 wrote:
No our military would never do so..but for Israel and I think not likely too..but it is life or death of their nation. They may have no choice..especially with obama in office.
@ lobo91:
OK, I think we’re on the same page, but just different paragraphs.
I agree w/ your take on Israeli ingenuity, and that they have beaten the odds before.
@ huckfunn:
Who in their right mind says they aren’t taxed enough? The American people are over taxed.
@ Lily:
I’m pretty sure that if the choice is between losing a few planes and/or pilots and having their country destroyed, they’re going to pick the former.
According to some people here, they should apparently just all go out and commit suicide, since there’s no way to accomplish the mission without losses.
A idiot says this…without the proper information.
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/09/19/hollywood-uber-moonbat-barbra-streisand-says-except-for-bill-clinton-obama-most-fiscally-conservative-president-in-recent-history/
Yet this has just come out..so say again Ms. Streisand how stupid and out of touch you are…
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/09/19/bls-obama-unemployment-rate-above-8-longer-than-any-other-president-since-1948/
@ huckfunn:
That was already legal. There is nothing stopping Buffet from cutting the IRS a check except greed, because Buffet should be taxed more. They should take that son of a bitch’s last dime.
lobo91 wrote:
I think they are smarter than that … to be honest. Yes they may have to take some losses…but they know their enemey a hell of lot better than we do. So I think they could come up with a plan without committing suicide.
Lily wrote:
Remember the big flappadoodle when Warren Buffet said he wasn’t paying enough taxes? There were several folks that said the same thing, more or less. I think maybe Bruce Springsteen was one of them.
@ Rodan:
Well, if I were in charge of planning Israel’s attack on Iran, I would use some nukes to seal off the entrances to the underground uranium enrichment plant. Some conventional bombs to wreck the infrastructure around the Bushehr reactor, but it’s not that much of a threat on its own, anyway.
And I would target the homes, offices, and dachas of the entire regime: Ahmanutjob, his ministers, all the ayatollahs, and as many mullahs as I could reliably locate. Hit the Parliament buildings and government office towers. Hit naval bases, air force bases, army bases, and Revolutionary Guard bases. Kill, destroy and demoralize as much of the regime as possible, while trying to minimize civilian casualties.
And with any luck, the pro-Democracy or Persian nationalist opposition groups will be sufficiently emboldened to start a revolution and overthrow the remnants of the regime.
huckfunn wrote:
The fine print on the bottom should read:
Buffet Rule really means if you’re filthy rich as long as you say you’re down with the struggle you get a free pass & it doesn’t mean that you actually have to be down with the struggle.
Iron Fist wrote:
That’s why it’s so funny. The GOP congressmen were just poking Buffet in the eye.
huckfunn wrote:
Yeah I remember it…what comes out of an idiots mouth is mindboggling at times.
John Difool wrote:
The people who say “I’m not taxed enough” actually mean “everyone else should pay more taxes”.
@ Lily:
Not according to General Rodan. He says they can’t do it.
And we’re all in agreement that Iran is building nuclear weapons, and that they’ll use them against Israel first chance they get.
Thus, the only logical answer is the Israelis should all commit suicide, since it’s inevitable that they’re going to be killed anyway.
Daffy Duck wrote:
I predict that if Обама is re-elected, Japan will go nuclear within six months to counter Red China and Korea Borealis. They already have that capability; they just haven’t put an arsenal together yet.
@ lobo91:
Well there are many ways Israel could handle this. And I don’t agree with them committing suicide…if they attack Iran they are actually trying to save their country..so if committing suicide is the only option why attack Iran at all?
@ Macker:
Probably South Korea and Taiwan also.
Lily wrote:
You’ll have to ask Rodan.
He’s the one who insists that it can’t be done.
Alberta Oil Peon wrote:
So much for Obama’s “world without nuclear weapons.”
Of course, we’ll continue our plans for unilateral disarmament.
Macker wrote:
I think China saber-rattling & threatening to take those Japanese islands is a dry-run on Taiwan to see how we’ll react. Go after the low-hanging fruit first.
Obama kicking with Jay-Z & Beyonce underneath an 800k dollar tower of champagne at a swank NY club while our embassies were burning & our people were being killed, pretty much sent them a loud & clear message on that.
@ lobo91:
Geral Rodan?
In a dickish mood I see. I guess people can’t have opinions of their own? Many Israelis says they can’t pull it off. Many of them served in the IDF, so they are talking shit?
I guess you can’t handle differing opinions.
@ lobo91:
Drinking already, that’s why you are in an asshole mood?
Rodan wrote:
All I’m doing is spelling out the inevitable conclusion of your assertions.
Where am I wrong?
Rodan wrote:
Um…you’re the one calling people names.
If anyone around here has a problem, it’s you.
jeez. overtime i log on anymore its fights.
oh well. see yin later.
@ lobo91:
You started with the name calling here. Don’t play the self righteous victim here.
If being a wise ass makes you feel better about yourself, then knock yourself out.
You obviously can’t handle disagreement and prefer an echo chamber.
Life is too short, I have better things to do with my time and get into a tit for tat over disagreeing over Israel striking Iran.
Have good one.
@ coldwarrior:
No fighting here. Hang around for a while. I give you a martini..
<<<<<<<<<<<<< Martini for CW.
What the lefties fail to take into consideration (or simply don’t even notice) is that Iran is ambitious wrt the rest of the Middle East. The Muslim Brotherhood takeover WILL reach Saudi Arabia and the rest of those oil rich states who pay other people to do the real work for them. The Sunni and Shia factions will continue to fester, and with increasing chaos, devolve into more dangerous tribalism. I know nothing about the military, but I’ve certainly learned about Islam. The Jews are first, but the Christians, African animists, Thai buddhists, etc. are already targets everywhere. We aren’t really ‘people’ to “devout” Muslims. The underpinnings of that so called religion are completely irrational. China and Russia don’t want their oil supplies disrupted. (Although Russia has oil)
John Difool wrote:
What does our preezy say about this? I thought I had read a few articiles about China wanting to take on Japan …. really as the world is burning our allies are being threatened obama is partying to raise funds for his re-election campagin.
@ Lily:
Priorities
@ yenta-fada:
Bingo…China is getting oil in Sudan while the Islamists are murdering whoever they can find or take them for slaves.
@ yenta-fada:
Russia wants to have a corner on the oil market…leverage to the EU.
Well isn’t this special…
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/09/19/report-jihadist-who-led-benghazi-attack-was-a-former-gitmo-detainee-released-by-u-s-in-2007/
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
He’s a complete monster who likes to harm people purely for shits and grins, and on top of that, he wants adulation for being just what he is.
A lot of people I know are going through difficult times with health, money, family, work, etc. The stresses are real. It’s not like the old days when we could have a ‘fight night’. sigh
I wish I were a New Age moonbat who keeps seeing the pony in the horseshit. /
Lily wrote:
Either that, or as it was put so delicately in a downstairs thread…puffing some peters…that’s more important than the whole damn world blowing up!
lobo91 wrote:
The world knows we have an incompetent eunuch as CINC who’s priorities are hanging out with the rich & famous & going on Late Night with David Letterman, this is why we’re starting to see the settling of scores now.
Last Sunday we saw the most fights in NFL history & a lot of dirty playing & tons of blown calls thanks to the scab refs being on the field. The players were trying the refs & seeing what they could get away with.
We have a scab president in the Whitehouse.
Everyone left???
Come on guys everyone has a different opinion.
@ Lily:
Oh great, another reason for Обама’s cheerleaders to blame Bush….
@ Lily:
Our “allies” being threatened doesn’t threaten Obama’s power-base except inasmuch as it threatens his re-election. Obama calculates that he has more to gain by partying with Beyonce and Jay-Z than he has to lose. He thinks that he has 47% of the vote locked up, and only has to snare another 3%. In this he is probably right (as was Romney when he said that he couldn’t win 47% of the voters, and implied that he wasn’t going to try). Those numbers are fairly accurate. No one is really denying them. Where Obama may be miscalculating though is his estimates of the enthusiasm of those 47%. If they aren’t really motivated to turn out, Romney will win by default. Obama is not a very strategic thinker. He never has had to be, though. He is used to everything being given to him on a silver platter. I hope that he is in for a nasty surprise over this. Enthusiasm is with the Romney voters. Not only do they like Romney (he continues to impress the base), but they really, really really dislike Obama. I am hoping that the enthusiasm gap is big enough for us to win the election on. I think it will be, but this will be a very close election.
John Difool wrote:
Wait a minute…the most fights in NFL history and a lot of dirty playing in the games last Sunday …yet I thought banning Sean Payton from the Saints Team for a damn year was suppose to fix that!!! Make an example out of the team so this sort of stuff doesn’t happen!!!
(Since my Saints Team has been over bitch-slapped I haven’t gotten into football too much yet).
Lily wrote:
Terrorist grad school
Lily wrote:
What I read that was back during the Nixon administration, Kissinger made a deal with Saudi Arabia to make sure that oil was internationally traded in the U.S. dollar. Essentially it is a “petrodollar currency”. Now nations are trading outside of the dollar, e.g. due to sanctions on Iran or, in the case of the Chinese, they are willing to trade in gold. There are so many games out there being played for resources, including food and clean water. The military is supposed to back the resources of a nation, but China is just buying them up everywhere it can since it holds a trillion or so U.S. treasuries. It’s a way to both diversify, get what they need, and internationalize the yuan. The things done in the name of religion just screws everything up even more.
First there was Wedding Gifts for Obama……Now it’s Yardsales for Obama.
Surely to be followed by car washes & bake sales for Obama.
yenta-fada wrote:
Trust me you don’t want to be a moonbat who believe it or not are basically hysterical screaming fools. Their blood pressure rises just if you disagree with them. Not to mention they are very quick to temper.
Lily wrote:
http://1389blog.com/2012/09/19/why-we-must-never-take-muslim-prisoners/
Macker wrote:
Insanity at it’s best …obama. But even though I may say insanity he knows what he is doing. Damn fool.
Alberta Oil Peon wrote:
Even the Australian Government has sent up ‘trial balloons’ on building their own nuclear deterrent as a counter to the Chicoms.
Mr. Peace Prize is causing the largest nuclear arms race in history…
@ 1389AD:
The American people do not recognize the psychopathic side of Ozero because he is partly black. Culturally he is a hybrid of Muslim, black, and white, but they don’t see that either.
@ Iron Fist:
He thinks that his base will think it shows how cool he is.
I think a lot of them are probably not all that impressed, while they’re scraping together the spare change to rent a DVD.
@ John Difool:
These are not the acts of someone with confidence in winning in November. Obama isn’t raising money the way he expected to be. This is good. Did you see that the DNC finished up something like $15 million in the hole? Couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch of anti-American abortion fanatics…
lobo91 wrote:
Those guys did the work/study program before grad school.
Lily wrote:
Not to mention their obvious fate in the hereafter for all the evil they do and all the malice they bear.
@ Da_Beerfreak:
Since he wants to get rid of ours, maybe we could sell them instead of destroying them.
At least it would bring in some cash…
lobo91 wrote:
Mr. Peace Prize has only been interested in a “world without American nuclear weapons”.
@ lobo91:
Yeah, maybe it is just me, but Obama seems surprisingly tone-deaf to that. Most Americans would like to have regular jobs. They don’t want to live off the leavings of an eliet class.
@ yenta-fada:
Culturally, he’s mostly red.
Da_Beerfreak wrote:
That is a clear statement.
@ Iron Fist:
I think you are right. obama’s base isn’t all that happy with him. Even though they may not be able to vote Republican they just may not vote at all.
yenta-fada wrote:
The prisons are full of psychopaths of every shade, but the crime shows on television mostly demonize white, native-born Americans who are either from Christian families or whose religious background is unspecified.
lobo91 wrote:
I forgot that. No wonder he’s such a confused lame POS.
Dinner.
yenta-fada wrote:
I’m more worried about their proximity to the Norks and to Pakistan. That’s an immediate threat and both countries are ruled by madmen.
If I were an Aussie I’d be pushing for that option for sure. H-bombs, ICBMs, full-on nuclear missile defense systems, the whole works. Without delay.
@ lobo91:
obama promised to close Gitmo …hasn’t happened his base must not be too happy here either.
obama made a lot of promise’s he hasn’t kept but he sure has kept his Marxist promises.
@ 1389AD:
Remember the “DC sniper” case?
They were convinced the perp was a middle-aged white guy. Right up until the slapped the cuffs on a black Muslim convert.
Oops.
John Difool wrote:
Saw that. When people have yard sales they need the money for themselves not some rich politican who is rolling in the money and doing everything to hurt the United States.
@ Lily:
I saw the other day where some black ministers were encouraging their parishiners to do exactly that. I think that black Christians are going to have to choose between their faith and their Party. What I am afraid, though, is that the vast majority of them will choose their race and party. While I think Obama’s enthusiasm even among black voters will be less than it was in 2008, I do expect him to take 99% of the black vote. I think it has been established beyond any reasonable doubt that if white people voted their race as strongly as blacks do, Obama wouldn’t have made it much beyond the State Senate.
Iron Fist wrote:
I know I would.
Although in my case, I’m living off savings. I don’t even get any benefits. Hell, I can’t even access what limited military benefits I’m supposed to have, since they’ve screwed up my ID.
Lily wrote:
I live in a motorhome and I don’t have any unneeded items left to sell at a yard sale even for my own benefit. If I had anything to donate I’d have given it to the missions anyway.
People here must be too broke to spend their money even at yard sales, which is why I see fewer and fewer of them as time goes by.
Da_Beerfreak wrote:
Good grief a complete nightmare!!! This is what happens when the United States has a jellyfish as a president.
@ Lily:
Don’t insult jellyfish.
Iron Fist wrote:
He is tone deaf! I mean he keeps doubling-down on crap that isn’t working for his campagin or our country!!! In fact he really is trying to run on the same things he did in 2008. No imagination at all. It is his 2008 re-do.
John Difool wrote:
Hey—if kiddies are having their lemonade stands shut down because of Obama’s regulations, as they are, bake sales have to be a fast ticket to the hoosegow.
Lily wrote:
He’s a helluva lot worse than a jellyfish. He’s pure evil.
Oh, and BTW, Bill Clinton actually started it by bombing the Serbs. Every other country on the planet saw that, without nukes, they were vulnerable.
Then, Hussein pulled the rug out from under Gadhafi after Gadhafi had agreed to give up his nuke program.
Lily wrote:
He’s not tone-deaf; he’s a would-be dictator. He doesn’t give a shit what “works for the country”; all that matters is what he thinks should happen.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
I’ll bet you would get an exception if half or more of that money was going towards Dear Leader’s re-election efforts.
1389AD wrote:
You mean the made-up ones? The Real Interrogations doesn’t show all white criminals at all. The made up TV shows aren’t anywhere near what happens in real life. My son is a Deputy with the Sheriff’s and doesn’t care for any of the made-up TV shows but he does like the shows on I.D. channel. Investigative Discovery Channel.
1389AD wrote:
That shit would have never happened to the Serbs with Putin in charge of the U.S.S.R.
In fact, they should have a do-over.
lobo91 wrote:
Well actually *trying* to profile a killer is very hard to do.
To be honest not all killers fit a certain *profile*. This is a work in progress to be honest. Sometimes *profiling* helps and sometimes it falls flat on it’s face. For example at one time they thought serial killers didn’t kill out of their race group. Since then this has been proven wrong.
Syrian general: We planned to send chemical weapons to Hezbollah
@ Iron Fist:
I agree to a point. Race vs. Faith/Religion/and Religious Tenets.
More than a few are going to land on the side of their faith…because what obama is trying to do goes against everything they believe in. But hey I’m in the South and religion is taken seriously. Obama has hurt himself here by going against religious tenets. Especially doubling down on abortion/gay marriage/and his war on religion which is our Constitutional right. Freedom OF Religion.
So like you say he may still gather most of the black vote..he will not have all of it this time around.
@ Lily:
In that case, they were completey wrong, because he wasn’t a serial killer. He was a jihadist.
@ 1389AD:
I really haven’t seen that many myself since you have mentioned it.
But then again I haven’t been looking for yard sales. Of course with you being in Motor home like my parents there is just so much you can keep…space is at premium. So gifts to my parents are either edible or flowers. That either have time limit or they can eat.
@ Lily:
In Obama’s America, you have whatever rights he decides you can have.
lobo91 wrote:
Ever stepped on one of them somes-of-b*tches??? They hurt!!!! August is the season they are really in flare!!!! Living close to the coast I have no love for jellyfishes.
@ 1389AD:
I have no disagreement with obama being evil. He cares for no one but himself and he certainly doesn’t love the country he is suppose to govern. I don’t like jellyfish anyway. Those things are a meance.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
True. He doesn’t care what works for our country…but he is tone deaf just like all wanna-be dictators. They don’t care about the people at all..only themselves.
John Difool wrote:
This is getting worse by the second. Do we even have the intell to know what is what here?
lobo91 wrote:
That is because he believes in “human rights”—i.e., rights as special privileges held by favored groups by government dispensation—instead of liberty protected by civil rights.
@ Lily:
He knows that what he’s doing won’t work. That’s the plan.
You can’t “fundamentally transform” a country without tearing down the existing one first.
Lily wrote:
We don’t get all that many channels here; we just get the basic cable that comes with our RV park rental. My husband watches both the made-up stuff and a couple of shows that are real. Problem is, both of those cherry pick cases that have non-Muslim white people for the bad guys.
Via The Jerusalem Post
Experts: Only US can destroy Iran’s nuke program
lobo91 wrote:
Yep. So they didn’t even take that into account. Not sure if it would have mattered. He didn’t leave any signs behind (before they caught him) like allah akbar or such. It was only after they caught him they knew his real intent. If I remember correctly it was a sharp-eyed truck driver that actually got him caught too.
Lily wrote:
The general defected three months ago so no telling if those weapons have been delivered since then. However, there has been significant Quds/Republican Guard force incursions into Lebanon over the past week supplying the Hezzbolls, so maybe the Iranians brought it for them.
Lily wrote:
Nope.
Only thing I know is this: bad as the Syrian government and Hezbollah are, their enemies are worse. Their enemies want to install straight-up shariah, and no Christians will survive there.
And where did the Syrians get those chem weapons? I seem to recall our having pissed away so much time before attacking Saddam Hussein that he had plenty of time to offload most of his contraband to Syria.
We would have been better off having no involvement in either Gulf War, merely telling everyone involved that we will nuke them without warning if they attack any US businesses or citizens, and we will let them alone for the time being if they keep their problems among themselves.
@ 1389AD:
Some probably did come from Iraq, but Syria has been a producer of chemical weapons for decades.
lobo91 wrote:
Do you think he is that astute? Or did he under-estimate the tearing down of the United States?
Speranza wrote:
If anybody with any sense were in office here, we’d already have dropped thermonuclear devices on every hardened target that might be concealing a nuclear installation.
1389AD wrote:
Not the ones I’ve seen. Now I can agree on one thing I haven’t seen any muslim bad guys on any of the shows.
@ Lily:
Yes
Speranza wrote:
I’m pretty sure that I said exactly that upthread.
If the alternative is doing nothing and waiting to be killed, though, which do you think they’ll do?
@ lobo91:
I have to admit he has done a rather good job of being bad for our country in every area.
Lily wrote:
Nobody’s that (un)lucky.
@ lobo91:
True. He has divided this country and it’s just full of vingear and spit at each other ….
Lily wrote:
I can remember exactly ONE with a Muslim terrorist bad guy.
White perps are overrepresented, both in terms of the percentage of the population as a whole, and in terms of the percentage of the population who are convicted of crimes. Although that might be because it’s hard to write a good detective story about a common street criminal or ghetto thug.
But you NEVER see a story where an obviously liberal politician, bureaucrat, journalist, NGO creepazoid, or academic is caught committing a felony and has to pay the price for it. I suppose that is because, in real life, those types nearly always get away with the evil that they do.
@ 1389AD:
They may get away with it here on earth, but when it is time, they, like all of us, must answer to God Himself.
lobo91 wrote:
My opinion is that if they were going to attack they would have done it when Bush was president. I still do not see the route they can take to Natanz (and what would be waiting for them if they could some how get there?). The idea that the Saudis will allow them to overfly their territory is a pipe dream. As I wrote almost three years ago on this very blog -- don’t be transfixed by Raid on Entebbe movies. Somethings are one off deals and cannot be repeated. Just my opinion.
Who’s sabotqaging Iran’s nuclear program?
Haw! Iranian cleric gets his ass kicked by woman after he tells her she’s “badly covered”. Feel good story of the day.
Speranza wrote:
One can only hope…
@ John Difool:
“Ain’t got no yard? Ain’t got no oven? Pimp yo’ ass for Obama!”