Hillary Paid Women Less

War on Language

"We’re engaged in a major counterterrorism operation,” he told CBS, “and it’s going to be a long-term counterterrorism operation."

Pop quiz: who uttered that quote?

    A) George W. Bush
    B) Dick Cheney
    C) Don Rumsfeld
    D) John Kerry.

Time's up. The answer is D. So, had the Bush administration prevaricated and equivocated, er, I mean, been more careful about the words chosen to describe the goings on - and the press let him get away with it - everything would have somehow been better?

And, as Jonah notes, it is a bit odd that an administration that has no trouble identifying domestic issues as a war on women, war against the poor, war on science, war on reproductive rights, war against the middle class, war on unions, race war - just to name a few - is squeamish about identifying sustained drone attacks, bombing and coordinated ground offensives as war.

So we can be comforted. As Asawin Suebsaeng informs:

According to Secretary of State John Kerry, President Obama’s newly announced (and possibly illegal) war on ISIS in Iraq and Syria is not a war at all—it’s merely a large-scale act of counterterrorism.

Beheadings Change Foreign Policy

Certainly we can all agree that beheadings are the violent actions of an enemy. But so were the murders of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens, US Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, and CIA contractors, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty in Benghazi.

How is Foggy Bottom certain that these journalists weren't just in the wrong place when a Youtube viewing made some viewers angry and their movie review poured out into the street and got a little out of hand - you know, victims of Peevish Movie Syndrome like those unfortunate souls in Benghazi?  Well, stop wondering because that just makes you a racist.

If you calmly finish the reading a children's book you're an unfit leader and an idiot.  If you hysterically blame movie critics you are solid.  If you dare question either of these suppositions you are a wacko, bat-shit-crazy conspiracy nut.  Oh, and racist.

Obama v Obama

              [Click image to enlarge]

In 2011, President Obama had this to say:

After taking office, I announced a new strategy that would end our combat mission in Iraq and remove all of our troops by the end of 2011. So today, I can report that, as promised, the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year.

And in 2012 his own Twitter post was pretty braggadocios about his involvement:

FACT: In 2008, Barack Obama said he would end the war in Iraq, and he kept his promise. http://t.co/V5wyw6uV
— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) October 9, 2012

But now he is perplexed about how this all transpired:

What I just find interesting is the degree to which this issue keeps on coming up, as if this was my decision.

This video shows how he hasn't been entirely clear over the years about whether he has had anything at all to do with ending American involvement in Iraq:




As Jonah Goldberg notes:

It’s only now that the downside critics warned about for years is materializing that he suddenly feels the need to explain the invisible asterisk he put on all of his statements. It reminds me of the years he spent going around telling everyone they can keep their health plan if they want.

None of this was too difficult to decipher. This thought about leaving from 2011. One wonders if he will disavow the Afghanistan drawdowns too.

GMO Hate

Neil deGrasse Tyson says what every sensible person knows about GMOs.

Does this make those who are religiously hysterical about this "anti-science"?

ن

Christian genocide.

Atheist or Agnostic?

NDT on atheism:

Mexico v Iraq

Given the horrible human rights violations and tyranny that is imposed by Muslim extremists and the US's abandonment of the region, why is the left not equally concerned about the women, children, homosexuals and Christians in the Middle East?

Often those who speak out against illegal immigration are dismissed as racist xenophobes who don't care about the welfare of those who are entering the US illegally. Those who speak out are concerned about overburdening schools and other public services and the associated fiscal impacts. They also wonder about the cultural effects that may result from such a large influx of non-legal pilgrims - not that Octoberfest will be canceled, but that a culture of disrespect for law and order might prevail. But no matter, they are dismissed as mean-spirited, greedy, hateful and selfish. However, those same people who favor open borders tend to oppose any intervention in Middle Eastern countries. They complain that too much money (greed?) is spent on behalf of a people who culturally are not up to the task of western democracy (bigotry?). Even though the human rights violations are on par with Nazism, they say that we have our own problems (selfish?). Women are treated like animals, homosexuals are murdered and those who don't convert or leave are literally stoned, tortured or crucified. Why are some favored for an outpouring of American compassion and tax dollars while others aren't? Is this a moral way to distribute compassion? Is something else at play?

Don't Wait To Immigrate

On The Border

Granted, this is pretty rich humor. But it could have been so much better if hordes of Central American chiquillos were running past in the background. And if he could have knocked a laptop off the lectern while gesticulating so that the hard drive popped out and shattered followed by a dryly delivered, "Oh. I guess those emails have been lost too.", that would have been icing on the cake. That would have been comedy gold. But I'll give him props for a straight delivery.

There is no way in hell this issue will be resolved before election day. This is political manna from heaven. Anybody who does anything other than coddle and suckle these poor children will be painted as not just a racist (because expecting people to obey the law is inherently racist), but a horrible, heartless sub-human who hates children and wants to feed them to the wolves or catapult them into a fiery furnace. Its one thing to want to deport adults or push granny and her wheelchair over a cliff. But to want to drive busloads of children into the river or turn them over to drug lords - who just happen to be armed with some pretty sweet US supplied toasters? Oh the humanity.

If the buses weren't bought and paid for by Reid and his friends, they should have been, because this is political genius. When faced with answering for spying on the press, the Bergdahl-Gitmo house cleaning, the law is whatever I say it is, murder for movies, the VA crap care is what you can expect for all, "if you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it", IRS thuggery, the mysterious hard drive massacre - just to name a few - its just a lot easier to say that your opponents want to deport these dear, innocent, little lambs. The choice is pretty simple - those other guys just hate brown children.

That and another October surprise that shuts down your favorite park, museum or fishing hole, and this could turn out to be a pretty good year for Harry's friends.

Saving the kiddos FTW.