Limbaugh on the Nobel: They’re trying to get him to stand down in Afghanistan
posted at 5:26 pm on October 9, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Seven-plus minutes of audio here on “the first post-accomplishment president,” but his point about Afghanistan is the crux of it. I noted this in the Nobel thread this morning but it bears repeating: For once, he and David Frum are in perfect sync.
That Nobel was not a gesture of Obama-worship by left-leaning Norwegians. It was the very opposite: It was a pre-emptive strike against Obama, an attempt to neutralize him. How can a Peace Nobelist strike Iranian nuclear plants? Or wage a protracted war in Afghanistan? Or tell the Palestinians, “Sorry, that’s the best offer, take it or leave it”? The hope of course is that he cannot.
Oh, now, be fair: He’s perfectly capable of abandoning Afghanistan to the Taliban without any Euro encouragement. Tapper makes a clever point, though, in noting how the award could potentially backfire by giving Obama political cover to embrace the hawk within. Now that he’s been anointed the prince of peace by the Nobel committee, any escalation in Afghanistan should presumably be supported by the “international community” as a measure taken for a just and noble purpose. Think that’s how it’ll play out? Click the image to watch.
Update: “This is a man of peace now.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
BleedsBlue:
You do not even know what you are talking about. Bush went into Afghanistan with NATO and the UN, which is exactly what the Democrats wanted. They were on the same damn page right up until they decided that using Afghanistan to beat him over the head with might be useful to them.
When the Senate authorized the use of force in Iraq, the Democrats said nothing about sending more people into Afghanistan. Nothing. Nada. And they did not change that attitude until it was politically expedient to do so.
And so Afghanistan has remained a NATO operation and now Obama is in charge and still the only thing the Democrats can manage to do is blame Bush. It is pathetic.
BTW, if Bill Clinton had dealt with Osama bin Laden a decade ago, if he had dealt with the Taliban a few years before that…there never would have been a 9/11. So if we are going to back in time and blame the other guy, why not go far enough back to really make a difference?
Terrye on October 9, 2009 at 6:34 PM
Well, Bama will have to do something to earn this prize, theis “call to action”…soooo, Czechs and Polaks laready done…Israel is being cornered…even the French are worried we have become wimps…Iran is quiet, can’t bomb them…lessee, gotta be something we can do, some cut and run I can get away with until it’s another president’s problem…McChrystal, right, always was a fool…off with his head right now…
Harry Schell on October 9, 2009 at 6:35 PM
And yes, the Republicans did control the Congress, and it was not until the Democrats took control that things really went to hell in a handbasket.
BTW, there are a dozen different instances of Bush trying to reign in the lending industry and the Democrats blocked every measure every time. They did that right up until September 2008, after which they passed the reforms they had refused to consider before.
Now, you could say that the Republicans did not do enough, but at least they tried, which is more than Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and Barack Obama ever did.
Terrye on October 9, 2009 at 6:36 PM
Must be the Marine wife vibe, but at the very first news bulletin this morning (long before Rush was on) that is the ONLY THING I could think. We all channel Rush to some degree, but this was spooky.
Appealing to his throbbing ego…it seemed so obvious.
And then I thought, perhaps the joke is on the big “O” because the higher they raise
Americahim the MORE SPECTACULAR THE TUMBLE.seejanemom on October 9, 2009 at 6:37 PM
I’m sorry, you are apparently borderline retarded. George ran the war in Afghanistan for seven years. After initial success, he focused on an entirely useless war in Iraq and the situation deteriorated os badly that career military were apparently appalled when they looked at the situation. It was and is and American led war. With Bush as CiC, we screwed up. We we hadn’t, you wouldn’t be calling for more troops tofay.
Bleeds Blue on October 9, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Whatever sins and atrocities you think Bush heaped on America pale in comparison to what Barry is doing, and will continue to do. In nine short months, Team Barry has managed to make America the laughingstock of the world. Gofer’s like you have helped him succeed in this endeavor. I imagine this accomplishment provides you with immense joy.
anXdem on October 9, 2009 at 6:38 PM
Obama now has more troops in Iraq + Afghanistan than George Bush had on January 19, 2009. Obama said that he would bring 1 to 2 brigades home each month from Iraq. It has been over eight months and he has only brought home about 1 or 2 brigades in total. Obama is a pathological liar. Unemployment is much higher now than when Obama took office. If you loathe Bush you should absolutely hate Obama.
MB4 on October 9, 2009 at 6:39 PM
I know it would be against the law, etc.
I was just saying…what IF…what IF the entire military, as a whole, decided their CIC was anti-American and actually formed their OWN plan and it worked.
What would happen?
I know, I know….not many people like to play the fantasy what IF scenerios….but I do. heh…..just curious
bridgetown on October 9, 2009 at 6:41 PM
ding, ding, ding. Easy for me to see…what is wrong with people? Perhaps if Obama was a white republican….they’d see to see.
bridgetown on October 9, 2009 at 6:43 PM
Two anagrams for Nobel Peace Prize are:
Brazen Ice People
Bronze Peace Pile
I think that sums it all up…
centre on October 9, 2009 at 6:43 PM
You must be a war monger as you don’t say squat about Obama withdrawing less troops from Iraq in the last 8 months than John McCain or even George Bush probably would have by now. Obama has withdrawn almost no troops from Iraq, in spite of his campaign promises, and has already escalated American troop levels in Afghanistan by about 60% in just 8 months. Why do you support Obama? Why are you such a war monger?
MB4 on October 9, 2009 at 6:44 PM
Not to mention…he says he is against torture, but he is perfectly fine with rendition…which is probably, most likely, oh yes it is MUCH WORSE Than Waterboarding someone.
bridgetown on October 9, 2009 at 6:49 PM
Obama should wear the nobel prize medal around his neck when he talks to Ahmadinejad…..that way he knows Obama is serious about peace. He’s got a medal to prove it.
tommer74 on October 9, 2009 at 6:50 PM
The hawk within?
rrpjr on October 9, 2009 at 6:52 PM
White House reporter:“This is a man of peace now.”
My initial reaction was in exactly the same format. Except I had substituted “bag” for “man” and “douche” for “peace.”
Other than that though, quite similar.
Gilda on October 9, 2009 at 6:54 PM
I and you, having to choose, would chose being water boarded. Bleeds Blue can take rendition. Maybe to Saudi Arabia.
MB4 on October 9, 2009 at 6:59 PM
What I would like to know is why aren’t they giving Obama the Nobel Prize for Chemistry and Physics as he has done every bit as much to earn them.
MB4 on October 9, 2009 at 7:01 PM
BleedsBlue:
No, I am not the one who is retarded my dear. Obama has been running the war in Afghanistan for several months now and thus far all we have heard is whine whine whine.
So, what great mind on the Democratic side had a great plan to save Afghanistan? Which of them said we should dump NATO and go it alone? Or lose the UN because they are corrupt and incompetent? I don’t remember that. I remember the Democrats ignoring Afghanistan until they thought it would work for them to pretend they cared and then when they got a shot at it, all they want to do is run away.
In fact, since Obama took the reigns things have gone downhill. Chances are if Bush was still the CinC we would not be in this position. Moron.
Terrye on October 9, 2009 at 7:02 PM
Why not Sara Palin? Her book isn’t out yet but it should get the Nobel for literature! Good for the goose…
obleo on October 9, 2009 at 7:03 PM
I can tell you this, Bush would listen to the generals, the only people Obama wants to listen to are the Eurotrash.
Terrye on October 9, 2009 at 7:04 PM
Bush = American
Obama = Not so much…thus..the Nobel
bridgetown on October 9, 2009 at 7:06 PM
In fact, more American/NATO troops have been killed in the 8 months that Obama has been President than in any full year under George W. Bush. That is not a coincidence, but is because McChrystal, under Obama, has changed the ROE drastically to be much more unfavorable for American troops.
MB4 on October 9, 2009 at 7:20 PM
Bombing Iran and invading Pakistan IS a peace mission.
John the Libertarian on October 9, 2009 at 7:30 PM
Alrighty then….(if we’re just playin’ fantasy)….Petraeus, McChrystal and the entire joint chiefs should march right into the WH and frog march this pompus ass right back to Chicago. Re-appoint GW, while new elections are held—and send a team to put the Nobel committee in an insane asylum. If you’re gonna do “fantasys”, why mess around?
Rovin on October 9, 2009 at 7:31 PM
The KC Chiefs have been awarded the superbowl. Obama also got a Nobel prize for economics. LOL Love ya Rush!
Dollayo on October 9, 2009 at 7:36 PM
Obamao in a nutshell (with an excellent link to Dr. K., as well): http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/10/024670.php
(The comments are delicious, too.)
onlineanalyst on October 9, 2009 at 7:36 PM
And his unaccountable marxist ‘czar’ advisors, let’s not forget.
BleedsBlue is an idiot. Due to leftist democrat pressure we actually did engage the world on both Iran and Afghanistan, encouraging and allowing our allies to join in and help with the load. Just as they demanded.
NATO and our allies failed to deliver in Afghanistan and France, Germany, and the UK talked for three friggin’ years with Iran and got bupkiss. And Bush was accused of ‘outsourcing’ Afghanistan and Iran. Way to have it both ways, you leftist idiots.
We’re beyond talk, but that’s all our nobel-winning President knows how to do, and he needs a teleprompter to do even that. President head-on-a-swivel… idiot looks like he’s watching a ping pong game when he speaks.
Not impressed. FOAD, bleedsblue. FOAD.
techno_barbarian on October 9, 2009 at 7:45 PM
Obama harboring a “hawk within”? Not possible. Perhaps a parakeet.
alwaysright43 on October 9, 2009 at 7:50 PM
LOL!!! point taken.
bridgetown on October 9, 2009 at 8:04 PM
The McChrsytal Plan: Surge 40,000 more US troops from a weary Army to renew the failing effort to apply our counter-productive counterinsurgency theory — which attempts to cure cancer with herbal tea.
The Biden Strategy: Focus ruthlessly on the destruction of al Qaeda and its auxiliaries across the border in Pakistan or wherever they may appear in Afghanistan. This is the counter-terror practice that’s worked for 3,000 years.
The “Vote Present” Strategy: Send a token increase of 10,000 or so troops, make cosmetic changes to the mission, try to please everyone partially — and kick the can down the road.
Pundits assume that those in uniform automatically support Gen. McChrystal’s request for more troops. It ain’t so, folks. Of the numerous uniformed contacts who’ve reached out to me — soldiers and Marines of all ranks — only two backed the McChrsytal plan. One of those was a close subordinate of the general’s, calling from Kabul.
MB4 on October 9, 2009 at 8:29 PM
** THIS from someone who apparently would require a lengthy and exorbitantly expensive mental UPGRADE in hopes of rising to mere retardation?
Katfish on October 9, 2009 at 8:34 PM
With all due respect, no.
Given all the twisted and corrupt things going on at this moment, let this one event be an honest vote for merit, and achievement.
The Heisman Trophy is a recognition of effort, not a political statement.
CPT. Charles on October 9, 2009 at 9:00 PM
No surprise. Anyone who knows much of anything about Sh!tcago would probably be able to deduce that a politician hailing from that city would be highly bribeable.
Dark-Star on October 9, 2009 at 9:27 PM
This is about climate change.
tomas on October 9, 2009 at 9:32 PM
I vote for the Obamessiah to be awarded the Heisman. I’m also voting for him to be awarded an Emmy and an Oscar. Next, he could possibly award himself the Presidential Medal of Valor.
I mean…why the hell not?
ICBMMan on October 9, 2009 at 9:41 PM
“He’s a man of peace now.”
Words fail. I’m literally disgusted beyond the ability to fully express the depth of my contempt for the media, for this administration, for Democrats in general.
Midas on October 9, 2009 at 10:03 PM
All I can think of is the Cowardly Lion in the Wizard of Oz who was given a medal of valor at the end and that gave him courage!
chickasaw42 on October 10, 2009 at 12:34 AM
If this prize is being given to sway Obama’s policy decisions, isn’t there some law against it? Doesn’t this amount to lobbying by a foreign government? The committee for the Peace Prize is made up of members of Norway’s parliament. Just as Americans are forbidden by the Constitution to accept titles of nobility such as knighthoods, it ought to be unconstitutional for a sitting President, member of Congress, or Supreme Court Justice to receive the Nobel Peace Prize.
nkviking75 on October 10, 2009 at 1:14 AM
That’s a brilliant analogy!
notropis on October 10, 2009 at 1:26 AM
Affirmative action at it’s logical conclusion.
KyserS on October 10, 2009 at 7:45 AM
Rush’s analysis is right on and the wussies on the left and Europe know it!
bluegrass on October 10, 2009 at 9:25 AM
I think it might be the reason, but that it will have no effect on Obama. I think it is more likely it was a ’shot’ at Bush. The concern that it might is probobly the reason behind making it unconstitutional to accept gifts/titles without congressional consent (see above link).
BermanPost on October 10, 2009 at 9:35 PM
Rewarding B.O. for wussing us out. I tend to agree.
Keep up the good work Rush.
johnnyU on October 11, 2009 at 10:51 AM
bama, a steaming pile-o-dung “wins” a worthless and totally undeserved pile-o-dung “award.” What a sack-o-shit!!!
jgdp on October 11, 2009 at 9:42 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2