First time visitor? Learn more.

The Hruska defense of mediocrity

by Speranza ( 130 Comments › )
Filed under Iran, Israel, Russia at February 7th, 2013 - 7:00 am

A mediocre Defense Secretary to join up with a mediocre Secretary of State, a mediocre C.I.A. Director all under the nominal tutelage of a less then mediocre President of the Untied States.

by Bret Stephens

Once upon a time, a Republican senator from Nebraska spoke up for the right of mediocrities to occupy eminent positions of public trust.

“Even if he were mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers,” said Sen. Roman Hruska in 1970 as a defense of G. Harrold Carswell, Richard Nixon’s ill-fated nominee to the Supreme Court. “They are entitled to a little representation, aren’t they, and a little chance? We can’t have all Brandeises, Frankfurters and Cardozos.”

Right. And at the Pentagon, we can’t have all Stimsons, Forrestals and Marshalls. Which is why America needs another senator from Nebraska to vindicate the cause of the mediocre man.That man is Chuck Hagel.

Until his confirmation hearing last week, Mr. Hagel was touted as a courageous tribune of the hard but necessary truth. His nomination, according to one sycophant, “may prove to be the most consequential foreign-policy appointment of [ Barack Obama's] presidency.” He was hailed as a latter-day Dwight Eisenhower, a military hero mindful of the appropriate limits of U.S. power, a real American bold enough to tell the chicken-hawk neocon pretenders where they could stick it.As for his claim about the Jewish lobby intimidating people, it was no more than a gaffe in the sense of accidentally telling the naked truth. “I am certain,” said another prominent Hagel defender, “that the vast majority of U.S. senators and policy makers quietly believe exactly what Hagel believes on Israel.”  [.......]

After the hearings, what’s left of that defense?

image

Chuck Hagel at his Senate confirmation hearing last week.

Courageous Chuck is done for. He simply folded in the face of questions about his previous positions on Israel, Iran, nuclear Global Zero, Pentagon overspending and so on. [.......]If he’s insincere, then he’s little more than a dissembler trying to advance his career.

Deep-thinking Chuck is no more, either. His befuddlement on Obama administration policy toward Iran—the flubbed remark about containment, the passed note, the re-flub, the coaching from committee Chairman Carl Levin—was almost the least of it.  [.......]

Chuck-in-Charge is also not in the cards. “I won’t be in a policy-making position,” he said, astonishingly, to a question from West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin. To be the secretary of defense, you see, is a bit like being the grand marshal at an Independence Day parade: You wear a sash, you hold a baton, you say a few words, you smile, wave and walk the route.

It says something about the political state of play that Mr. Hagel’s defenders are now whispering that he just won’t matter all that much. Serious defense policy will be run by the grown-ups in the White House, people like Ben Rhodes, Valerie Jarrett, Denis McDonough and, of course, the president. That’s reassuring.It also says something about the political moment that Republicans seem prepared to let Mr. Hagel through now that they have drawn a bit of blood. Nebraska’s Mike Johanns and Mississippi’s Thad Cochran have declared their support for Mr. Hagel. John McCain opposes a filibuster on the grounds that the president deserves an up-or-down vote on his nominee. [.......] But a political party that can’t press a political advantage when it has one is a loser. And who wants an opposition that thinks its honor lies in losing honorably?

In the meantime, it will come as a comfort to America’s enemies to know what they’ll be getting in a second Obama term.One is a cabinet without a single hawk or even semi-hawk, whereas only a year ago there were three: Leon Panetta, David Petraeus and even Hillary Clinton. Another is a secretary of defense with an unsteady grasp of a department that may, within a month, be facing a historic and blunt reduction in its budgets. A third is a vice president who has just agreed to yet another round of negotiations with Tehran. And finally there’s a president whose second inaugural address was entirely devoted to calling America home for the collective tasks he believes lie ahead.

Ask yourself how Vladimir Putin, Ali Khamenei and Bashar Assad are likely to feel about all of that. Shouldn’t America have at least one officer of cabinet rank who scares the daylights out of these people?

If Mr. Hagel had a sense of the seriousness of the office he is now likely to enter, he would withdraw his name from consideration. But the essential characteristic of mediocre people is that they are the last to recognize mediocrity, either in themselves or in others. That our legislators in their wisdom may soon make this man secretary of defense says as much about them as it does about him. Truly, it’s a Roman Senate.

Read the rest – Hagel’s Hruska Defense

Tags: , ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

130 Responses to “The Hruska defense of mediocrity”
( jump to bottom )

  1. buzzsawmonkey
    1 | February 6, 2013 5:13 pm

    “Even if he were mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers,” said Sen. Roman Hruska in 1970 as a defense of G. Harrold Carswell, Richard Nixon’s ill-fated nominee to the Supreme Court. “They are entitled to a little representation, aren’t they, and a little chance? We can’t have all Brandeises, Frankfurters and Cardozos.”

    Actually, Hruska said, “We can’t have all Brandeises, Frankfurters and Cardozos, and stuff like that there.” He was roundly criticized for his endorsement of mediocrity, and for his choosing three Jewish Supreme Court Justices as his examples.

    BTW, G. Harrold Carswell was arrested some years later in a Florida men’s room for soliciting sexual favors.


  2. 2 | February 7, 2013 7:15 am

    I think mediocre is the best we could shoot for with Obama's nominees. Hagel will be outright bad for the country. That’s why Obama chose him.


  3. citizen_q
    3 | February 7, 2013 7:33 am

    Given this schmuck’s history, IMHO it is highly telling he is refusing to disclose foreign funding of organizations he worked with.

    Hagel Refuses to Disclose Foreign Funders

    “President Barack Obama’s nominee for Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, has informed the Senate Armed Services Committee that he will not provide foreign financial details for the corporate and nonprofit organizations he was affiliated with since he left the Senate in 2009,” reports BuzzFeed.

    Hagel maintains that he has a “fiduciary duty” to keep “confidentiality” of his and his organization’s donors.

    A Senate aide tells BuzzFeed, “Senators are not reacting well to [Hagel's] response.”

    The aide details, “Committee members have specific concerns with regard to foreign contributions to the Atlantic Council by Saad Hariri (or the Hariri family), Dinu Patriciu, Kazakhstan, Bidzina Ivanishvili (his supporters/network) – and the nexus between Chevron’s investments in Kazakhstan and their involvement with Hagel at the Atlantic Council.”

    What was the question put to him in the hearings last week? Why does Iran support your appointment?

    I would think he is simply bought and paid for, but like jimmy carter, and comrade zero I think hagel has found deep pockets that share his hatreds.


  4. 4 | February 7, 2013 7:44 am

    citizen_q wrote:

    A Senate aide tells BuzzFeed, “Senators are not reacting well to [Hagel's] response.”

    I’d love Hagel to get voted down, but I bet that a slim majority will confirm him. The Democrats see themselves as a rubber stamp for Obama. They’ll do anything he asks.


  5. 5 | February 7, 2013 7:51 am

    It’s pretty insulting and cynical that the administration thinks they can slip this loser by on the basis of “hey, we’re bipartisan, we’re nominating a Republican!”. That said, they keep doubling down on their bet that the American people are just stupid enough to swallow anything they’re fed, and in all fairness, that’s been a successful strategy. Republicans need to flush this turd by themselves, they’ll get no help from the American people.


  6. 6 | February 7, 2013 7:59 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Part of me says why not go ahead and give him to America. Let Americans see how truly bad a President Barack Obama really is. Hagel is being brought in to demolish our military. Obama’s alreayd working on that. Di d you see the thing yesterday where they are severly restricting military pay raises? They can give Congress a raise, and all the Federal drones, but the fighting men on the sharp end of the stick get nada. It is just going to get worse, no matter who Obama appoints Sec Def. Hagel is probably no worse that whomever else Obama would appoint.


  7. 7 | February 7, 2013 8:11 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I suppose Обама could nominate Барни Франк for the job….


  8. 8 | February 7, 2013 8:17 am

    Tech advice needed before I head to work.

    I use Firefox (18.0.2) and in the last day or so, any in thread youtube videos have disappeared.

    Any ideas?


  9. 9 | February 7, 2013 8:20 am

    Ok, even weirder. Videos in the ‘Shakespeare’ thread aren’t showing, but ones from the ‘Mumford’ one are.

    WTF?!

    BTW- I’ll be doing the ‘Bowl For Kid’s Sake’ again this year. I’ll post a link to the site where you can sponsor me if you’re able here in a day or two.

    Thank you!


  10. citizen_q
    10 | February 7, 2013 8:33 am

    @ mfhorn:
    Check your plugins.

    You might need to reinstall or upgrade them. Occasionally I have issues after a firefox upgrade.


  11. citizen_q
    11 | February 7, 2013 8:35 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    Comrade zero has not taken responsibility for anything yet, why would they start now?

    They can blame boooosh, or the evbil republicans for not increasing taxes, or tsunamis in Japan, sunspots, juptiter aligning with mars, etc…


  12. 12 | February 7, 2013 8:36 am

    Ask yourself how Vladimir Putin, Ali Khamenei and Bashar Assad are likely to feel about all of that. Shouldn’t America have at least one officer of cabinet rank who scares the daylights out of these people?

    Bashar Assad is too busy fighting al-Qaeda. Putin is enjoying Russia’s economic boom. Iran is the only potential problem on that list and the Chinese. I don’t get why the GOP elite is obsessed with Assad. He’s nothing and has his own problems.


  13. 13 | February 7, 2013 8:38 am

    In case anyone missed it.

    Rand Paul’s Foreign Policy speech at the Heritage Foundation

    There is nothing groundbreaking here. This was the traditional Republican policy until Bush decided to be the reincarnation of Woodrow Wilson.


  14. 14 | February 7, 2013 8:41 am

    @ Rodan:

    Top o’ the day Rodan, Here’s a good column that I think you’ll enjoy.


  15. 15 | February 7, 2013 8:50 am

    @ MacDuff:

    That article is spot on!

    How are you? That was a great game Sunday!


  16. Speranza
    16 | February 7, 2013 8:57 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    Top o’ the day Rodan, Here’s a good column that I think you’ll enjoy.

    Excellent article.


  17. 17 | February 7, 2013 8:58 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    That article is spot on!

    How are you? That was a great game Sunday!

    I’m good and I hope you are as well, just been consumed by other things. Yeah, that was a fantastic game! I had no dog in the fight, which made it all the more enjoyable. BTW, there is a fantastic slideshow of the Battle of Stalingrad over at the National Review website that’s well worth looking at


  18. Speranza
    18 | February 7, 2013 8:59 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Actually, Hruska said, “We can’t have all Brandeises, Frankfurters and Cardozos, and stuff like that there.” He was roundly criticized for his endorsement of mediocrity, and for his choosing three Jewish Supreme Court Justices as his examples.

    BTW, G. Harrold Carswell was arrested some years later in a Florida men’s room for soliciting sexual favors.

    The whole Clement Haynesworth (and after his rejection by the Senate) the G. Harold Carswell nominations were complete embarrassments. It was Nixon (anticipating down the road George W. Bush and Mitt Romney) trying to pander to yahoos in 1969 and it blew up in his face.


  19. 19 | February 7, 2013 8:59 am

    @ MacDuff:

    BTW, there is a fantastic slideshow of the Battle of Stalingrad over at the National Review website that’s well worth looking at

    Will do that battle fascinates me.


  20. Speranza
    20 | February 7, 2013 9:02 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Bashar Assad is too busy fighting al-Qaeda. Putin is enjoying Russia’s economic boom. Iran is the only potential problem on that list and the Chinese. I don’t get why the GOP elite is obsessed with Assad. He’s nothing and has his own problems.

    He is an Iranian stooge and a pale imitation of his father.


  21. theoutsider
    21 | February 7, 2013 9:08 am

    @ Rodan:
    I’d rather sign on with Eisenhower’s foreign policy. Rand Paul is a phony. He’s trying to thread the needle between his father’s policies and the policies of Bill Kristol. The result is a FAIL.


  22. 22 | February 7, 2013 9:11 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    I’d rather sign on with Eisenhower’s foreign policy. Rand Paul is a phony. He’s trying to thread the needle between his father’s policies and the policies of Bill Kristol. The result is a FAIL.

    I see you got OFA’s talking points.

    What did Rand Paul say that bothers you? His policy is no different than Ike or Reagan. Please tell me what bothers you about Rand Paul’s speech?


  23. 23 | February 7, 2013 9:12 am

    @ Speranza:
    Al Qaeda will end up beheading him.


  24. coldwarrior
    24 | February 7, 2013 9:13 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    I’d rather sign on with Eisenhower’s foreign policy. Rand Paul is a phony. He’s trying to thread the needle between his father’s policies and the policies of Bill Kristol. The result is a FAIL.

    oh, please do flesh out the following:

    He’s trying to thread the needle between his father’s policies and the policies of Bill Kristol. The result is a FAIL.

    i also eagerly await details on that and deatails on how you plan on paying down the debt. seriously, i am getting sick of your shuck and jive. please answer the above questions or be a coward and nothing more than a talking point memo. the floor is yours.


  25. 25 | February 7, 2013 9:14 am

    David Bosse in Breitbart: The Civil War Has Begun

    If this has already been posted or otherwise noted, my apologies, but it’s not my fault. ;)


  26. RIX
    26 | February 7, 2013 9:16 am

    Good morning. The Brennan hearing could be interesting if the Republicns
    ask the right questions about the drone program.
    What criteria are they using to kill Americns on foreign soil with apparently no
    judicial or other legal process?
    Obama is so grovvy & nuanced, waterboarding is a human rights violation,
    but kaboom by a drone is standrd ops.


  27. theoutsider
    27 | February 7, 2013 9:18 am

    @ Rodan:
    OFA’s talking points? No way in hell. Can’t you see that Rand Paul is sucking up to the NeoCons?


  28. coldwarrior
    28 | February 7, 2013 9:18 am

    @ RIX:

    until the gop grows a set, the dems and 0 will govern at will.

    we are led by cowards.


  29. 29 | February 7, 2013 9:19 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    I’d rather sign on with Eisenhower’s foreign policy.

    What’s this sudden fascination on the left with Eisenhower?


  30. coldwarrior
    30 | February 7, 2013 9:21 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    theoutsider wrote:
    I’d rather sign on with Eisenhower’s foreign policy.
    What’s this sudden fascination on the left with Eisenhower?

    stop. i want an answer from outsider to my #24.

    seriously want an answer. i’m done playing around with it.


  31. 31 | February 7, 2013 9:21 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    OFA’s talking points? No way in hell. Can’t you see that Rand Paul is sucking up to the NeoCons?

    How is he sucking up to the Neocons, when he rejects their nation building philosophy. Please give me an example how he is kissing up to Neocons.


  32. 32 | February 7, 2013 9:22 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    theoutsider wrote:
    I’d rather sign on with Eisenhower’s foreign policy.
    What’s this sudden fascination on the left with Eisenhower?

    That is what fascinates me. He was Center-Right and not a man of the Left.


  33. 33 | February 7, 2013 9:22 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    @ RIX:

    until the gop grows a set, the dems and 0 will govern at will.

    we are led by cowards.

    Guggi pasted a very good Ayn Rand quote on the previous thread apropos to that point:

    The truly and deliberately evil men are a very small minority; it is the appeaser who unleashes them on mankind; it is the appeaser’s intellectual abdication that invites them to take over. When a culture’s dominant trend is geared to irrationality, the thugs win over the appeasers. When intellectual leaders fail to foster the best in the mixed, unformed, vacillating character of people at large, the thugs are sure to bring out the worst. When the ablest men turn into cowards, the average men turn into brutes.


  34. 34 | February 7, 2013 9:23 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Establishment vs. Purists. Neither one is the answer.


  35. RIX
    35 | February 7, 2013 9:25 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    @ RIX:

    until the gop grows a set, the dems and 0 will govern at will.

    we are led by cowards.

    Obama & his people are lawless. Checks & balances is a concept that they
    find quaint. They consider the Constitution a set of suggestions that they are
    free to ignore.
    Senator Durbin slandered our troops, as Nazis, Gulag Guards & Pol Pot henchman
    for water boarding. But he’s cool with the drone program with no oversight.


  36. coldwarrior
    36 | February 7, 2013 9:26 am

    @ MacDuff:

    ayn is a fun read but a bit of a kook.

    in that quote she blames everyone else for the evils of a few. no, i blame the perpetrators not everyone else. she gives the elites an out for bad behavior by blaming the masses there.


  37. coldwarrior
    37 | February 7, 2013 9:26 am

    i await an answer from outsider.

    the clock is ticking.


  38. coldwarrior
    38 | February 7, 2013 9:28 am

    RIX wrote:

    Checks & balances is a concept that they
    find quaint.

    because the opposition allows them to think that.

    it is reality


  39. 39 | February 7, 2013 9:29 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    He’s awaiting an answer from OFA.


  40. rain of lead
    40 | February 7, 2013 9:30 am

    @ coldwarrior:
    good luck
    with an answer from the outsider
    the slimey little pusbucket has got nuthin


  41. RIX
    41 | February 7, 2013 9:33 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    Checks & balances is a concept that they
    find quaint.

    because the opposition allows them to think that.

    it is reality

    THe Republicans seem to think that to much criticism of Obama gets
    them branded as mean & racist.
    They are playing it safe, hoping to win the Senate in 2014.
    Bad idea, it didn’t do Romney any good.


  42. rain of lead
    42 | February 7, 2013 9:35 am

    wow

    Dick Yuengling rips Philadelphia over $6 million lawsuit

    Dick Yuengling said he was “probably the happiest guy in the beer business” – until Tuesday.

    That’s when he learned, from an article in the Daily News, that the city was suing his Pottsville brewery, D.G. Yuengling & Son, for more than $6 million in business taxes it claims he owes

    Councilman Bill Green said it’s in the city’s interest. “I don’t know whether it’s a warning shot for everyone else in the market,” he said. “It’s a good idea, if it is.”

    The suit, filed last week, seeks $6.6 million in business-income and -receipt taxes (BIRT) from Yuengling. That figure includes interest and penalty fees.

    The suit claims that Yuengling refused to let the city’s Revenue Department audit its books, so the department made an assessment based on a Philly beer distributor’s accounts-payable list.

    The suit has no details of what activities Yuengling conducted in Philadelphia that the city found to be taxable. City officials declined to elabor


  43. coldwarrior
    43 | February 7, 2013 9:38 am

    @ rain of lead:

    yeugling is in pottsville, many miles away from the shithole that is phillie.

    take it to court, dick. you will win in a jury trial!


  44. coldwarrior
    44 | February 7, 2013 9:39 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    i await an answer from outsider.
    the clock is ticking.

    tick tock outsider.

    the floor is yours.


  45. theoutsider
    45 | February 7, 2013 9:41 am

    @ Rodan:
    Maybe a lot more voter @ Rodan:
    I give in. I read the whole AEI speech, and it it is not Neocon friendly. I’ve been going on his last few appearances on Fox News.


  46. 46 | February 7, 2013 9:41 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    ayn is a fun read but a bit of a kook.

    in that quote she blames everyone else for the evils of a few. no, i blame the perpetrators not everyone else. she gives the elites an out for bad behavior by blaming the masses there.

    It’s rather a paragraph-long expansion of Burke’s (and I paraphrase) ‘Evil triumphs when good men do nothing’ line, but it’s a thought that I believe has currency. Self-governance is not always positive or wise and, in fact, can sometimes lead to horrendous consequences when “The People” are swayed by emotion instead of rational thought.

    As for myself, I’ve


  47. 47 | February 7, 2013 9:41 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    You’ll not get it. I’ve never had an answer on what we are going to do when the debt reaches 150% GDP.


  48. coldwarrior
    48 | February 7, 2013 9:43 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    As for myself, I’ve

    you’ve….?

    :lol:


  49. 49 | February 7, 2013 9:44 am

    @ theoutsider:

    I’ve been going on his last few appearances on Fox News.

    What has he said on Fox that gives you that impression?


  50. Speranza
    50 | February 7, 2013 9:49 am

    Neocons!

    Hagel is as Mark Steyn wrote, “an over sedated Elmer Fudd”.


  51. coldwarrior
    51 | February 7, 2013 9:50 am

    Speranza wrote:

    Neocons!
    Hagel is as Mark Steyn wrote, “an over sedated Elmer Fudd”.

    at least elmer was likeable.


  52. RIX
    52 | February 7, 2013 9:51 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    theoutsider wrote:

    I’d rather sign on with Eisenhower’s foreign policy.

    What’s this sudden fascination on the left with Eisenhower?

    The Left always rehabilitates a Republican that they used to disdain,
    to use as a club against them.
    They constantly use Reagan as an example of Republican reason.
    But in life they loathed & smeared him.
    Obama told his room mate at Columbia that he wanted to be a Community
    Organizer to undo Reagans policies, but he constantly uses Reagan to
    somehow justify himself.


  53. 53 | February 7, 2013 9:52 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    Rand Paul’s speech struck a nerve with the Spread Democracy/Nation Building crowd.

    I wonder what the Outsider has to say now.


  54. Speranza
    54 | February 7, 2013 9:53 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    ayn is a fun read but a bit of a kook.

    Her books are like 1,000 pages. Good luck with that. I also do not like the cult of personality her fans have developed over her (and that includes a woman whom Charles Johnson used to like but now hates and who named her blog after one of Rand’s novels).


  55. coldwarrior
    55 | February 7, 2013 9:54 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    Maybe a lot more voter @ Rodan:
    I give in. I read the whole AEI speech, and it it is not Neocon friendly. I’ve been going on his last few appearances on Fox News.

    that is half of the answer.

    do continue, my man. we wait with great anticipation.

    to refresh the second part of my question: i also eagerly await details on that and deatails on how you plan on paying down the debt.

    my ceylon aislaby estate will be brewed in 3 minutes and i await some enlightening reading whilst i enjoy sri lanka’s finest.


  56. theoutsider
    56 | February 7, 2013 9:55 am

    @ Rodan:
    Hannity, O’reilly, Greta. I’ve seen him on all three. The guy is not a libertarian in their eyes. He wants to suck up to every viewer he can possibly get.


  57. 57 | February 7, 2013 9:55 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:

    As for myself, I’ve

    you’ve….?

    I’ve prematurely hit “submit”! :D

    I was going to say that I’ve lost the reverence for “the wisdom of the People”. Fool us once, shame on Obama, fool us twice, shame on us.


  58. Speranza
    58 | February 7, 2013 9:55 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    Rand Paul’s speech struck a nerve with the Spread Democracy/Nation Building crowd.
    I wonder what the Outsider has to say now.

    He is checking with TPM.


  59. Speranza
    59 | February 7, 2013 9:55 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    I was going to say that I’ve lost the reverence for “the wisdom of the People”. Fool us once, shame on Obama, fool us twice, shame on us.

    It may sound elitist but the masses (low information voters) are asses.


  60. coldwarrior
    60 | February 7, 2013 9:56 am

    Speranza wrote:

    coldwarrior wrote:
    ayn is a fun read but a bit of a kook.

    Her books are like 1,000 pages. Good luck with that. I also do not like the cult of personality her fans have developed over her (and that includes a woman whom Charles Johnson used to like but now hates and who named her blog after one of Rand’s novels).

    most folks have just read the cliff notes. she was required reading in two of my undergrad courses so i had no choice but to slog through.


  61. Speranza
    61 | February 7, 2013 9:56 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    Hannity, O’reilly, Greta. I’ve seen him on all three. The guy is not a libertarian in their eyes. He wants to suck up to every viewer he can possibly get.

    He is a small “l” libertarian as am I. He does not have his head up his ass like his father has. The Ronulans on Hot Air hate him.


  62. coldwarrior
    62 | February 7, 2013 9:57 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    I’ve prematurely hit “submit”! :D

    there are treatments for that you know.

    :lol:


  63. 63 | February 7, 2013 9:58 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    Hannity, O’reilly, Greta. I’ve seen him on all three. The guy is not a libertarian in their eyes. He wants to suck up to every viewer he can possibly get.

    Can you be specific on what Rand has said that is sucking up. I want an example and not generalities.


  64. Speranza
    64 | February 7, 2013 9:59 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    most folks have just read the cliff notes. she was required reading in two of my undergrad courses so i had no choice but to slog through.

    Atlas Shrugged is over 1,000 pages as is The Fountain Head, you have to have some ego to write novels that long.


  65. 65 | February 7, 2013 9:59 am

    Speranza wrote:

    It may sound elitist but the masses (low information voters) are asses.

    I, too, may sound elitist by saying that I heartily agree.


  66. 66 | February 7, 2013 10:00 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:

    I’ve prematurely hit “submit”!

    there are treatments for that you know.

    Well played! :D


  67. coldwarrior
    67 | February 7, 2013 10:00 am

    Speranza wrote:

    I also do not like the cult of personality her fans have developed over her (and that includes a woman whom Charles Johnson used to like but now hates and who named her blog after one of Rand’s novels).

    shining prince robert is going to scold you for that!


  68. RIX
    68 | February 7, 2013 10:02 am

    davidfrum @davidfrum

    If a Union sniper had killed Robert E. Lee without a jury trial first, would that have been a war crime?
    10:49 PM – 05 Feb 13
    23 RETWEETS 12 FAVORITES ReplyRetweetFavorite

    Frum is of course defending Obama on his drone policy.
    This is an odious comparison. R.E Lee was the commander of
    enemy forces in a declared war.


  69. Speranza
    69 | February 7, 2013 10:03 am

    RIX wrote:

    The Left always rehabilitates a Republican that they used to disdain,
    to use as a club against them.
    They constantly use Reagan as an example of Republican reason.
    But in life they loathed & smeared him.
    Obama told his room mate at Columbia that he wanted to be a Community
    Organizer to undo Reagans policies, but he constantly uses Reagan to
    somehow justify himself.

    Another favorite former Republican President whom they reviled but now have rehabilitated was George H.W. Bush probably because he was at heart a big liberal, kinder and gentler type and was anti-Israel as well. Colin Powell called himself a George H.W. Bush, James Baker, Brent Scowcroft Republican.


  70. coldwarrior
    70 | February 7, 2013 10:04 am

    @ theoutsider:

    my tea is done.

    to refresh the second part of my question: i also eagerly await details on that and deatails on how you plan on paying down the debt.

    i take my tea straight, so you have a few minutes whilst it cools.


  71. Speranza
    71 | February 7, 2013 10:04 am

    RIX wrote:

    Frum is of course defending Obama on his drone policy.
    This is an odious comparison. R.E Lee was the commander of
    enemy forces in a declared war.

    Frum has a tendency to tweet before he thinks things through.


  72. coldwarrior
    72 | February 7, 2013 10:06 am

    RIX wrote:

    davidfrum @davidfrum
    If a Union sniper had killed Robert E. Lee without a jury trial first, would that have been a war crime?
    10:49 PM — 05 Feb 13
    23 RETWEETS 12 FAVORITES ReplyRetweetFavorite
    Frum is of course defending Obama on his drone policy.
    This is an odious comparison. R.E Lee was the commander of
    enemy forces in a declared war.

    if W had done this the left would have flipped the hell out.


  73. 73 | February 7, 2013 10:06 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    He’s awaiting OFA.


  74. Speranza
    74 | February 7, 2013 10:07 am

    The Civil War actually was not a declared war and neither was the Revolution.


  75. theoutsider
    75 | February 7, 2013 10:07 am

    @ Rodan:
    Any time he’s been on O’Reilly, Greta, or Hannity. Isn’t it obvious?


  76. coldwarrior
    76 | February 7, 2013 10:07 am

    Speranza wrote:

    coldwarrior wrote:
    most folks have just read the cliff notes. she was required reading in two of my undergrad courses so i had no choice but to slog through.
    Atlas Shrugged is over 1,000 pages as is The Fountain Head, you have to have some ego to write novels that long.

    maybe she was russian?

    :lol:


  77. 77 | February 7, 2013 10:09 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    If W had done this, he’d have been impeached.


  78. coldwarrior
    78 | February 7, 2013 10:09 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    Any time he’s been on O’Reilly, Greta, or Hannity. Isn’t it obvious?


    Any time he’s been on O’Reilly, Greta, or Hannity. Isn’t it obvious?

    how i plan on paying down this debt is…

    (i started it for you)


  79. 79 | February 7, 2013 10:10 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    Any time he’s been on O’Reilly, Greta, or Hannity. Isn’t it obvious?

    Can you be specific. What has Rand Paul said that would be considered kissing up? Please I want a specific example.

    Be honest, you just hate Rand Paul because the media and OFA tells you too. Be real.


  80. coldwarrior
    80 | February 7, 2013 10:10 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    If W had done this, he’d have been impeached.

    ya think!


  81. 81 | February 7, 2013 10:11 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    If W had done this, he’d have been impeached.

    There would be massive protests. But Obama is a god-king and can do what he pleases.


  82. RIX
    82 | February 7, 2013 10:11 am

    if W had done this the left would have flipped the hell out.
    @ coldwarrior:

    The Hitler comparisons would be all over the place.


  83. coldwarrior
    83 | February 7, 2013 10:14 am

    RIX wrote:

    if W had done this the left would have flipped the hell out.
    @ coldwarrior:

    The Hitler comparisons would be all over the place.

    chimpymcbushitler, baby!


  84. 84 | February 7, 2013 10:17 am

    Speranza wrote:

    The Civil War actually was not a declared war and neither was the Revolution.

    History isn’t a continuum, it’s a series of events, somewhat contained by their time and surrounding events. Positing the morality of assassinating Lee as a historical measure of a contemporary act, is like surmising what Alexander the Great would have done- it’s absurd on it’s face. One might just as well wonder what Captain Kirk would do…..


  85. RIX
    85 | February 7, 2013 10:17 am

    Family sues Disneyland, claims rabbit character is ‘racist’

    Published February 07, 2013 | FoxNews.com

    A San Diego family is suing Disneyland, alleging that an employee in a rabbit costume at the popular amusement park is racist.

    Fox5SanDiego.com reports that the Black family was on a trip to the Anaheim park in August when 6-year-old Jason Black Jr. approached his favorite character, the White Rabbit.
    “I went to hug him but he turned his back,” Jason told the station. “It’s made me feel sad because I wanted to really hug him.”

    Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/weird-news/2013/02/07/lawsuit-disneys-white-rabbit-

    racist#ixzz2KE6yzkLT

    Didn’t you always know that the bunny was a cracker?
    What about that ho Alice? I never saw her hanging out with
    anybody looking like he could be Obamas son.


  86. RIX
    86 | February 7, 2013 10:18 am

    Speranza wrote:

    The Civil War actually was not a declared war and neither was the Revolution.

    Thanks, that is something that I didn’t know.


  87. RIX
    87 | February 7, 2013 10:19 am

    @ coldwarrior:
    Ohn yeah.


  88. Speranza
    88 | February 7, 2013 10:21 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    Speranza wrote:
    I also do not like the cult of personality her fans have developed over her (and that includes a woman whom Charles Johnson used to like but now hates and who named her blog after one of Rand’s novels).

    shining prince robert is going to scold you for that!

    Just because people dislike the same things you do does not necessarily make them your friends.


  89. coldwarrior
    89 | February 7, 2013 10:23 am

    @ RIX:

    damn krakaz.


  90. Speranza
    90 | February 7, 2013 10:23 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    Speranza wrote:
    coldwarrior wrote:
    most folks have just read the cliff notes. she was required reading in two of my undergrad courses so i had no choice but to slog through.
    Atlas Shrugged is over 1,000 pages as is The Fountain Head, you have to have some ego to write novels that long.

    maybe she was russian?

    Actually I think she was Russian.


  91. Speranza
    91 | February 7, 2013 10:25 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    Speranza wrote:
    The Civil War actually was not a declared war and neither was the Revolution.

    History isn’t a continuum, it’s a series of events, somewhat contained by their time and surrounding events. Positing the morality of assassinating Lee as a historical measure of a contemporary act, is like surmising what Alexander the Great would have done- it’s absurd on it’s face. One might just as well wonder what Captain Kirk would do…..

    That is why comparing Generals from different eras is pointless.


  92. Speranza
    92 | February 7, 2013 10:25 am

    RIX wrote:

    Speranza wrote:
    The Civil War actually was not a declared war and neither was the Revolution.

    Thanks, that is something that I didn’t know.

    Wars are declared between independent nations.


  93. RIX
    93 | February 7, 2013 10:26 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    @ RIX:

    damn krakaz.

    Always keepin the people down.


  94. coldwarrior
    94 | February 7, 2013 10:26 am

    Speranza wrote:

    maybe she was russian?

    Actually I think she was Russian.

    that explains the seemingly endless epic novels.


  95. Speranza
    95 | February 7, 2013 10:26 am

    Ayn Rand (pron.: /ˈaɪn ˈrænd/;[1] born Alisa Zinov’yevna Rosenbaum; February 2 [O.S. January 20] 1905 – March 6, 1982) was a Russian-American novelist, philosopher,[2] playwright, and screenwriter. She is known for her two best-selling novels, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, and for developing a philosophical system she called Objectivism. Born and educated in Russia, Rand moved to the United States in 1926. She worked as a screenwriter in Hollywood and had a play produced on Broadway in 1935–1936. After two early novels that were initially less successful, she achieved fame with her 1943 novel The Fountainhead.


  96. Lily
    96 | February 7, 2013 10:27 am

    I know off topic…but not only are Americans going to feel the burn with their income tax returns, gas prices and now food….which would effect the poor and the old. Yeah obama really cares/NOT. Really the obama administration likes we are stupid.

    The FDA says much of ObamaCare is aimed at helping Americans live healthier lives, and these proposed labeling requirements would help them do just that. In the text of the proposed regulation, the FDA states: “[The information] should help consumers limit excess calorie intake and understand how the foods that they purchase at these establishments fit within their daily caloric and other nutritional needs.”

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/06/jail-time-for-food-labels/?test=latestnews#ixzz2KE9APcRy


  97. coldwarrior
    97 | February 7, 2013 10:27 am

    RIX wrote:

    coldwarrior wrote:
    @ RIX:
    damn krakaz.

    Always keepin the people down.

    kraka-assed honky bunny!


  98. coldwarrior
    98 | February 7, 2013 10:28 am

    @ Speranza:

    the long russian winters can get tedious.


  99. Lily
    99 | February 7, 2013 10:28 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    I think mediocre is the best we could shoot for with Obama’s nominees. Hagel will be outright bad for the country. That’s why Obama chose him.

    And that is just sad to be honest.


  100. coldwarrior
    100 | February 7, 2013 10:30 am

    theoutsider wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    Any time he’s been on O’Reilly, Greta, or Hannity. Isn’t it obvious?

    my tea is finished and you have not answered part 2 of the question.

    a gentleman and/or a scholar would have answered by now. you are neither.

    good day.


  101. coldwarrior
    101 | February 7, 2013 10:31 am

    bbl all y’alll….yinz….youze guys….


  102. RIX
    102 | February 7, 2013 10:32 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    Speranza wrote:

    maybe she was russian?

    Actually I think she was Russian.

    that explains the seemingly endless epic novels.

    She was born in St. Petersbug Russia in in 1905.
    The Bolshevik Revolution caused her family to emigrate.


  103. buzzsawmonkey
    103 | February 7, 2013 10:32 am

    OT for those following the Moran thread over at PJM; a response to his last comment in thread #73:

    randomengineer burbles:

    OK, if I’m understanding buzzsawmonkey’s point, a slew of scientific studies now looking at brain chemistries and other physiological differences are “qualified” and not yet conclusive… therefore imputing conclusive proof of a plot by 19th century socialists. After all being gay was pathology known in the DSM until the leftist lobby got it removed. Got it.

    Randomengineer seems not to be able to comprehend that just as the invention of “homosexual identity” was a 19th-century leftist political construct based entirely on pseudoscience, it remains a political construct based entirely on pseudoscience even as the researchers scurry around desperately attempting to try and retroactively justify it.

    In the meantime, even if some reasonably plausible Great Determining Cause for homosexual behavior is ultimately found, that does not alter the past and present fact that the gay-rights movement has been, and remains, a leftist movement based in pseudoscience which is engaged in destroying the political fabric for its own ends. The movement is not the behavior, and it is certainly not all the people who engage in the behavior.

    The movement, however, should be careful what it wishes for; it might get it. While the movement for the most part abandoned using the term “sexual preference” some years back when it realized that it could not justify its bogus claims to “civil rights” based on mere preference, it will find that discovery of a Great Determining Cause will not be the boon it imagines. As the number of people who choose to engage wholly in homosexual behavior are a small minority, any discovery of a biological Great Determining Cause will of necessity be a physiological abnormality; this will inevitably bolster the claims of those who would like nothing better than to regard homosexual behavior as a “disease,” which is something the gay-rights movement has been struggling for years to overcome—but which will resurrect discussions of “cures” and “treatment.”

    Worse, if that Great Determining Cause is shown to not be inevitable, as discovery of an “alcoholic gene” a few years ago did not determine that one would become an alcoholic, but merely increased the probability that one might become one, then engaging in homosexual behavior becomes, once again, a mere choice, despite the presence of the now-scientifically-verified Great Determining Cause. And the movement once again loses.

    So, let the researchers scurry about in search of their post hoc determinations. It does not alter the pseudoscientific foundation of the “homosexual identity”; it does not alter the subversive history of the gay-rights movement, or its politically destructive activity in the present day. And whatever the researchers’ findings may ultimately prove to be, they will not aid those who would make a god of “science” in their goal of replacing morality with the laboratory.


  104. RIX
    104 | February 7, 2013 10:33 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    coldwarrior wrote:
    @ RIX:
    damn krakaz.

    Always keepin the people down.

    kraka-assed honky bunny!

    Straight up, yo!


  105. Lily
    105 | February 7, 2013 10:33 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    Part of me says why not go ahead and give him to America. Let Americans see how truly bad a President Barack Obama really is. Hagel is being brought in to demolish our military. Obama’s alreayd working on that. Di d you see the thing yesterday where they are severly restricting military pay raises? They can give Congress a raise, and all the Federal drones, but the fighting men on the sharp end of the stick get nada. It is just going to get worse, no matter who Obama appoints Sec Def. Hagel is probably no worse that whomever else Obama would appoint.

    I just can’t see us giving him our country….This is were we stand. We can only hope people are going to start seeing how rough it is going to be in the next few months. Already gasoline is high and food is fixing to go up and let’s not mention all those tax returns people *think* they are going to get this year when in reality they are going to end up owing the government and yeah they can thank the feds for all of this.


  106. eaglesoars
    106 | February 7, 2013 10:33 am

    Lily wrote:

    Really the obama administration likes we are stupid.

    We are

    We elected him. TWICE


  107. 107 | February 7, 2013 10:35 am

    Man, it’s 42 and sunny out there and it’s expected to get to 60. I need to get out there and suck up some of that Global Warming whilst it’s still available! Later, peeps……..


  108. 108 | February 7, 2013 10:37 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    If they were to find a homosexual gene, then they could do a prenatal test for it and abort potential homosexuals. I don’t think the gay lobby is planning for them all to be wiped out, but if they were to find a genetic determinant for it, that would probably be the net effect.


  109. buzzsawmonkey
    109 | February 7, 2013 10:41 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    If they were to find a homosexual gene, then they could do a prenatal test for it and abort potential homosexuals. I don’t think the gay lobby is planning for them all to be wiped out, but if they were to find a genetic determinant for it, that would probably be the net effect.

    Even if there is some other alleged “cause,” such as a measurable physiological difference in some gland or secretion or something, that resurrects all of the “cure” stuff that the gay-rights lobby has been trying for decades to get away from and suppress.

    The lobby is on the horns of a dilemma; it can’t claim “civil rights” on the basis of choice or preference, but it places its alleged constituency at risk the more it attempts to obtain scientific proof of inevitability.


  110. RIX
    110 | February 7, 2013 10:44 am

    Panetta just said regarding Benghazi that ‘” It is not the role of
    the U.S Military to provide a 911 servce………….”


  111. Speranza
    111 | February 7, 2013 10:44 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    Lily wrote:
    Really the obama administration likes we are stupid.
    We are
    We elected him. TWICE

    Not moi!


  112. Speranza
    112 | February 7, 2013 10:45 am

    RIX wrote:

    Panetta just said regarding Benghazi that ‘” It is not the role of
    the U.S Military to provide a 911 servce………….”

    and he was considered to be one of the “grown ups” in the Obama administration.


  113. Speranza
    113 | February 7, 2013 10:46 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    the long russian winters can get tedious.

    A Russian short story is 600 pages.


  114. RIX
    114 | February 7, 2013 10:47 am

    Speranza wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    Panetta just said regarding Benghazi that ‘” It is not the role of
    the U.S Military to provide a 911 servce………….”

    and he was considered to be one of the “grown ups” in the Obama administration.

    I guess that it’s all relative. will even one Senator call him out for that remark?


  115. Lily
    115 | February 7, 2013 10:51 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    Lily wrote:
    Really the obama administration likes we are stupid.
    We are
    We elected him. TWICE

    Darn it that was a PIMF thinks we are stupid.
    /well we know over 1/2 of us are stupid and I’m going to wonder how they react in the next few months…it should be interesting.


  116. 116 | February 7, 2013 10:53 am

    @ RIX:

    They left those people there to die. I am coming to believe that they wanted them to die. There was so much that they could have done and didn’t. I would chalk it up to shere incompetance, but the more they deny (and how they make their denials) the more I suspect malfeasance. id the ambassador step on somebody’s toes? Were they pissed about his repeated calls for more security? Certainly, the Obama Administration feels it is above answering to the people for its acts, and the lap-dog media seems willing to give them a pass on this.


  117. Lily
    117 | February 7, 2013 10:54 am

    RIX wrote:

    Panetta just said regarding Benghazi that ‘” It is not the role of
    the U.S Military to provide a 911 servce………….”

    WTH??? Not even for our own country? I swear the hate for anything American is very strong with this administration.


  118. Lily
    118 | February 7, 2013 10:55 am

    Speranza wrote:

    eaglesoars wrote:
    Lily wrote:
    Really the obama administration likes we are stupid.
    We are
    We elected him. TWICE
    Not moi!

    Neither did I…but supposedly 1/2 the country did.


  119. 119 | February 7, 2013 10:57 am

    An arguement for gun conrol that you’ll never hear about:

    (CNN) — A former Los Angeles cop who had allegedly warned he would target law enforcement in retribution for being fired is now suspected of shooting at least two officers early Thursday, killing one, authorities said.

    The shootings — which come a day after Irvine, California police named Christopher Jordan Dorner as the suspect in a double slaying there Sunday — sparked a huge manhunt in Southern California.

    The California Highway Patrol issued an alert Thursday morning urging officers in several Southern California counties to be on the lookout for the onetime officer.

    Dorner, 33, is suspected of shooting two officers in Riverside, one fatally, around 1:30 a.m., police there confirmed to CNN. Police learned of the shooting when Good Samaritan picked up a police radio and made a distress call on behalf of the wounded officers, Riverside police said.

    First off, he’s an ex-cop. To make an arguement for gun control, you have to argue that the police shouldn’t be allowed personal guns, at the very last. It gets better, though:

    The letter writer claimed he was terminated after he reported excessive force by a fellow officer, and said his attacks were retribution for his termination, as well as a culture of racism and violence he says continues within the department.

    He called the attacks against police “a necessary evil that I do not enjoy but must partake and complete for substantial change to occur within the LAPD and reclaim my name.”

    The shooter is, of course, black. The racial motives make this a hate crime, or would if the shooter were white.


  120. Lily
    120 | February 7, 2013 11:00 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ RIX:
    They left those people there to die. I am coming to believe that they wanted them to die. There was so much that they could have done and didn’t. I would chalk it up to shere incompetance, but the more they deny (and how they make their denials) the more I suspect malfeasance. id the ambassador step on somebody’s toes? Were they pissed about his repeated calls for more security? Certainly, the Obama Administration feels it is above answering to the people for its acts, and the lap-dog media seems willing to give them a pass on this.

    And that is a disgrace. You are correct the more they protest the more it is mostly they are hiding…They protest too much.


  121. buzzsawmonkey
    121 | February 7, 2013 11:01 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    They left those people there to die. I am coming to believe that they wanted them to die.

    One gets the impression that the former SEALS’ resistance was not part of the script that Washington had in mind. There was speculation, I recall, that the whole Benghazi incident was supposed to be a staged kidnapping that would provide cover for a swap—Stevens and anyone with him in exchange for releasing the Blind Sheik. If so, the SEALS deciding to weigh in, and put up resistance, screwed up the playbook—and letting them all die was intended to put the lid on the swap plan.

    That would certainly explain why the Administration has been so lackadaisical about its attempts to “bring the perpetrators to justice,” even when they’ve been out in the open; put them in front of a camera and they might blab the works.


  122. RIX
    122 | February 7, 2013 11:03 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    They could at least dispatched an aircraft to do maneuvers to at least
    occupy the attackers.
    The rapid respnse tem did not have time to change out of uniform?


  123. RIX
    123 | February 7, 2013 11:05 am

    Lily wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    Panetta just said regarding Benghazi that ‘” It is not the role of
    the U.S Military to provide a 911 servce………….”

    WTH??? Not even for our own country? I swear the hate for anything American is very strong with this administration.

    It was a shocking comment. I know that he is talking about cost & logistics,
    but wtf?


  124. 124 | February 7, 2013 11:05 am

    New Thread


  125. citizen_q
    125 | February 7, 2013 11:05 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    There is so much that stinks about the whole affair. PC aside one has to wonder about the wisdom of sending and openly gay ambassador into a backward, tribal, muslim area.

    I have heard conjecture that they were supposed to be kidnapped to be used in trade for the blind sheik.

    I am pretty sure we will never learn anything approaching the truth. We are fed lie up lie to obfuscate and attacked by the administration and the admin propagandists masquerading as objective journalists when we question the obvious falsehoods.


  126. lobo91
    126 | February 7, 2013 11:06 am

    RIX wrote:

    Panetta just said regarding Benghazi that ‘” It is not the role of
    the U.S Military to provide a 911 servce………….”

    In the context of his larger point, he was absolutely correct.

    The primary responsibility for securing diplomatic facilities and personnel falls on the State Department, not DOD. Yes, they can call on the military for help, but that doesn’t mean that the military has people standing by waiting for someone to call, like a fire department does.

    If State has serious concerns about its ability to defend a particular facility, it’s their responsibility to reach out to DOD and make some sort of arrangements to accomplish that mission.


  127. RIX
    127 | February 7, 2013 11:32 am

    The primary responsibility for securing diplomatic facilities and personnel falls on the State Department, not DOD. Yes, they can call on the military for help, but that doesn’t mean that the military has people standing by waiting for someone to call, like a fire department does.@ lobo91:

    I know, but it just seemed like a crass way to put it.
    He put primary responsibility on the host country.
    France would be correct, but Libya?
    Iran should be a lesson.


  128. lobo91
    128 | February 7, 2013 11:38 am

    @ RIX:

    I know, but it just seemed like a crass way to put it.
    He put primary responsibility on the host country.
    France would be correct, but Libya?
    Iran should be a lesson.

    Under international law, the host country is responsible for security of diplomatic facilities.

    There are obviously place where we have our own security forces, including military personnel. Baghdad and Kabul come to mind.

    Maybe this facility should have been in the same category. In hindsight, it probably should have.

    But it’s not DOD’s responsibility to make that determination.


  129. 129 | February 7, 2013 11:52 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    That would certainly explain why the Administration has been so lackadaisical about its attempts to “bring the perpetrators to justice,” even when they’ve been out in the open; put them in front of a camera and they might blab the works.

    Obama hasn’t even tried out his new Super Power of Assassination on them. He’s quite deliberately let these people walk free. And he’s gotten away with it. Only “fringe lunatics” like ourselves are concerned with it.


  130. buzzsawmonkey
    130 | February 7, 2013 11:55 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Obama hasn’t even tried out his new Super Power of Assassination on them. He’s quite deliberately let these people walk free.

    Well, it’s not as though they’re Americans.

    Until after amnesty/”comprehensive immigration reform”, anyway.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David