A Democrat Not Playing Perpetual Defense?
If you thought Obama 2012 was going to be like the Democrats of yore, who would forever be on defense and let the Republicans control the message, you’d be wrong.
For instance, this ad is now airing in Ohio. It should be called “boom goes the dynamite”.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5e0QoUdPJM]
And for those of you wondering whether Obama will run on his record, wonder no more.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WbQe-wVK9E]
“Wow, he’s my hero! So skinny, so tough, such a good shot!”
–Pakistani peasant, blown up by a drone.
Within weeks, the Republicans will put his ass right back on defense. THey’ll attack him where he is strongest…
– The killing of Bin Laden will be discredited and conspiracy theories around it will make John Kerry’s Swift Boat fiasco seem tame.
– The bailout of the auto companies will be turned into a huge boondoggle that has destroyed American innovation
– Why does Obama keep women down?
– Why does Obama hate black people?
Dear Christopher,
Yes, right–and the Obama crew will boldly respond by touting his macho heroism in telling his troops to shoot an unarmed man in the face and dump his body in the ocean. Who needs trials, after all? Look for BHL to show up in a flight jacket on an aircraft carrier. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Jim, do you think a trial of Osama Bin Laden would have gone well? Do you think Osama Bin Laden DESERVED a trial? I can’t believe that you do…
Believe it, Cory. Trials aren’t reserved for nice people–they’re reserved for human beings. Do you think was OBL qualitatively different from and worse than the defendants at the Nuremberg Tribunal? Yet that went off pretty well.
Indeed, it appears we’re about to name the new courts building downtown after its chief justice, Robert M. Jackson, who said, famously, “to initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an
international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from
other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the
whole.”
There’s one drawback to a trial, however: it makes people consider the abstract standard being applied–if OBL had been convicted of initiating a war of aggression, or of the mass murder of civilian non-combatants, it might have raised worrying questions about GWB and BHO and their wars of aggression and their murders of civilian non-combatants. From that perspective, it’s probably more discreet to shoot your enemies in the face.
People like you make me want to puke. You should be so brave as the Seal Team that laid their lives on the line to get Bin Laden. Do you forget that 3000 Americans were burnt alive on 9/11. Maybe you should go back and look at the videos of people jumping 100 storied to their deaths. Your pathetic.
Did you have a nice puke, saltecks? Good! Feel better now? Great! Did you forget the one million + Iraqis the US killed before and after 9/11? And the millions of exiles? And the occupation of Palestine? No, you didn’t forget, because your [sic] ignorant and never knew. Go have another puke.
Your an ass , we are talking about Osama idiot.
And in no way am I justifying the Bogus Iraq war, the product of previous administration. But I am glad they shot the bastards face off.
Anti-Israeli disingenuous pseudo-pacifism is my favorite.
I don’t think Obama was worried about raising questions about GWB my man. Osama Bin Laden has been wanted “dead or alive” since he admitted to being the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks. I’m guessing you were in the streets in October 2001 shouting “let the man have a trial!” Just because it’s 10 years later doesn’t mean the man isn’t just as dangerous, and you know he has had followers in our own hometown (remember the Buffalo Six?), I’m sure he had followers in similar cities. If shooting a man in the face who killed nearly 3,000 people isn’t justice to you then you might want to reexamine your way of thinking.
The main thing distinguishing a dictatorship from a democracy is the rule of law, which is why I like trials rather than assassinations. I think that OBL was the mastermind behind the attacks, but he never “admitted” to it, as you say here. I haven’t heard of anybody being in the streets in October 2011 shouting “Let the man have a trial,” so that’s error number two. It was the Lackawanna Six, not the Buffalo Six–they visited an Al Qaeda camp, but aside from that, there’s no evidence that they were his “followers.”
So, let’s see, that’s four errors in a short email response, Cory. If you can’t write more clearly, then you might want to reexamine your way of thinking.
The whole thing about “justice” is that it takes us beyond reflexive acts of vengeance (your model), so that it calls up abstract principles that should be applied equally, across the board. So let’s see, you state here that it’s just to shoot people in the face if they kill more than 3000 other people. Can you think of any Americans to whom that might apply? Or is this a principle of justice you reserve for non-whites, and non-Americans?
Sometimes, vengeance is the only proper & reasonable form of justice.
You haven’t heard of anyone in the streets shouting “Let the man have a trial” because nobody did.. That was my point.
It was the Buffalo Six, look it up (here, i’ll help you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_Six)
You spent a while there picking apart my response but couldn’t muster up one of your own. Unfortunate.
Why DOES Obama hate black people?
He could change marijuana’s status in a heartbeat. He could push for school choice so urban poor might actually have a chance in a generation.
Nah. Keep the status quo. Keep the power brokers on Wall St happy. He’s so much cooler than Mitt.
Mitt’s a douchebag anyway, it’s a Hobbesian choice.
@Jesse – how exactly could a President overturn an act of Congress (Controlled Substances Act of 1970) “in a heartbeat?” And why would legalizing marijuana benefit signify some benefit for black people?