Osama bin Laden is dead

[Guest]

He refused to give the president any credit for seeing it through and suggested it was all for policial reasons.

The Traveler

How is that non-partriotic?

[PrinceofLight2000]

He refused to give the president any credit for seeing it through and suggested it was all for policial reasons.

The Traveler

This just isn't factual, providing Rush's comments weren't sarcastic. He repeatedly said they weren't, and he sounded completely serious when he said it. I'd pull up the audio if I could.

Rush Limbaugh: "Thank God for President Obama" - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Edited May 4, 2011 by PrinceofLight2000

[JohnnyRudick]

I do believe in spite of what one may think this did

pull the president out of the mud a great deal.

His re-election "was" 50/50 at best

now I think it is almost a sure thing.

[PrinceofLight2000]

I do believe in spite of what one may think this did

pull the president out of the mud a great deal.

His re-election "was" 50/50 at best

now I think it is almost a sure thing.

Disagree completely. As Rush put it, bin Laden's blood doesn't fill my gas tank, nor does his death fix any other problems, not even the war in Afghanistan. It's a big blow to al-Qaeda's morale, I think, and the information obtained is likely invaluable, but this small moment of triumph will be seriously dwarfed by all the other issues up for debate.

EDIT: Just curious, how come you always hit enter after every 10 words or so?

Edited May 4, 2011 by PrinceofLight2000

[Just_A_Guy]

I think Limbaugh was being partially sarcastic--genuine in his congratulations of the President for letting the existing apparatus do its work; but also satirizing the elements in the press who (he felt) were inflating the White House's role and turning the President into some kind of hero whilst giving short shrift to the intelligence/military grunts who actually got the job done.

That's the thing about Limbaugh--he'll pop balloons even when at fluffy, feel-good moments when it seems like political suicide to do so. He warned about the "Obama Agenda" and openly called for its failure while the rest of the country was still gushing about its accomplishment in electing the first minority president. Now that we're hearing waffling about the account of the assassination and hearing rumblings that Special Ops didn't even try to take the guy alive--possibly to pre-empt a feud within the Justice Department as to what to do with him--it may be that Limbaugh's antics again prove prescient.

FWIW - we're not much closer to the 2012 election now, than H.W. Bush was to the '92 election when he declared victory after the liberation of Kuwait back in '91. And we all know how that turned out for him . . .

[Wingnut]

His re-election "was" 50/50 at best

now I think it is almost a sure thing.

I think he's got a better chance now, but it's far from a "sure thing." Most people -- I think -- recognize that he's likely to lean on this pretty heavily during his campaign, but also that it doesn't wipe out other long-term failures that more directly affect everyday life for Americans.

[Elphaba]

I think Limbaugh was being partially sarcastic--genuine in his congratulations of the President for letting the existing apparatus do its work; but also satirizing the elements in the press who (he felt) were inflating the White House's role and turning the President into some kind of hero whilst giving short shrift to the intelligence/military grunts who actually got the job done.

The only reason there is more space devoted to Obama's role than the intelligence community's or the military's is because more is known about it. However, I have yet to read one general account of the killing that does not acknowledge everyone's roles, including the intelligence community's and the military's. There's nothing wrong with writing stories about what is known, including the fact that it was a gutsy move on Obama's part because failure would have been a disaster for him, much more so than this will be helpful, and to interpret that to mean they are calling Obama a hero while ignoring the role of others is ridiculous. There's no doubt copious amounts of news space will be filled with every detail of the operation as it becomes known, demonstrating the heroic, and non-heroic, efforts of many.

That's the thing about Limbaugh--he'll pop balloons even when at fluffy, feel-good moments when it seems like political suicide to do so.

The only way Limbaugh could commit political suicide is if he were to become a liberal. He has a conservative following that will stay with him until the day he dies as long as he remains conservative.

He warned about the "Obama Agenda" and openly called for its failure while the rest of the country was still gushing about its accomplishment in electing the first minority president. Now that we're hearing waffling about the account of the assassination and hearing rumblings that Special Ops didn't even try to take the guy alive--possibly to pre-empt a feud within the Justice Department as to what to do with him--it may be that Limbaugh's antics again prove prescient.

First, doesn’t this paragraph violate the political candidate rules? I realize it’s difficult to tell given the event, but it seems to me this paragraph crosses the line.

Additionally, I don't understand it. How does the fact that they didn't try to take bin Laden alive (something I heard from the very beginning, thus no "rumblings") prove Limbaugh’s so-called “Obama Agenda” critique prescient?

Frankly, I'd be shocked if no waffling occurred. That's the downside to our 24-hour news cycle. There's never enough time to get all the details of anything complicated pulled together and presented to the press without errors, even when there's no attempt to whitewash any of it. It doesn't necessarily mean people are lying, as it's impossible for everyone to have all the facts immediately at hand, and what they think to be the truth in the moment turns out not to be. Of course, it could also mean people are lying.

The point is, it's far too early to know. I'm sure there are many truths that will need to be analysed to be put in their proper context, and that is going to take a very long time. To start criticizing the operation at such an early date demonstrates one is motivated more by ideology than reality.

FWIW - we're not much closer to the 2012 election now, than H.W. Bush was to the '92 election when he declared victory after the liberation of Kuwait back in '91. And we all know how that turned out for him . . .

I agree. I don't see this will have any significant impact on the election, particularly if the ecnonomy is still struggling, and especially if there is still no jobs recovery.

Elphaba

[JohnnyRudick]

Disagree completely. As Rush put it, bin Laden's blood doesn't fill my gas tank, nor does his death fix any other problems, not even the war in Afghanistan. It's a big blow to al-Qaeda's morale, I think, and the information obtained is likely invaluable, but this small moment of triumph will be seriously dwarfed by all the other issues up for debate.

EDIT: Just curious, how come you always hit enter after every 10 words or so?

Thanks. I really hope you are right. You very well could be.

I like to keep my column about half the page as it is easier

for me to keep up with.

I have a mental/brain problem where the whole page confuses

me and I have to stare at it for too long to figure out what is written.

Compacting it like I do helps me figure out what I just wrote.

Imagine what I have to go through to read what you guys wrote:bangcomputer:

[Guest]

Thanks. I really hope you are right. You very well could be.

I like to keep my column about half the page as it is easier

for me to keep up with.

I have a mental/brain problem where the whole page confuses

me and I have to stare at it for too long to figure out what is written.

Compacting it like I do helps me figure out what I just wrote.

Imagine what I have to go through to read what you guys wrote:bangcomputer:

Reminds me of this guy in the snake forum I go to.

He can barely write plain english - as in,

I have to really think about what he said because

some words are typed like htis and

most sentences are devoid of subject or predicate...

One time, he got into an argument with some folks and

they called him an "idiot" that can't even write 3rd grade level...

Come to find out - this guy is a 50+ year old who is a genius

trapped in celebral palsy. That is - he has an IQ of genius

but has gross sensory and motor impairment!

Only reason we found out was because some other

forum member came by his house to work with him

on an animal rescue operation.

Okay, done with the thread hijack...

[JohnnyRudick]

Reminds me of this guy in the snake forum I go to.

He can barely write plain english - as in,

I have to really think about what he said because

some words are typed like htis and

most sentences are devoid of subject or predicate...

One time, he got into an argument with some folks and

they called him an "idiot" that can't even write 3rd grade level...

Come to find out - this guy is a 50+ year old who is a genius

trapped in celebral palsy. That is - he has an IQ of genius

but has gross sensory and motor impairment!

Only reason we found out was because some other

forum member came by his house to work with him

on an animal rescue operation.

Okay, done with the thread hijack...

Thanks for the formatting.

You are a big help:)

I like your story as well:cool:

[Just_A_Guy]

First, doesn’t this paragraph violate the political candidate rules? I realize it’s difficult to tell given the event, but it seems to me this paragraph crosses the line.

*shrug* I hope not. Believe it or not, I meant it to be more an observation on Limbaugh than Obama. As for the remainder of the paragraph - I'm not sure whether the President's bid for re-election immunizes the Attorney General from second-guessing on these forums; but I'll bow to the other mods.

Additionally, I don't understand it. How does the fact that they didn't try to take bin Laden alive (something I heard from the very beginning, thus no "rumblings") prove Limbaugh’s so-called “Obama Agenda” critique prescient?

I probably wasn't clear enough. Many of us believed (or were told), on 1/20/09, that the entire country (except for a few die-hard racists) was about to slip into a Monrovian [i assume that's a word] "era of good feelings". Limbaugh broke that spell and refused to march in lockstep with the Administration before it was socially acceptable to do so. That's what I meant by "prescient".

Frankly, I'd be shocked if no waffling occurred. That's the downside to our 24-hour news cycle. There's never enough time to get all the details of anything complicated pulled together and presented to the press without errors, even when there's no attempt to whitewash any of it. It doesn't necessarily mean people are lying, as it's impossible for everyone to have all the facts immediately at hand, and what they think to be the truth in the moment turns out not to be. Of course, it could also mean people are lying.

I fully agree. My understanding, though, is that some of these now-repudiated details were coming from the White House itself. That does raise some eyebrows--probably no justification for conspiracy theories at this point; but it is odd.

The point is, it's far too early to know. I'm sure there are many truths that will need to be analysed to be put in their proper context, and that is going to take a very long time. To start criticizing the operation at such an early date demonstrates one is motivated more by ideology than reality.

Sure; but you've got to pop the aura of infallibility before you can really start asking the hard questions. I think that's what Limbaugh was trying to do yesterday.

Edited May 4, 2011 by Just_A_Guy

[PrinceofLight2000]

Thanks. I really hope you are right. You very well could be.

I like to keep my column about half the page as it is easier

for me to keep up with.

I have a mental/brain problem where the whole page confuses

me and I have to stare at it for too long to figure out what is written.

Compacting it like I do helps me figure out what I just wrote.

Imagine what I have to go through to read what you guys wrote:bangcomputer:

Reminds me of this guy in the snake forum I go to.

He can barely write plain english - as in,

I have to really think about what he said because

some words are typed like htis and

most sentences are devoid of subject or predicate...

One time, he got into an argument with some folks and

they called him an "idiot" that can't even write 3rd grade level...

Come to find out - this guy is a 50+ year old who is a genius

trapped in celebral palsy. That is - he has an IQ of genius

but has gross sensory and motor impairment!

Only reason we found out was because some other

forum member came by his house to work with him

on an animal rescue operation.

Okay, done with the thread hijack...

Nice haikus, guys.

I have cerebral palsy myself from being born three and a half months early. Thankfully it's very mild and I'm not completely crippled or a vegetable.

[JohnnyRudick]

Nice haikus, guys.

I have cerebral palsy myself from being born three and a half months early. Thankfully it's very mild and I'm not completely crippled or a vegetable.

Good show;)

Keep up keepin' on:D

[RipplecutBuddha]

Apparently there are photographs. They just haven't been released yet. The appropriate time and method for releasing them is still being determined (I'm not sure why there's a delay at all). But photos were taken for the express purpose of avoiding conspiracy theories.

Conspiracy theories will happen, though, with or without just reason.

Ah, the two-edged sword of wikileaks....

[skippy740]

It reminds me of a line from a movie...

"You can't win, Darth. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine."

While I don't compare the Empire to the United States...

Obi-Wan Kenobi Is Dead, Vader Says - Galactic Empire Times

Oh, you have GOT to read the comments at the bottom of the article! Priceless!