Quotes of the day

posted at 9:21 pm on May 28, 2013 by Allahpundit

The pivot in counterterrorism policy that President Obama announced last week was nearly two years in the making, but perhaps the most critical moment came last spring during a White House meeting as he talked about the future of the nation’s long-running terrorism war. Underlying the discussion was a simple fact: It was an election year. And Mr. Obama might lose…

While part of the re-evaluation was aimed at the next president, it was also about Mr. Obama’s own legacy. What became an exercise lasting months, aides said, forced him to confront his deep conflicts as commander in chief: the Nobel Peace Prize winner with a “kill list,” the antiwar candidate turned war president, the avowed champion of transparency ordering operations over secret battlegrounds. He wanted to be known for healing the rift with the Muslim world, not raining down death from above…

In seemingly endless meetings, including a dozen or more with the president, Mr. Brennan and other administration officials grappled with the issue. Concluding that Al Qaeda’s core leadership had been decimated, some officials wanted tighter restrictions on the use of drone strikes, but the Central Intelligence Agency and the Pentagon balked. The C.I.A.’s counterterrorism center resisted another proposal to take its drones away and put them under Pentagon control.

While the agencies argued, Mr. Obama focused on winning a second term, boasting about the same aggressive approach he was privately rethinking.

***

Obama knows that the war on terror requires that the United States kill or capture a very small number of implacable enemies, and change the minds and the lives of tens of millions of others. Indeed, in his speech he acknowledged that “in the absence of a strategy that reduces the wellspring of extremism, a perpetual war — through drones or Special Forces or troop deployments — will prove self-defeating, and alter our country in troubling ways.” Even former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld once worried that the United States was making enemies faster than it was killing them. But the short-term urgency of killing bad guys inevitably eclipses the long-term goal of changing the conditions which produce terrorism. So even a figure as conscientious as Obama slides down the slippery slope from approving the rare drone strike against “high-value targets” to approving the less discriminating “signature strike” against unidentified individuals engaged in a pattern of threatening activity. Both ending that practice and closing Guantanamo, which Obama also vowed in his speech to take steps to do, constitute an implicit recognition that the time has come to restore that balance.

Of course, the deep sense of embitterment which citizens of the Islamic world feel towards the United States is not going to be much diminished by Obama’s decision to end “signature strikes,” or to transfer control of the drone program from the CIA to the Pentagon. Pakistan’s leaders will keep feeding their people a steady diet of anti-Americanism even if the Obama administration ends the drone program altogether, and doubles foreign aid. In his speech, Obama was careful to say that the United States had to be humble about what it could do to improve the lives — and, presumably, the opinions — of people in the Middle East. But it has no choice save to try.

***

Early on in his speech, Obama defended the use of drones, noting that they are often the only way to kill people who are planning attacks on the United States and that, while these weapons sometimes kill innocent civilians, they kill far fewer civilians than other forms of military power, such as conventional airstrikes or troop incursions on the ground.

But then, Obama conceded that these weapons had to be subjected to restrictions, lest they be used too casually. Specifically, it had to be determined that the person killed poses a “continuing, imminent threat” against the United States; that capturing the person alive was infeasible; and that there was “near certainty” that the strike would kill or injure no civilians.

This sounds reasonable, except that these same standards were outlined—with much of the exact same language—in an unclassified 16-page “white paper” that the Justice Department released back in February. And the way that the paper defined those terms rendered the restrictions meaningless…

In short, the speech heralded nothing new when it comes to drone strikes.

***

To put the matter simply, I can’t tell at this stage whether there’s really been a substantial narrowing—that is, whether there are people whom the US used to target whom it is, as a matter of new policy, no longer targeting because the President regards the AUMF conflict as winding down and in its end phase. To be sure, the number of drone strikes in Pakistan has fallen sharply, but I had taken that to be a function largely of sovereign pressure. This question strikes me as an area ripe for additional clarification from the administration.

***

Don’t get me wrong: I’m all for closing Guantánamo, reining in drone strikes, and making U.S. counterterrorism policy more focused and effective — as long as American security interests don’t suffer as a consequence. But was it necessary to wrap all of this in a long and largely academic presidential address? The presidency isn’t a law-school seminar. And while teaching and educating the nation is important, means and ends need to be calibrated carefully, words credibly followed up by deeds…

I don’t want to create a strawman here: I know Obama made clear that no American president can eradicate terror entirely, and that we must continue to fight it. Still, the speech did have a historic turning-point quality about it — that’s what happens when the most powerful man in the world gives a speech suggesting we’re turning the page on the War on Terror.

But our success against al Qaeda doesn’t mean we can call off the struggle against those who want to do catastrophic harm to America. All it means is that we’re winning that war.

And it is a war. The most important task of a president is to protect the homeland, and to safeguard our individual liberties while he does it. And while we’re much safer from externally planned attacks, we’re still not safe. Those who want to harm us have unlimited time, and the angry, broken, dysfunctional region in which they live will continue to provide them with ample resources. Let’s do everything we can — within reason — to address what ails the greater Middle East, drain the swamp, and defuse the anger.

***

This war, like all wars, must end when someone wins it. The president—speaking at the National Defense University, of all places—said, “the core of al Qaeda . . . is on the path to defeat.” And so it may be. But meanwhile, the core of al Qaeda, its aims and its beliefs, is also on the path to Boston and London and any number of other places…

In 2001 Congress passed the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, a declaration of war on terrorists and nations that harbor them. In his speech the president said, “I look forward to engaging . . . in efforts to refine and ultimately repeal the AUMF’s mandate.”

I like the president’s use of the word “efforts” here, as though he’s merely trying to be stupid. He doesn’t need to try. Earlier in the week he signed new policy guidance for drone strikes. In the future we will use lethal drones only on terrorists who are a “continuing and imminent threat to the American people” and not on terrorists who are a “significant threat to U.S. interests.” Although, assuming tremendously stupid efforts will be made to tell the two kinds of terrorists apart, maybe I’m wrong about the president not needing to try. The policy guidance also stipulates that there “must be a near certainty” that civilians won’t be killed or injured in a drone strike. Imagine how stupid a WWII Army Air Corps briefing officer would have had to be to say that to his B-17 pilots.

***

Obama’s Reinhold Niebuhr act comes with potential costs of its own. While the last president exuded a cowboyish certainty, this president is constantly examining his conscience in public — but if their policies are basically the same, the latter is no less of a performance. And there are ways in which it may be a more fundamentally dishonest one, because it perpetually promises harmonies that can’t be achieved and policy shifts that won’t actually be delivered.

That’s a cynical reading on Obama’s speech, but it feels like the right one. Listened to or skimmed, the address seemed to promise real limits on presidential power, a real horizon for the war on terror. But when parsed carefully, it’s not clear how much practical effect its promises will have

Over all, as the Brookings Institution’s Benjamin Wittes put it, the speech seemed written to align Obama “as publicly as possible with the critics of the positions his administration is taking without undermining his administration’s operational flexibility in actual fact.”

There are obviously good reasons to preserve this flexibility. The problem is that by making it sound as if American policy is about to change more than it actually will, the president’s rhetoric risks coming across as a bait and switch — on his supporters at home, but more important, on audiences across the Muslim world.

***

“Before any strike is taken, there must be near-certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured — the highest standard we can set.” This is merely an assertion, and it raises further questions about how the Obama administration defines “near-certainty” and what lower standard they were following previously…

This was supposed to be the speech in which President Obama clarified his targeted killing policies. Instead, he further confused both domestic and international audiences. By comparing it with previous administration officials’ comments, Jonathan Landay determined that “Obama’s speech appeared to expand those who are targeted in drone strikes.” Wall Street Journal reporters came to the opposite conclusion: “The new language is more restrictive than the policy declared in an April 2012 speech by John Brennan, then White House counterterrorism chief.”

To quote the rant by former New York Jets football coach Herman Edwards about anonymous comments by his staff: “Just put your name on it. That’s all I say. Be a man, or a woman, put your name on it.”

This is President Obama’s policy. He has authorized over seven times more drone strikes than his predecessor, he is the commander in chief, and he can declassify whatever information he wants. He missed this opportunity to put his name on his drone policies, relying on his senior aides to do it for him — a common presidential practice. To assure his administration remains the “most transparent in history,” he should direct Brennan’s replacement, Lisa Monaco, to prepare a follow-up speech that explains to the public, not just to selected reporters, what U.S. targeted killing policy really is.

***

Via Mediaite.

***


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 3 4 5

Resist We Much, your HotAirians post is a classic! If you get to me, I hope you don’t think I look like this. I actually look much closer to this. :-)

ITguy on May 29, 2013 at 1:45 AM

It is love, the memory of perfect love, that makes him feel content with his lot. He has his love, his memory of his love. He wouldn’t trade that for all the rest. :)

thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 1:43 AM

Good one, can I count on a “B+” for my first test?

arnold ziffel on May 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM

Not really. I see this as a different intent and feel. Maybe I’m msising something. Fill me in?

thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 1:29 AM

More as kind of a counterpoint to well respected man, the flip side, is my thinking.

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 1:48 AM

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 1:41 AM

I believe it. When Orbsion went to London to meet with U2, Bono was so impressed that he was going to record with them that he offered to get Orbson anything he wanted. Bono said ( being the kind of man he is) that he would have gotten him anything, literally, cocaine, girls, anything at all… but Orbison just looked at him and said ” Could I have a cold bottle of Coke?” Bono said that he handed Orbison the music for the peice and Orbison just sort of hummed a little and mumbled a bit and Bono was horrified and thought “Oh, God! He’s lost his voice!” but right about then Orbison said let’s hit it and they started to play…. Bono said Orbsion lifted his head, his lips barely moved… and the voice of an angel welled out of his throat.

Here’s the tune Mystery Girl- Orbison

thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 1:50 AM

I speak English, college Italian, and a smattering of French, German, and Russian. ( I also speak enough Spanish to get by… but I’ll deny it if anyone asks :))

thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 1:36 AM

I am impressed, seriously. If more women and men, had half your sense we would not be in the fix we is in.

arnold ziffel on May 29, 2013 at 1:51 AM

arnold ziffel on May 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM

Oh, I should think an A… A minus at the very least, Arnold. You got it. :)

thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 1:53 AM

RWM forgot sesquipedalian. I know, I kwow, it’s WIP.

Schadenfreude on May 29, 2013 at 1:36 AM

Squidy? This ought to be good.

SparkPlug on May 29, 2013 at 1:53 AM

arnold ziffel on May 29, 2013 at 1:51 AM

lol! Thank you, Arnold. I learned the hardway… :)

thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 1:54 AM

Resist We Much, your HotAirians post is a classic! If you get to me, I hope you don’t think I look like this. I actually look much closer to this. :-)
ITguy on May 29, 2013 at 1:45 AM

Or maybe?
:D

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 1:55 AM

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 1:48 AM

Now that’s an interesting perpective.:) I’ll have to listen and think in that context.

thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 1:56 AM

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 1:55 AM

That’s a classic. “Mr. Potato Head, you are doing it again.”

SparkPlug on May 29, 2013 at 1:57 AM

thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 1:50 AM

He had a voice for the ages, for sure. Gone way too soon.

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 1:58 AM

“Lucky Man” Emerson, Lake, and Palmer nails this one.

thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 1:31 AM

The Carpenters nailed that one too.

SparkPlug on May 29, 2013 at 1:59 AM

MIdnight Blues – Moore

I bid you all a fond goodnight. It’s been a pleasure, as always. See you soon.

Goodnight, Paladin. :)

thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 2:01 AM

That’s a classic. “Mr. Potato Head, you are doing it again.”
SparkPlug on May 29, 2013 at 1:57 AM

Yeah, it is. Along with the line the Colonel says when it looks as if there’s a boatload of incoming missiles, Somebodys running through the complex yelling that it’s not a real attack and the Col chides the guy – “Don’t run in here! Somebody could get hurt!”.

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 2:04 AM

Goodnight, Paladin. :)
thatsafactjack on May 29, 2013 at 2:01 AM

“Good night, Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are”

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 2:06 AM

Nite Jackie – just btw. us, RWM missed the Schad scheme, but don’t say anything. Paladin and spoofs, as in spies, should have been clues.

Schadenfreude on May 29, 2013 at 2:07 AM

“Mr. Potato Head, you are doing it again.”
SparkPlug on May 29, 2013 at 1:57 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=n31fogbmQTg#t=161s

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 2:09 AM

whatcat, you link good stuff.

Schadenfreude on May 29, 2013 at 2:11 AM

whatcat, you link good stuff.

Schadenfreude on May 29, 2013 at 2:11 AM

There’s a lot of fun and interesting stuff out there!

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 2:13 AM

There’s a lot of fun and interesting stuff out there!

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 2:13 AM

Takes a good mind to find it, appropriately.

Schadenfreude on May 29, 2013 at 2:14 AM

Schadenfreude on May 29, 2013 at 2:14 AM

Great odd historical stuff, too. Like this genius inventor who decided to test his parachute by jumping off the Eiffel Tower.

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 2:19 AM

Bout that time, Irene.

whatcat on May 29, 2013 at 2:29 AM

Midnight in a Perfect world

tom daschle concerned on May 29, 2013 at 2:31 AM

‘Whatever happened, Axe did it.’ – Sparky

Bwaaah. That page is getting even funnier. ’bout ruptured my other gizzard laughing.

SparkPlug on May 29, 2013 at 2:36 AM

For darlin’ bnmine (you gotta love their name! :)):

“Well, I think you’re lovely, and I think you’re beautiful…”

The Vibrators – “I Think You’re Lovely”

Anti-Control on May 29, 2013 at 3:19 AM

The Angels – “Take A Long Line”

Anti-Control on May 29, 2013 at 3:42 AM

For anyone who thinks Americans will be told that Benghazi was a nation-state attack by ex-CIA chief David Petraeus in the near future they are in for a disappointment. He is part of the problem and has been for years. He sold his soul for shiny medals and financial perks and circuses long ago—and as his record shows, he will roll over again and again. Recall how Petraeus fell into lock-step rank-and-file with President Obama and Hillary Clinton when he joined them in falsely misleading America before the 2012 elections by blaming an “out-of-control demonstration prompted by a Youtube video” for the Benghazi attack to the House Intelligence Committee three days after the attack. He’s as dirty as they are.

What is happening is America is the final stages of the run up to the next major military conflict coming up in the Middle East. But unlike Iraq and Afghanistan or the smaller operations in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, Syria won’t implode it will explode and spread throughout the region in an epic bloody, deadly Sunni-Shiite conflict. Christians, people of all faiths, non-believers will be persecuted if not outright slaughtered. Think Islamic Caliphate time.

One can’t help but ask what did the Obama-Clinton regime think would happen when they funded al Qaeda rebels to topple Gaddafi? Either they are dangerously stupid or this is what they wanted to happen considering they have been gearing up for the next stop Syria for well over a year now.

The next time someone, be it in the media, President Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry or members of Congress, like the insufferable Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.S.), say the U.S. needs to overthrow Syrian President Assad for humanitarian purposes, ask them what they think will happen next. Are they really so stupid to actually believe that freedom, democracy, unicorns, peace and lollipops will take over Syria after Assad is removed, or will another vacuum be created for the Muslim Brotherhood to fill? A vacuum that will be filled by massive bloodshed, ethnic cleansing, genocide that could set the entire region on fire with American and NATO troops being dragged in to serve the interests of someone else who are using America’s military might to create the United States of Islam. You already can see it happening in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya.

VorDaj on May 29, 2013 at 6:26 AM

Mr. Obama focused on winning a second term, boasting about the same aggressive approach he was privately rethinking

and the lemmings fell for it…cripe…

all about the O….

morning folks

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 6:35 AM

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 6:35 AM

Morning!

Right outta the box with Obama? I’m sick of looking at him and sick of hearing the media fawn over him. Not even grade schoolers having their first crush on an older kid are this mushy.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 6:40 AM

mika feeling holder’s remorse…awwwww

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 6:41 AM

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 6:40 AM

morning Liam!

amen brother…

ALL HAIL DEAR LEADER

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 6:42 AM

ALL HAIL DEAR LEADER

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 6:42 AM

If I’m not there in five minutes, they can start without me.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 6:44 AM

rattner defending holder…doj DID send information to news corp about the upcoming pull of records…

boy hes a good lapdog for obama…

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 6:45 AM

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 6:44 AM

lol
:)

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 6:46 AM

Obama – Greatest President

Saudi Arabia has ever had

VorDaj on May 29, 2013 at 6:46 AM

rattner defending holder…doj DID send information to news corp about the upcoming pull of records…

boy hes a good lapdog for obama…

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 6:45 AM

Where are the original documents to prove it? DoJ should have produced them by now. Gee, I hope they didn’t fax them to MSNBC.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 6:46 AM

My take.

kingsjester on May 29, 2013 at 6:48 AM

Mornin’, y’all! I hit the button too quickly.
The subject:
“UK/Europe Experiencing the Dangers of Lax Immigration Policies”

kingsjester on May 29, 2013 at 6:50 AM

To blazes with the Euros. The only sad thing is we lost so many troops saving their lame butts in two world wars, and kept them safe half a century from the Soviets. This is what our troops died for?

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 6:57 AM

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 6:46 AM

they would actually fax them to msdnc before anyone else….

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 7:04 AM

holy cow, joe thinks cruz will go the way of bachman, say crazy immflammatory things and then need to leave town…

what an idiot…

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 7:06 AM

kingsjester on May 29, 2013 at 6:50 AM

spot on KJ…no assimilation…you must kowtow to us

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 7:07 AM

holy cow, joe thinks cruz will go the way of bachman, say crazy immflammatory things and then need to leave town…

what an idiot…

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 7:06 AM

What — Cruz’s filibuster wasn’t enough? LOL Joe is just a blowhard who, like all liberals, needs wishful thinking to sustain himself. Cruz may blow it at some point, but the longer until he might, libs like Joe are going to become more shrill and hysterical.

It is kinda fun to watch.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:09 AM

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 7:07 AM

Thank you, ma’am!

Precisely. And, if we don’t secure our borders…if will happen to us.

kingsjester on May 29, 2013 at 7:11 AM

Morning, morning crew. :) Hope you have a great day!

OT/ @gophergirl — if you see this — I created a new category and called it “Scrapbook,” for odds and ends. I used a little valentine heart dealio for it, since scrapbooks (probably, generally) contain a fair amount of mush. :)

First up is not mush, though:

Minnesota Golden Gophers. Nuf said!

Axe on May 29, 2013 at 7:11 AM

It is kinda fun to watch.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:09 AM

true

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 7:11 AM

LOL Joe is just a blowhard who, like all liberals, needs wishful thinking to sustain himself. Cruz may blow it at some point, but the longer until he might, libs like Joe are going to become more shrill and hysterical . . .

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:09 AM

Is he still saying that the failure to pass gun control is going to . . . meh, I can’t even type it. :)

Axe on May 29, 2013 at 7:13 AM

And, if we don’t secure our borders…if will happen to us.

kingsjester on May 29, 2013 at 7:11 AM

It already is. You don’t think all those Latins coming across the border are really Latin, do you?

Watch Invasion USA some time, and imagine something like that happening here. I believe the possibility is very high.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:15 AM

Is he still saying that the failure to pass gun control is going to . . . meh, I can’t even type it. :)

Axe on May 29, 2013 at 7:13 AM

I don’t watch the show. I get enough drivel from our interloping trolls to need it.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:16 AM

Axe on May 29, 2013 at 7:13 AM

not yet…

:)

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 7:17 AM

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:15 AM

If you mean the Chuck Norris, movie, I have…several times. :)

kingsjester on May 29, 2013 at 7:19 AM

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:15 AM

If you mean the Chuck Norris, movie, I have…several times. :)

kingsjester on May 29, 2013 at 7:19 AM

That’s the one! I hope the jihadists never have. I wouldn’t want them to get any ideas.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:20 AM

Axe on May 29, 2013 at 7:13 AM

he just went there again…

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 7:20 AM

Obama knows that the war on terror requires that the United States kill or capture a very small number of implacable enemies, and change the minds and the lives of tens of millions of others.

I gotta BS on this comment. The filthy rat-eared coward doesn’t acknowledge there is a war on terror. He even declared terrorism as we knew it at an end because we had not had a case of domestic terrorism since the 9/11/01 atrocities. Fort Hood was a case of workplace violence. The Arkansas recruiting station shooting was an anti-war protest. Benghazi was a spontaneous protest inspired by the Cairo reaction to a YouTube video. The Boston Marathon bombing was never called terrorism. All the other associated attempts at terrorism including stuffing bombs in clothing and boarding planes and parking cars in Times square were isolated incidents the work of lone wolves and not in any way indicitive of the religion of peace.

Happy Nomad on May 29, 2013 at 7:20 AM

he just went there again…

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 7:20 AM

lol :)

– I dunno. I’d enjoy my own planet too, and really, given my rep, who am I to judge?

Axe on May 29, 2013 at 7:21 AM

Happy Nomad on May 29, 2013 at 7:20 AM

Obama is a typical liberal. He knows so much that isn’t so.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:24 AM

UPDATED!!!

The HotAirians (Pics)

Resist We Much on May 28, 2013 at 9:48 PM

What perfectly delightful way to start my morning!

I stand in utter awe!

herm2416 on May 29, 2013 at 7:28 AM

By the way…if you want to read something really scary…read kaltes’ pontifications on the “Hunt Thread”. Yikes.

kingsjester on May 29, 2013 at 7:29 AM

Obama is a typical liberal. He knows so much that isn’t so.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:24 AM

Yeah, well the European Socialists treated their domestic terror problems as isolated law enforcement issues too. How’d that work out?

Happy Nomad on May 29, 2013 at 7:29 AM

Obama knows that the war on terror requires that the United States kill or capture a very small number of implacable enemies, and change the minds and the lives of tens of millions of others.

That is a really funny statement. When we invaded Iraq, all we heard from liberals is that fighting AQ is only going to create more terrorists. Now, under Obama, we need only wipe out a handful and pay some bribes.

Liberals are sick. And disgusting. And liars. And idiots. And…

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:29 AM

Yeah, well the European Socialists treated their domestic terror problems as isolated law enforcement issues too. How’d that work out?

Happy Nomad on May 29, 2013 at 7:29 AM

As American liberals say, “We don’t have all the facts yet. Let’s not jump to conclusions.”

They must be livid they can’t blame the terror attacks in Europe on the Tea Party.

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:31 AM

Axe on May 29, 2013 at 7:21 AM

:)

Liberals are sick. And disgusting. And liars. And idiots. And…

Liam on May 29, 2013 at 7:29 AM

+1

cmsinaz on May 29, 2013 at 7:33 AM

Bwaaah. That page is getting even funnier. ’bout ruptured my other gizzard laughing.

SparkPlug on May 29, 2013 at 2:36 AM

New favorite, canopfer.

Fallon on May 29, 2013 at 8:02 AM

OT: How long does it take for a news tip to maybe show up in the article list? I found something I thought Ed wouldn’t be able to resist… CHOCOLATE BULLETS! Yes, these guys followed Biden’s comment to the kid who suggested making bullets out of chocolate and do some tests with chocolate-filled shotgun shells. The results are… surprising!

dominigan on May 29, 2013 at 8:04 AM

CHOCOLATE BULLETS! Yes, these guys followed Biden’s comment to the kid who suggested making bullets out of chocolate and do some tests with chocolate-filled shotgun shells. The results are… surprising!

dominigan on May 29, 2013 at 8:04 AM

Nice!

ITguy on May 29, 2013 at 8:56 AM

ITguy on May 29, 2013 at 8:56 AM

I’m still laughing about this in my head…

CAPTAIN: Is this report accurate?
OFFICER: Absolutely.
CAPTAIN: It says here that the home invader was killed by chocolate.
OFFICER: Yes, when I arrived on the scene there were what I believed to be chocolate stains on the body. The homeowner claimed he shot the invader twice with a special load of Dove Dark.
CAPTAIN: Was this confirmed?
OFFICER: Yes, by the K9 unit that arrived later. We had to pull the dog off the body. You know… dogs and chocolate…

dominigan on May 29, 2013 at 9:23 AM

And still laughing…

CAPTAIN: I understand a 2nd altercation occurred later at the same address.
OFFICER: Yes, sir.
CAPTAIN: And what happened in that case?
OFFICER: The homeowner’s wife discovered that her cache of Dove Dark was missing. When we explained what had happened earlier, well…
CAPTAIN: Yes?
OFFICER: She attacked her husband. We barely got him out alive.
CAPTAIN: What fool would use his wife’s Dove Dark as a shotgun load?
OFFICER: Obviously he was a newlywed, sir.

dominigan on May 29, 2013 at 9:28 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5