Hadn't you heard? Obama got Osama!
Oh, wait! That's old news.
But President BO (the amateur president) is quick to take all of the credit for it, and his liberal friends and the MSM are happy to give it to him.
Actually, he had no more to do with it than to say, "Go!"
He had no hand in planning it. He had no hand in seeking OBL out. He had no hand in carrying it out. He had no hand in any other part of it except, "Go!"
The real heroes in all of this are the ones who DID plan, seek and carry out.
They deserve accolades of the highest order.
Unfortunately, not only are they not getting the accolades they deserve, some are not getting anything at all.
According to columnist, Paul Bedard, "...(the actual one) who put two rounds into Osama bin Laden's forehead May 2, 2011, is jobless, struggling to pay basic bills and has been offered no protection from the retaliation he anticipates..."
Bedard says it is all going to come out in an Esquire interview, and the news will be very, very sad.
The liberal/progressive know-it-alls who think they own all rational thought and kindness, continually fail to provide for those who have served valiantly, but really put out for those who serve illegally.
Isn't there just a little something a bit backward in their line of thinking?
In the end, who got who?
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Jo Joe -
"According to columnist, Paul Bedard, "...(the actual one) who put two rounds into Osama bin Laden's forehead May 2, 2011, is jobless, struggling to pay basic bills and has been offered no protection from the retaliation he anticipates..."
The liberal/progressive know-it-alls who think they own all rational thought and kindness, continually fail to provide for those who have served valiantly, but really put out for those who serve illegally."
We liberals would be happy to provide him and his family with financial benefits and insurance coverage for the rest of their lives. Because he's an American Hero.
It is people like YOU who would deny him coverage because that would constitute another over-reaching grab of the Federal Government into YOUR wallet!
You think individual Americans should be able to decide whether or not they want to support the Navy Seal who killed Osama bin Laden and his family. Maybe by buying "Navy Seal Cookies" or going to "Navy Seal Car Washes".
The Federal Government shouldn't be able to force you, through any form of taxation, to provide support to this soldier or his family.
Because Federal Government, the same Federal Government who hired and trained this soldier, who tracked down bin Laden, who sent this soldier in to harm's way to kill bin Laden, is so evil that you refuse to fund it.
You think State's Right's supersede Federal Authority (a matter which was very bloodily decided otherwise many years ago).
What state is the soldier from? Why isn't his state government stepping up to provide for him?
What religion does he subscribe to? Where is his church? Why isn't his faith community stepping up to care for him and his family?
What about his family, his community and all of the other social structures that conservatives like to put forward as the foundations of American Society.
Where are they?
The world view that I subscribe to would embrace and care for this soldier and his family. Not because he killed Osama bin Laden but because he is an American who served his country and deserves our respect and honor.
But you people would deny him anything because you don't want the ever evil Federal Government spending any money on any thing, ever!
XO: It's liberals who fight to cut the defense budget.
Just what country do you think you're president of?
You surely can't be referring to the United States of America , can you? America is emphatically a Christian nation, and has been from its inception! Seventy percent of her citizens identify themselves as Christian. The Declaration of Independence and our Constitution were framed, written and ratified by Christians. It's because this was, and is, a nation built on and guided by Judeo-Christian biblical principles that you, sir, have had the inestimable privilege of being elected her president.
You studied law at Harvard, didn't you, sir? You taught constitutional law in Chicago? Did you not ever read the statement of John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and an author of the landmark "Federalist Papers": " Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers - and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation - to select and prefer Christians for their rulers"?
In your studies, you surely must have read the decision of the Supreme Court in 1892: "Our lives and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian."
Did your professors have you skip over all the high-court decisions right up till the mid 1900's that echoed and reinforced these views and intentions? Did you pick up the history of American jurisprudence only in 1947, when for the first time a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson about a "wall of separation between church and state" was used to deny some specific religious expression - contrary to Jefferson 's intent with that statement? Or, wait a minute: were your ideas about America 's Christianity formed during the 20 years you were a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ under your pastor, Jeremiah Wright? Is that where you got the idea that " America is no longer a Christian nation"? Is this where you, even as you came to call yourself a Christian, formed the belief that " America has been arrogant"?
Even if that's the understandable explanation of your damning of your country and accusing the whole nation (not just a few military officials trying their best to keep more Americans from being murdered by jihadists) of "not always living up to her ideals," how did you come up with the ridiculous, alarming notion that we might be"considered a Muslim nation"?
Is it because there are some 2 million or more Muslims living here, trying to be good Americans? Out of a current population of over 300 million, 70 percent of whom are Christians? Does that make us, by any rational definition, a "Muslim nation"?
Why are we not, then, a "Chinese nation"? A "Korean nation"? Even a "Vietnamese nation"? There are even more of these distinct groups in America than Muslims. And if the distinction you're trying to make is a religious one, why is America not "a Jewish nation"? There's actually a case to be made for the latter, because our Constitution - and the success of our Revolution and founding - owe a deep debt to our Jewish brothers.
Have you stopped to think what an actual MuslimAmerica would be like? Have you ever really spent much time in Iran ? Even in Egypt ? You, having been instructed in Islam as a kid at a Muslim school in Indonesia and saying you still love the call to evening prayers, can surely picture our nation founded on the Quran, not the Judeo-Christian Bible, and living under Shariah law. Can't you? You do recall Muhammad's directives
to "break the cross" and "kill the infidel"?
It seems increasingly and painfully obvious that you are more influenced by your upbringing and questionable education than most suspected. If you consider yourself the president of a people who are "no longer Christian," who have "failed to live up to our ideals," who "have been arrogant," and might even be "considered Muslim" - you are president of a country most Americans don't recognize.
Could it be you are a president without a country?
All who love their Christian Beliefs and their Country, Forward to all in your address book.
Jo Joe - This has nothing to do with defense spending. He's no longer a member of the military. It's about having a safety net that provides a minimum level of human dignity for every American. Something you can justify opposing while also using at every opportunity.
Joe - Maybe President BO is taking credit for getting Osama - but if the tables were turned - do you think that former President Geoge W. Bush would not take credit.
And wouldn't you give President Bush credit?
sh: "... former President Geoge W. Bush would not take credit."
As he ALWAYS did, he would give credit to the people who actually did the deed.
XO: So we're not supposed to be spending all that money on doctors and hospitals to take care of veterans?
I have a bunch of veteran friends, some disabled, some whole, who would disagree with you on that one.
You need to get off of this argument. It's making you look like Scrooge. And I don't mean McDuck.
Now he knows something about those "freedoms" he was fighting for, eh Joe?
We liberals would have national health insurance in force and he would be covered.
I'm with XO, what state is he from. North Carolina? Did you read up on their move to cut back unemployment benefits to less than ten weeks?
I do know that this man is not from that nasty commie state of Massachusetts.
This guy is getting the Full Ayn Rand, the Teabagger Special. This is what the fringe right world looks like.
He'll get a job and assistance as a result of this publicity. If it were some single mother living in a car, well ... she deserves it, right Joe?
Ducky: This guy is a VETERAN, for Pete's sake! We are supposed to take care of our veterans, not through an insurance company, but through that wonderful, efficient office called the Veterans Administration!
You liberals are just plain sick and can't see your own inconsistencies.
Doesn't change a thing in the laissez-faire teabagger world, Joe.
As I said, he'll be fine. Book deal, job as a Fox news special commentator ... no worries.
And again I will say, if this were a single mother living with two kids in her car you'd tell her to get a job and quit mooching off the nanny state.
This guy's lucky. There will be a job made for him. All he has to do is whine that he can't make it outside of the protective environment of the state where he has always been. No Full Ayn Rand for him. That goes to the extra people.
Joe - I say let him take some credit for it. If the mission had failed he would have had to take the blame - and no one would let him forget it.
But the mission was successful so he gets some credit too.
What about 'Mission Accomplished!'
Huh?
Sue that Mission accomplished was not about winning ,it was about accomplishing one mission they went on. Liberals always twist that one. And if Navy seals failed to get Osama You can bet Obama would be blaming them like he blames everyone else for everything.
We know Obama gets credit for getting Osama.he never lets us forget it. He's like Clinton even when he's out of office we won't be rid of him. I wonder why liberals don't give Bush credit for getting KSM the mastermind of 9/11 but if Obama got him that would be more important that Osama
I will NOT watch the speech tonight. I've been a Democrat for just about all of my life, I switched when they began to act like lunatics.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.
From Huffington:
UPDATE (10:15 p.m. ET): Stars and Stripes posted a story Monday evening, charging that the Esquire piece's claim of no available military health care options is inaccurate. The independent U.S. military news source points to a Department of Veterans Affairs program which provides five years of free health coverage post discharge.
Post a Comment