Unemployment to rise for six days in wake of Obama's re-election
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
Unemployment to rise for six days in wake of Obama's re-election
It's true -- after a well-deserved vacation day today, I'll be joining David Petraeus on the unemployment line for three days, get re-hired for a day next Sunday, then get laid off again for three more days. Or, as some would call it, unpaid furlough. Where was Obama on this one? Banks got bailed out, newspapers got sold out.
So, while I'm gone chew these matters over:
1) The weird thing about Petraeus os that he's such a political Rohrchach test that makes everyone see what they want to see. Is it the downfall of a conservative icon, or the downfall of an Obama administration official? The only thing I know for sure is that what the conjoined Petraeus scandal/Benghazi issue WON'T do is a prompt an "adult conversation" about what we're doing in Libya and elsewhere in the Middle East and, since we're there, how can we do it better? Instead,, conservatives will salivate over this as a way to hurt Obama (it won't) while the Obama administration will try too hard to make it go away (they shouldn't), Regarding Benghazi, let Petraeus testify and tell the truth. America has nothing to fear.
2) Who won the 2012 election in one word? Science.
3) Occupy Wall Street isn't dead. While you were wasting your time watching the Eagles, those "urine soaked moochers" (not) are working their butts off trying to save Staten Island. God bless them.
4) Also, God bless America's veterans as we honor them this weekend. We should be in awe of their service and their sacrifices:
See you briefly on Sunday.
Comments (112)
The briefer the better.— fizzbin
I'm assuming that our intrepid Attytood conservative friends MIA are getting to the bottom of the newest Obama scandal.
Why would Obama embed Paula Broadwell in General Patraeus' daily routine? Did the President pay her to seduce the 4 star General? Was this really a secret plot to help Iran develop nukes? Was this withheld until after the election so Obama's socialist policies could further destroy the country he hates?
Inquiring minds want to know...— wokmaster- I am not particularly familiar with Petraeus' political leanings, only really rading them with regards to achieving a military goal. In that vein I would suspect any military commander would write opinions in much the same way.
With that said, it's the downfall of an individual, nothing more. I can't see how Obama can be blamed for the General having an affair. That doesn't mean that Obama doesn't have some responsibility for choosing a flawed leader to be in charge of the most powerful spy organization in the world, as Will has already pointed out by linking to the article listing the General's faults.
Petraeus put the country at great risk just to get his end wet. Clinton did much the same thing. So did Weiner, and Vitter, and countless others. In the end, Petraeus made the right decision to step down.— General Turgidson - I like how Willie brushes off the Petraeus scandal. He was chosen by Obama to head the CIA so this is Obama's appointee. I bet if it happened under a Republican administration, loons like Will would be going crazy and he'd be posting videos from the 1960's that make fun of the president and Petraeus.— Phillies2008WSChamps
- OWS heard there was no plumbing and are reassuring Sandy victims that going to the bathroom in your underwear is nothing to be ashamed of. After all, smelling like urine builds character.— jmc
- I'm sure you can relate. How many times did you relieve yourself in your underwear on Tuesday night? — chasing history
- That stinks, Will (unpaid furlough). Maybe we should rip the part about the American Labor Movement out of high school history texts books. It'll just make those kids depressed when later they join the real job market.— Hamlet
- So who does Obummer blame now? He appointed Peterus (or as Hitlery called him Betrayus). And why does his affair matter? It's personal. Doesn't affect his job performance. Clinton got Lewinskied and it didn't matter and he was the most powerful man in the free world. Again selective outrage. Nobody cared about the Menendaz revelations. You guys are disgusting.And Will, don't worry about the furlough. I'm sure your check from the DNC PR guys for services rendered will be in soon. That or a check from Soros.— georgel
- Georgel, sometimes you are positively illegible...— Hamlet
- And, BTW, "Who won the 2012 election in one word?" I'll give you three: The Good Guys!— Hamlet
- @Georgel,GeneralTurd--Now,now let's say it together--President Barack Obama, Senate majority leader Harry Reid, Senator Elizabeth Warren. You right wing radical wing nuts lost and common sense won. Obama joins FDR, Eisenhower and Reagan as presidents who got over 50% of the popular vote in two consecutive elections (only 4 times in last 100 yrs.) The Tea Party is dead OWS is alive and which makes more sense by the way..."Keep your government hands off my Medicare" or "We are the 99%."— mick-of-the-moment
- Tsk, tsk, Mick, I much prefer your sports-related ditties; best stick with that rather than hold up Obama, Reid and Warren as paragons of anything. I believe Obama was the first reelected president to lose votes in how many years? 80? Tea Party is hardly dead although I must agree that OWS is alive - the stench outside Trinity Church reminds me of that every day. Enjoy gloating for the next four years, if that, but remember that political fortunes have a tendency to fluctuate as much as the Phillies season records. I look forward to returning the favor next election. — fizzbin
- "The Tea Party is dead OWS is alive"
More than ever. Tammy Baldwin and Elizabeth Warren are allies of OWS!— Hamlet - Gloating is so unbecoming... even for low-life liberals.— philly2flag
- "So who does Obummer blame now?"
Who has PRESIDENT RE-ELECT OBAMA blamed, Georgie? Poor George, he's sooo angry at Tuesday's results Did you put your flag back up yet, creep?
"...or as Hitlery called him Betrayus"
First of all, that simply isn't true. Back up your accusation or crawl back under your rock.
Secondly, "Hitlery"?? Really? How old are you?— wokmaster - I love how the Repubs. have all retreated from this web page after their blistering defeat. All the better. Now intelligent conversation can take place and they can take their rants to a place "not dictated by fact checkers."— mick-of-the-moment
- I'm starting to notice a pattern with Republicans - and it involves the number 6.
I first remember hearing Republicans trying to defend Bush's legacy in the midterm elections of 2007 (of course, this was before the bottom fell out of the economy) by telling us that he had done a "good job of keeping us safe". This was around 6 years after 9/11 happened ON President Bush's WATCH.
In 2009, after President Obama had taken the oath of office, it was at about the 6 month mark when Republicans started blaming the economic conditions on the our newly elected President. "this is "Obama's economy", they started to howl in unison, and "how long are you going to blame Bush for?" - as if the non Fox News crowd fell off the turnip truck.
Fast forward 3.5 years, after a hard fought re-election, when Republicans were saying the polls were all biased, and Independents would carry the election for Romney, and the democrats weren't as enthusiastic this time around, and the President would lose the popular vote, and "Romney would win in a landslide", and Obama would lose Pennsylvania, and the GOP would retake the Senate, and Rasmussen was the only poll that could be trusted, Obama would lose Virginia because he made the zinger at the debate about horses and bayonets, and Nate Silver was a partisan hack and on and on and on. It's been 6 days and Republicans are pretending that we should just forget about all of their astoundingly ignorant predictions. What a bunch of sore losers!
Seems like Republicans think the rest of us have amnesia. So, with all due apologies to our conservative friends, I'm gonna enjoy this one for awhile. If that's gloating, than so be it.— wokmaster - Where's georgel? Are you watching Hannity and he is telling you that Herman Cain and Marco Rubio will be the next winning presidential ticket for the Repubs.— mick-of-the-moment
- "America has nothing to fear?" - it will turn out that Obama himself gave the order to withhold assistance to Americans who asked for it while under attack. President Biden is definitely something to fear.
And why does OWS need to bail anyone out? Are you saying FEMA isn't doing its job? No better than Katrina, perhaps? We are still hearing about how Bush supposedly messed that one up; where is the cry against Obama for a rush to a pre-election photo-op, and leaving New Yorkers to suffer? ....— Mirror - Does anyone have a Tegretol or Carbatrol? Mirror seems to be having a seizure...— Hamlet
- "America has nothing to fear?" - it will turn out that Obama himself gave the order to withhold assistance to Americans who asked for it while under attack."
That worked so well in the last election that the GOP is doubling down on it. Bravo!
"President Biden is definitely something to fear."
And where was Paul Ryan after the debate with Biden? He was on the back of a milk carton after his neophytic performance. And you probably voted for the McCain ticket in '08. Now THAT was something to fear - a President Palin.
— wokmaster - I highly doubt the decision to not send reinforcements to Benghazi went all the way up to Obama's desk.— General Turgidson
- You're way too sensible and rational to be a conservative. — wokmaster
- "You're way too sensible and rational to be a conservative."
Wok, there is a big difference between being a conservative and being a Republican, just as there is in being a liberal and being a Democrat.— Hamlet - I don't think he's a Republican. — wokmaster
- @Mick - -I'm still here. And Wok's comments on what Republicans were thinking is accurate. And sadly, we were wrong. Not way off our rockers wrong, but just wrong. I think the tea party is far from dead, though politically their philosophies may be. Of the 48% of the people who did NOT vote for Obama, probably about 60-70% of them (or 33%-40% of the country) is highly upset that Obama won re-election. That does not spell good news for us all. A percentage of those people are going to be telling their congressmen(& women) to NOT vote for anything Obama wants to do, which will maintain the stalemate. The Bush tax cuts are going to provide a REALLY interesting preview for the next 4 years.— IggleFan68
- "Not way off our rockers wrong." Unfortunately, the driving force of your party, the tea baggers, are "way off their rockers wrong." Unless and until the reasonable Republicans (there once were such people) get control of the party, they are on a downslide to irrelevance. There are actually people who believe that Romney lost because he was not conservative enough. See how being more conservative plays with young people, Latinos, Asians and African Americans in future elections. Moreover, at some point, the people will get sick and tired of the party of no and all the obstuctionist tactics.— Ogey Oglethorpe
- "I love how the Repubs. have all retreated from this web page after their blistering defeat."...Mick - we're still here, in mourning for the country, waiting out the 2 years that the Empty Suit has left. For once his pattern of doing nothing is encouraging; imagine what the Dullard-in-Chief would try to enact if he thought he had free rein.— 2ndNlong
- I love this type of delusional thinking. Obama has cut taxes, eliminated terrorists, bailed out the auto industry, ensured access to private insurance for 30 million Americans, and ended a war in Iraq. Quite the librul agenda!
Dopes, no change!— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine - "Mick - we're still here, in mourning for the country, waiting out the 2 years that the Empty Suit has left."
Assuming you are talking about the President of the United States, what is going to happen to him in two years?— Hamlet - Word of warning before you answer. I'm pretty sure the DN would have no problem giving your name and email address to the United States Secret Service.— Hamlet
- Can't help but think of Petraeus as the Burt Lancaster character in 'Seven Days in May', as a popular general plotting an American military coup d'etat during the Cold War. Incriminating love letters to a mistress were procured by the President as ammunition to use against him. Life imitiating art again?— montani semper liberi
- There was speculation last year that Obama tapped Petraeus for the CIA job to keep him out of the running for a 2012 GOP presidential or veep nomination. Well, 2012 is over, Obama won, and co-opting Petraeus was no longer necessary. But spoiling him for 2016 still was. Just sayin.— montani semper liberi
- @Hamlet -- I think a reasonable interpretation of 2nd's comments is that the mid-terms elections will be similar to 2006, where the Republicans will wipe out the Democrats. And it's not an unreasonable position. After GWB was elected in 2004, the D's were just as dejected and morose as conservatives/republicans are now. And yet, in 2 years, they took back the House and Senate. And GWB got the same # of votes nationally that 2012 Obama did (though that was a raise for him, and a decrease for O). If we have 2 more years of constant battle and more of the same from the last 4 years, it will be very interesting to see who the country blames.— IggleFan68
- Okay, Iggle, you're probably right. I have just been hearing so much from crazies about violent revolution and other disturbing things that I jumped the gun (so to speak).
On the lighter side, how about that woman in Arizona who blamed her husband for Obama's win because he didn't vote (I guess she never heard of the EC), so she ran over him with a, wait for it, JEEP! The husband is in the hospital right now in critical condition.— Hamlet - Interesting, MSL. I love that movie. Did you know that JFK was responsible for it getting made, even though he didn't live to see it.— Hamlet
- Thasnks Hamlet, didn't know that. I had to read the book for a college literature course on the "political novel", along with "darkness at noon" and "all the king's men", and couldn't put it down.— montani semper liberi
- You must be my age... read it on the O.C. beach in summer '62 — philly2flag
- Iggy,
===]]] @Hamlet -- I think a reasonable interpretation of 2nd's comments is that the mid-terms elections will be similar to 2006, where the Republicans will wipe out the Democrats. And it's not an unreasonable position. [[[===
The House popular vote favored Republicans by some 6.5% in 2010. In 2012, it favored Dems slightly. The trend is moving in the other direction. The economy is likely getting better. A majority of Americans will blame Repubs if we go over the "fiscal cliff" (53% to 29% who would blame Dems). If immigration reform is passed, Dems will get the credit. If it isn't passed, Repubs will get the blame. The middle class and poor will be getting tax cuts - good for Obama. More people will be benefiting from healthcare reform. Good for Obama.
The position that Dems will be hurt in 2014 is not an unreasonable position in that it is certainly possible. However, the evidence we have tells us that it is more than likely a wrong position. Remember, Longy and his buds were predicting Romney would win the election - in spite of the evidence indicating otherwise. They believed conspiracy theories rather than the evidence. Not a good prescription for making predictions.— Talking point sleuth - The party in the White House usually loses seats in the midterm, but you make some good points and I share your concerns (LOL) — philly2flag
- IgglesFan is correct...the 2 was not a typo. Once the midterm elections are over candidates from both parties will be jockeying for position. Obama won't have any coattails (if he ever did) so he won't have enough leverage to fix tickets let alone enact his legacy. This will be more or less true regardless of the outcome of the midterms. In reality, Obama has 6-9 months to get done what he hopes to do. After that, the press will start to feed, as they must. They only nudged him this year but will start biting soon enough. The media on the Left, flush with victory, will want more than can be accomplished and the Right will jump on any stumble. Good luck with that.— 2ndNlong
- It's looking like Harry Reid is going to get to work on filibuster reform. The idea that been proposed looks like a step in the right direction. The way the filibuster was abused over the last 2 years has basicly made the Senate minority equal to the Sente majority. This needs to change - no matter who's in control.— wokmaster
- I've been worried about some of our most outspoken conservative posters, but perhaps blackhawk90, bile atkins, sarah89, phishface and the like have been busy signing petitions to secede?— wokmaster
- Good riddance to us! — philly2flag
- ==]] The party in the White House usually loses seats in the midterm, [[==
That is a good point - but (1) I think that huge gains made by Repubs in 2010 changed the normal calculus. The disproportionality between this year's House votes and the impact on party ID in the House is of historic proportions - as a result of the gerrymandering. That will still have an impact in 2014 - but it may well be lessened, (2) you always need to balance those general patterns against the actual circumstances. It's unlikely that if the economy improves the Repubs will make significant gains in the House. I think it is most likely that the economy will improve - not necessarily as the result of anything that Obama or the Dems do - just as matter of economic momentum.— Talking point sleuth - From Wikipedia's entry on Seven Days in May:
The story is said to have been influenced by the right-wing anti-Communist political activities of General Edwin A. Walker after he resigned from the military. An additional inspiration was provided by the 1961 interview by Knebel, who was also a political journalist and columnist, conducted with the newly-appointed Air Force Chief of Staff, Curtis LeMay, an advocate of preventive first-strike nuclear option.
President John F. Kennedy had read the novel and believed the scenario as described could actually occur in the United States. According to Frankenheimer in his director's commentary, production of the film received encouragement and assistance from Kennedy through White House Press Secretary Pierre Salinger, who conveyed to Frankenheimer Kennedy's wish that the film be produced and that, although the Pentagon did not want the film made, the President would conveniently arrange to visit Hyannis Port for a weekend when the film needed to shoot outside the White House.
It is LeMay who was unknowingly recorded disparaging Kennedy to the other chiefs after the president had just walked out the situation room during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Kennedy put in the recording system after the Bay of Pigs so that the chiefs could not lie and then say they didn't again. Anyway, Kennedy walk out of that room after LeMay suggested a first strike on the Soviet Union.
— Hamlet - Sorry, I mean to put the Wikipedia entry in quotes. The last paragraph is mine.— Hamlet
- TPS - You have to check out the comments on secession thread! Hilarious.— wokmaster
- Oh, and Bucky might be happy to know that LeMay was the inspiration for the Buck Turgidson character in Dr. Strangelove.— Hamlet
- Wok, address, please. I could use a good laugh.— Hamlet
- Under politics. Should still be the first story under politics. — wokmaster
- *Presidential politics* The loons are out in full force, led by "professor". Mr Smith decided to come out of hiding lol.— wokmaster
Got it, thanks. Professor1982 has my vote for stupidest person on philly.com.— Hamlet- Man - it's like a ghost town in here. Where are the Attytood boyz? They were going full guns just a bit over a week ago. Did something happen to dampen their spirits? Anyone know what it might have been?
BWAHAHA BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH— Talking point sleuth - They are plotting 2nd Amendment solutions...— Hamlet
- I think the time for election gloating has passed, fellas. Obama's second term hasn't even officially started yet and there are already a number of major issues he's facing -- the fiscal cliff, Benghazi just won't go away, a CIA director who played too much footsie, his selection for the head of NATOs Supreme Allied Command, Europe writing a bunch of dirty emails. Not to mention Israel is about to bomb anyone who so much as lights a firecracker in their direction, and Fast and Furious. Not to mention a huge natural disaster recovery to tend to, a jittery stock market, and a slumping economy. I'm hoping Obama is everything you guys seem to hope he is, because he's in the middle of a maelstrom right now.— General Turgidson
- I smell urine.— bannedrepublican
- ===]]] I think the time for election gloating has passed, fellas. [[[===
How does one determine if the time for gloating passes before or after the time for crying for succession passes? Is it before or after the time passes for exploiting the deaths of diplomats to score points? Is it before or after the time passes for laughably trying to blame Obama for Fast and Furious? Is it before or after Romney stops trying to make excuses for what a lousy candidate he was by blaming students, blacks, and Latinos?— Talking point sleuth - TPS better stay away from any type of spark or ignition. With so many straw men, he's awfully flammable.
- @General Turgidson - Some of thoughts in response to your last comment:
I agree that in hindsight, the appointment of Patraeus to CIA Director looks bad now. Who would have known? I always thought of him as a viable presidential candidate. I looked at his appointment by Obama as a political manuever to keep him out of the race. Maybe Obama thought he was the best man for the job. Maybe Patreaus' rewriting of the military's counter insurgency manual made him seem like a perfect fit.
While I understand the difficulty of removing a General in charge of all operations in Afghanistan - during the initial phases of leaving the theatre, no less - I'm concerned about leaving a man in charge who somehow found he time to send anywhere from 20 to 30 thousand love letters (emails). I think the President might be wise to look at other options.
Netanyahu has always worried me. Today's strike on Hamas should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed this man. He is extreme even by Likud Party standards. He makes Ariel Sharon look like a dove. I believe America's best hope to avoid being into another regional conflict is for Israel to vote him out of office and replace him with a pragmatic, diplomatic leader from the Labor Party.— wokmaster - ///While I understand the difficulty of removing a General in charge of all operations in Afghanistan///
Problem for Obama now is that he lost his #1 guy for Afghanistan, his #1 selection for head of NATO, AND his #1 CIA guy, all in one week! And this is just at the point where he desperately needs good intel and military strategy in the middle east. One can't fault Obama for the actions of either General, however there is a difference between being responsible and accountable. And Obama is accountable -- that's part and parcel of the whole "buck stops here" thing of the presidency.
//I think the President might be wise to look at other options.//
No disagreement there.
//Netanyahu has always worried me. Today's strike on Hamas should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed this man.///
The strike should come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to the Syria for the past 6 months. This is a policy failure, pure and simple. Assad was considered a "reformer" who the US could work with (Sec of State Clinton's own words) and now his fallen regime looks like it will trigger an explosion. I don't blame Netanyahu for defending his citizens from rocket attacks. If drug cartels in Mexico suddenly started lobbing mortars into Texas border towns, we'd probably want to respond in the same way. Never mind the fact that all of Israel's neighbors want to wipe it off the map, and its biggest ally, the U.S., has sent mixed messages of support. Pragmatic and diplomatic has been tried already. - Where I disagree:
Fast and Furious; Sorry, never bought into the "scandal surrounding this matter.
The fiscal cliff; I sense a compromise coming between the President and John Boehner. I believe Boehner read the results of last week as a mandate to compromise. I could be wrong, but every indication tells me he will strike a bargain. Besides, I'm sure Boehner is concerned about the stigma attatched to being the Speaker of the House during an economic catastrophe (which he can more likely than not get the votes to prevent).
Benghazi; This will not go away, if Fox "News" has anything to say about it. It is strting to look to me hat what Susan Rice told the morning shows was a cover story. Not from the President. From the CIA. But since when does the CIA have to start disseminating it's secret ops and sensitive intel immediately after we are attacked overseas?
I do think it was a cover story, just not for any underhanded reason. Post-mortems can take a long time, and I think the public is generally more amenable to a story than a flat "that's classified" statement.
The news outlets don't have any brilliant insight or unknown sources here - we can get the same info from the WH that they can. Any conclusions they reach are speculation at best.
What really disturbs me, though, is that all of this anger from the right is directed at the Obama administration and not at the terrorists who killed our citizens. We should be spending at least as much energy on finding the culprits as we are on the who-knew-what-and-when game.
— wokmaster - Bucky left out the major issue for Obama being that he is a sekrit Kenyan Muslim— Talking point sleuth
- Nothing says "intellectually vapid" in an argument like bringing up a completely unrelated conspiracy theory to counter.
- I'm looking for RG's petition to secede himself. I'd sign it, seeing how safe and painless it is in upholding his "principles".— montani semper liberi
- MSL -
RG left for Somalia weeks before the election. He couldn't deal with the choice of facing Obama's tyrannical taxes or Romney's interventionist foreign policy.
They have good private international schools in Somalia - very safe with big walls and armed guards - and his children wouldn't have to interact with "parasites" and grazing ungulates.— Talking point sleuth - RG decided it was the only "principled" thing to do.— Talking point sleuth
- "How does one determine if the time for gloating passes..." . . . . For as long as it keeps batty off this board, lol.— montani semper liberi
- "While I understand the difficulty of removing a General in charge of all operations in Afghanistan - during the initial phases of leaving the theatre, no less "
So if you wanted to remove such a man from command, how would you do it? I'm starting to think MSL is, somewhat, on to something (although the motives might have been different - or maybe they weren't).— Hamlet - "So if you wanted to remove such a man from command, how would you do it?"
I don't know and I'm thankful I don't have to make those decisions.— wokmaster - Bucky makes another great point. Drug cartels in Mexico and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict = same/same. Brilliant analogy.
Oh, yeah - and another good point is that the Syrian situation with Assad indicates the failure of Obama's policies.
— Talking point sleuth - ///Bucky makes another great point. Drug cartels in Mexico and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict = same/same. Brilliant analogy. ///
Oh yeah, that's EXACTLY what I said. That they're the same thing.
You're so obsessed with me that you continue to just make stuff up, right? - And the president's defense of Susan Rice was also a harbinger of things to come. Any Republican that underestimates him from now on will be in for quite a surprise.
"I'm Barack Obama and I *AM* the president!"— Hamlet - "Obama's second term hasn't even officially started yet and there are already a number of major issues he's facing -- " . . Yet it doesn't come close to what he faced 4 years ago, with a global economy in free fall. Israel was lobbing bombs into the Gaza then, too. Meanwhile, a still-breathing bin Laden was issuing more taunts and rallying cries for jihad, Toyota surpassed GM, and we were still mired in Iraq. All in all, it could be worse.— montani semper liberi
- ===]]] Nothing says "intellectually vapid" in an argument like bringing up a completely unrelated conspiracy theory to counter. [[[===
Right. Glad you got my point.
Fast and furious as an indictment of Obama isn't a conspiracy theory? Exploiting the American deaths in Benghazi with conspiracies about Obama....um...isn't a conspiracy theory?
Too funny.— Talking point sleuth - ///Fast and furious as an indictment of Obama isn't a conspiracy theory? Exploiting the American deaths in Benghazi with conspiracies about Obama....um...isn't a conspiracy theory? ///
Sigh... more examples of making up statements out of whole cloth and then attributing them to me. You're really worked up TPS, better get back on those meds.
Re: both Fast and Furious and Benghazi, I'd called both "major issues that he [Obama] has to deal with."
Fast and Furious seems to mostly be the responsibility of those at the ATF. How the ATF and the Dept of Justice came up with such a horrendous idea to let guns walk completely, and not even interdict them after the sale, is simply beyond me. As such, they are responsible. Holder is accountable, for sure. But like it or not, Obama is ultimately accountable -- it is his administration. How he reacts to it either reinforces his leadership or undermines it. That's not conspiracy theory, that's just fact. That doesn't mean Obama has to take the fall for the action. It just means that he needs to seek the truth and react accordingly.
Questioning what led to the protests in Benghazi and Cairo does not equal a conspiracy theory. But finding out what happened, and what went wrong, is important. And again, the failures might be the responsibility of the Dept of State, and accountable to Sec. Clinton, but ultimate accountability lies with Obama. Even he said so.
That's not conspiracy theories. Clearly. And bringing up the BS secret muslim thing is just a straw man on your part, yet another in a long line of them.
You don't do smug very well. Must be why you're still single and alone. - "I don't know and I'm thankful I don't have to make those decisions."
Wok, that was a rhetorical question. The answer is appoint him to the position of DCI. Now to go with the Seven Days in May theme you would then use dirt you already have and fire him.— Hamlet - Maybe it's time we let Israel secede from the union.— montani semper liberi
- If you go to Israel you will hear "We are the 51st state" from Israelis all the time. It's a running joke, but it's not true.
What Israel needs to do is to put the Labor Party in power. Fellow Philadelphian, Bebe, has earned a nice, long retirement. I nominate Ruth Dyan for Prime Minister!— Hamlet - Here we go.
McCain tries to get to the bottom of "Obama's issue" - of Benghazi. Is there anything that better shows how willing Republicans are to exploit the deaths of Americans simply to attack Obama> McCain is "outraged, outraged I say" about Benghazi, yet can't be bothered to attend a classified briefing on the attack, attacks a reporter for asking why he didn't attend (instead of holding a press conference attacking the administration), and them lamely has his aides say he didn't attend because of a "scheduling conflict."
There you go, Bucky. There's your significant "issue" for Obama. You boyz are hilarious.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/11/15/exp-tsr-bash-mccain.cnn
— Talking point sleuth - I've been saving this for a special occasion. I do believe the time has come. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7EvTTrd84A— montani semper liberi
- @MSL - That's f-ing hilarious!— wokmaster
- Brought a tear to my eye, MSL.
You gotta wonder where all that hate is being directed now that our much beloved Attytood Republcan toadies and extremist libertarians can't bring themselves to post comment after comment, day after day, venting hatred at Will and talking about "parasites" and diapers.— Talking point sleuth - I think this about sums it up...
http://blogs.ajc.com/mike-luckovich/2012/11/13/1114-luckovich-cartoon-turkey-day/— wokmaster - BENGHAZI!!!!!!1!!!!1— Talking point sleuth
- "You gotta wonder where all that hate is being directed now..."
I'm sure some of our conservative friends missing in action are busy getting signatures to secede.— wokmaster - But it would be a victory for political discourse if they could make like RG, and secede their way off of Attytood.— wokmaster
- Now that O's even more in the pocket of the unions, one must wonder what he'll do (with taxpayer's money) for the bakers that struck Hostess last night??? 18,500 out of work with all plants closing up shop.— philly2flag
- So on the one hand philly2flag wonders what Obama will do, pleading ignorance, and in the same breath suggests, though, in spite of this ignorance, is certain it'll involve taxpayer money. And to think I thought the results of the election, showcasing the delusion, would somehow cause the right to reflect, and adjust. Nope. Just different. It still persists, evident by Mark Levin last night screaming like the wimp he is about the latest initial claims report -- implying that now that the election is over, and the books no longer need to be cooked, the 'real' number jumps up. He doesn't want to hear about no actual analysis -- conspiracy.— Murrayman
- Right now, John McCain is skipping breakfast so he can have a press conference about not being served breakfast.
The GOP STILL can't get on with America's business and help the economy, instead, they are wasting taxpayer money on nutty witch hunts and conspiracy theories. They really are useless.— wokmaster - This just in from Glenn Beck -- the "fiscal cliff" details cannot be negotiated because -- look what happened when the unions attempted to negotiate with Hostess management. I kid you not.— Murrayman
- Yeah, I think that press conference - held DURING the Benghazi briefing - where he sniped a reporter for asking why he was out there blovating and not at his own committee's briefing is where John McCain finally jumped the shark. He's done. He survived picking the Wasilla half-wit for a running mate, but this will be his undoing.— Hamlet
- The GOP thinks they got hammered in this election, wait until 2014!— Hamlet
- You'd think the GOP would have done some some actual soul searching after last week. Nope. The takeaways were as follows: Hannity says he has "evolved on the immigration issue". Prominent Republican talking heads claim they have the same mandate as Obama because they managed to hold onto the House (despite losing seats), and Fox comes to the conclusion that they didn't harp on Benghazi enough.
Let me say it again, these people are USELESS. I can't imagine 2014 will be any different. The elephants aren't just losing the minority vote; they're beginning to lose the white working class vote also.— wokmaster - Last night I walked into the room and the end of Game Change was on -- where McCain told Palin, "don't let Limbaugh and the extremists" run the party (GOP). How you like them apples? Ironic coincidence? Now today McCain has gone along with EXACTLY the same line that Limbaugh, at this very moment, is going on about. How convenient to use the gift of perfect hindsight. "Its clear right from the beginning it was a te44or a11ack". How convenient once again, for you, there, Limbaugh. He then suggests that people are misinformed. How ironic is that? He serves to confuse. Confuse the listener, then tell them whatever you think should be the truth.— Murrayman
- I don't know how you do it, Murray. First you sat through Beck *puke* and now Limbaugh. You have a high tolerance for annoyance. I tuned into Hannity for about 5 minutes last week and wanted to reach through the screen and ring his neck.— wokmaster
- ///
There you go, Bucky. There's your significant "issue" for Obama. You boyz are hilarious.///
TPS apparently feels that the savage murder of American soldiers and representatives is insignificant. I guess the dozens who were killed and hundreds injured in riots about a film erroneously blamed by the administration itself as the trigger for the attack, those are insignificant too.
I kid you not. Talk about being too funny.
You can certainly argue that many are trying to make political hay out of the issue -- that's politics TPS, and complaining about that on your behalf is completely wasted effort. Declaring the efforts to find as a waste of time because some are trying to score political points is just as partisan as what you protest against!
More disconcerting, and worthy of the ongoing investigation, is why the State department ignored warnings and requests for additional support. Why, especially on Sept 11, was security so lax? Why was nothing done about the Libyan-supplied security team taking photos? With a security failure as big as Benghazi, is why the administration insisted on the film as being the cause, going so far as having the Cairo embassy issue a statement deploring it, when it was clear this was an organized attack.
The answers to these questions are critical towards understanding the failures so they do not happen again. The tens of thousands of US embassy personnel and their soldier-protectors deserve no less. There was once a time when the left considered asking such questions as "patriotic."
If you still think it's not "significant," well, bully for you, I guess.— General Turgidson - General, I guess you're not testifying today on the Hill because of a "scheduling error"? What's that you say, "no comment"?
- ///General, I guess you're not testifying today on the Hill because of a "scheduling error"? What's that you say, "no comment"? ///
I'll have my press secretary issue a press release to the media at 5 pm on a Friday.
Now, I gotta get back to the important security role of writing salacious emails to a Real Housewife of Tampa. - "murder of American soldiers". They weren't American soldiers you undeniable total complete moron. Yes, when the right wing talking heads say 'the Navy SEALs', they are being inaccurate. They were FORMER SEALs, therefore no longer 'American soldiers'. Strange, one has to ask, why would soldiers trained at counterte44orism be guarding a consulate? Oh thats right they're not SEALS currently -- they are contractors -- mercenaries if you will -- actually they were CIA personnel. Their job was to guard the mission of moving arms.— Murrayman
- /// Yes, when the right wing talking heads say 'the Navy SEALs', they are being inaccurate. ///
Well, forgive me for not having their complete military dossier in front of me. But tell me, is there a difference in the value of their lives between being an active-duty soldier and a security contractor at the embassy? Based on your post, you seem to imply that there is a difference in value. I don't think their death should in any way be treated differently just because I omitted the word "former" in front of "American soldier."
///Their job was to guard the mission of moving arms. ///
Uh-oh, now you've gone and done it. Any second now TPS will come on here and fire away at you for spouting wild conspiracy theories... (crickets). - "film erroneously blamed by the administration itself as the trigger for the attack, those are insignificant too." Oh look, boo-hoo, we're not thinking it as significant as the right wingers. Oh that's right we're not bent on seizing power. That's right I said it -- this is being done to gain power politically, nothing more. They don't give a hoot about truth. And FYI dummy -- they still suggest that the film was a trigger. The mistake made in the initial reports, since edited based on new information, is that there were no long-standing protests in Benghazi -- what were thought to be protests by civilians were actually a11ackers gathering to a22ault the compound. But if you make the suggestion that the a11ack wasn't triggered by the protests in Cairo, then what, in your estimation Turgidson, were they triggered by? And seriously, who cares what they were triggered by? What are you a global DA, and you need to set the degree? It occurred, people were k1lled, and now, most importantly, the a11ackers need to be pursued.— Murrayman
- It is rare to see someone so daft that he contradicts himself multiple times in the same post, but this is a good example.
On one hand, Murray, you imply that you consider the attack "significant." And then it seems nonchalant... "it occurred, people were killed.
//is that there were no long-standing protests in Benghazi -- what were thought to be protests by civilians were actually a11ackers gathering to a22ault the compound.//
An assault in which there seemed to be some hints and warnings that they were coming. From where? What was the intel beforehand? Who was aware, and what decisions did they make based on this intel? Are these signs of different tactics being employed by Al Qaeda? Is it a different, front group? Does the US need to react in a different way to secure our overseas personnel?
It's more than just pursuing the attackers. The point of a thorough analysis is to prevent it from happening again.
As I've already said, i doubt the president made the direct call to not respond to the warnings, or to not send reinforcements to the consulate once the attack began. And sure, some are doing the usual political grandstanding. But there is nothing wrong with asking the questions.
- Bucky - in reality, you have no idea about how the threats were evaluated and how possible responses were evaluated in the full context.
If the goal is to support investigation into what happened, as it should be, than politicizing the events to score cheap points, by asking questions with a laughably limited understanding of the relevant information, as if you (or the public) will ever be granted the needed security clearance to assess the actual situation for yourselves, if anything only hampers a thorough evaluation.
Cry all you want that your laughably flimsy suspicions haven't been disproven. It is amusing to watch.
Republicans have politicized this issue from the jump. Check out Romney's initial response to the event. And their exploitative politicization continues - check out the CNN clip I linked.
If it makes you feel proud of yourself to say that I don't care about the deaths of the diplomats - have at it. More power to you. My point is not that you or other Republican toadies don't care - but that you are willing to subvert rational analysis for the sake of partisan loyalties.
Let the military and intelligence officials do their work. Let them evaluate the threats and do a thorough cost/benefit analysis. In fact, that is exactly what they do as a matter of practice. "After-action reviews" are something that the military and intelligence agencies take very seriously.
I don't think that their processes are without flaws - not by a long shot, but I have little doubt that their efforts are far more trustworthy than your transparent interest in making political hay out of this.
BENGHAZI!!!!! BENGHAZI!!!!!— Talking point sleuth - McCain is an odd duck. He intermittently does things that show integrity and character, and then panders to the lowest elements of the Republican Party base. Hard to figure that dude out.— Talking point sleuth
- McCain is trying to develop some sort of long-lasting legacy, I suspect. His military career isn't as distinguished now that his misbehavior was exposed, and his signature piece of legislation, McCain-Feingold, is widely seen as a joke. It's like he wants to go out as some sort of GOP lion, when really he just seems to be an opportunist.
- ==]]] when really he just seems to be an opportunist. [[===
I have seen him take principled stances that did not seem politically expedient - in particular when differentiating his views from the Republican mainstream.
On the other hand, his does flat-out ridiculous stuff also. Weird dude, IMO.— Talking point sleuth - ===]]] . But like it or not, Obama is ultimately accountable - [[[===
For either Benghazi or Fast and Furious, Obama is accountable for assessing the errors and taking corrective actions. If his administration performs poorly on either task in either situation, he is accountable for that poor performance. He is not accountable for the errors that occurred. Bad things happen. Lack of foresight sometimes creates policies that return bad results. That is a simple reality. You can't expect a president to completely eliminate any negative repercussions of any of his predecessor's policies. You can't expect that under a given president, the military or intelligence won't make mistakes. Laying "accountability" for the fact of these problems at Obama's feet is political nonsense - nothing more and nothing less. It goes hand-in-hand with Romney's and McCain's laughable attempts to politicize Benghazi. It only distracts from the work that needs to be done to assess the problems so as to create structures that eliminate repetition of the errors. Read what freakin' Condoleezza Rice had to say about Benghazi.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/10/25/condi-rice-downplays-benghazi-criticism
— Talking point sleuth - ///For either Benghazi or Fast and Furious, Obama is accountable for assessing the errors and taking corrective actions. If his administration performs poorly on either task in either situation, he is accountable for that poor performance.///
Exactly the point I was trying to make. Thanks.
//He is not accountable for the errors that occurred. Bad things happen.//
Depends on the errors but for the most part this would be true. If the errors are made as a result of a policy he instituted, then he would be accountable of course.
//Lack of foresight sometimes creates policies that return bad results. That is a simple reality. You can't expect a president to completely eliminate any negative repercussions of any of his predecessor's policies. ///
True, but I don't see much connection between Bush's policy on Libya and Obama's.
1
Popular Posts
Search this blog:
Blog Roll
- Andrew Sullivan
- Blinq
- Blogorrhea
- Blonde Sagacity
- Free Republic
- Instapundit
- James Taranto
- ScrappleFace
- The Corner
- Buzzmachine
- Eat the Press
- Editor and Publisher
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Media Bloodhound
- Mickey Kaus
- Pressthink
- Romenesko
- The Inksniffer
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Above Average Jane
- BlankBaby
- Citizen Mom
- Keystone Blog
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- Phawker
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Philly Future
- Phillyblog
- Phillyist
- The Clog
- The Next Mayor
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Young Philly Politics
- Afro-Netizen
- All-Spin Zone
- Atrios
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- Booman Tribune
- CorrenteWire
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- iFlipFlop
- Kiko's House
- MyDD
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Rowhouse Logic
- Slacktivist
- Suburban Guerilla
- Tattered Coat
- upyernoz
- AmericaBlog
- Andy Borowitz
- BuzzFlash
- Crooks and Liars
- Cursor
- Daily Kos
- David Sirota
- Drudge Report
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Fire Dog Lake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Hullabaloo
- Jesus' General
- Jon Swift
- Josh Marshall
- Juan Cole
- Kevin Drum
- Mad Kane
- Majikthise
- Matthew Yglesias
- Oliver Willis
- Raw Story
- Swing State Project
- Talk Left
- Taylor Marsh
- TBogg
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Think Progress
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- A Citizen's Blog
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Beer Leaguer
- Dick Polman
- Phillies Nation
- Philling Station
- Shallow Center
- The 700 Level
- The Good Phight
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: