Skip to main content


With his recent speech on national security and counterterrorism, President Obama delivered a masterful oratory of everything and nothing at the same time.  It kinda' sorta' sounded like he was getting all peaceful and turning over a new leaf.  But if you look into what he said just a little bit, or wait for news reports and events to unfold, you'll see all is not peace and love and Obama-of-2008.  It's one thing if you take a hard line on counterterrorism and are okay with kill lists and killing citizens of the United States occasionally, just don't give me the warm and fuzzy gosh-this-is-tough routine.  Kind of reminds me of an introspective, professorial version of this.

Be sure to comment, share and let me know what you think.

 

Obama:

Good evening, America.

As you know, technology has changed the way we fight our wars and conduct counterterrorism operations.

Tonight, I introduce to you another technological advance . . .

"The Re-Obamulator."

With the touch of a button, the Re-Obamulator transports me . . . back to the idealistic constitutional scholar we all know and love.

With this groundbreaking technology, lives will be saved.  And I, will be me.

For we are not a nation of drone strikes that kill civilians and U.S. citizens.

That is not America.  That is not me.

I urge you to contact your members of Congress to demand that they restrain me, before I kill again.

And our shame of Guantanamo:  a shadow system of justice, indefinite detention, secret charges, and our military force-feeding prisoners who have been cleared of any charges?

Is this who we are?

This is not me.

We must demand the military's Commander-in-Chief put a stop to this stain on our nation's soul . . . as I have been urging for five long years.

Now, on our own shores, we have hounded the very journalists who help preserve our democracy.

As James Madison surely must have said:  "There will come a great president, who will establish a review board to weigh civil liberty concerns."

I believe I am that president.

And thanks to advances like the Re-Obamulator . . .

hands will be wrung, conscience will be felt, and souls will be searched.

I can be the new old Obama, you know and love.

Together, as a nation, we can make me the President you thought I was.

Thank you . . . now watch this drone.

Originally posted to Comics on Fri May 31, 2013 at 06:50 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The peace and love Obama of 2008 (13+ / 0-)

    that promised to go after al Qaeda and hunt bin Laden in Pakistan if necessary?

    "But the problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence." - President Clinton

    by anonevent on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:03:51 AM PDT

  •  What do I think? What do I think? (15+ / 0-)

    "Exactly."  "Perfect." "Yep."  "You nailed it."

    That's what I think.

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:05:27 AM PDT

  •  I think we need a liberal in the WH (12+ / 0-)

    I think we need a president who does not continue the same rotten policies of a disasterous republican adminsitration we voted out of office in 2008.

    I'm afraid the Re-Obamalator is not powerful enough for me.  I will always see Pres. Obama as the third and now fourth term of GW Bush.

    "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

    by Hugh Jim Bissell on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:15:22 AM PDT

    •  This president (7+ / 0-)

      not only stated that he was going to be a progressive when in power but went on to make a strong argument as to why that was necessary.  Nothing to stop the next D challenger doing exactly the same thing unfortunately.

      •  Meaningless political parties (10+ / 0-)

        The slogans of the two main political parties are largely meaningless.  Both democrats and republicans serve the corporate and wealthy interests first and foremost.  

        The democratic and republican parties serve the wealthy and corporate interests in two important ways: 1) ensuring that the laws that increase the wealth and well-being of thewealthy and corporations are enacted; and 2) providing a useful wedge to divide voters from joining forces to control their government and enact policis that would be helpful to the majority.

        While I am a full supporter of progressive policies, I see both democratic and republican parties as stanidng in the way of having a progressive government that would serve the needs of the many, instead of the desires of a wealthy few.  

        "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

        by Hugh Jim Bissell on Fri May 31, 2013 at 08:32:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I've seen this before (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Helpless, Aramis Wyler

          In the 1968 election, liberals were so bummed out on the way LBJ had 'escalated' the Vietnam War, they/we grumbled there was no difference between Democrats and Republicans.  Then we got Nixon.  

          One of the goals at Daily Kos is "to elect more and better Democrats".  I suppose that goal, and my sense of deja vu, lead to the conclusion that we need to work on the "better" part during the primaries.  In the general elections the only thing we can vote for is "more".

          We're all pretty strange one way or another; some of us just hide it better. "Normal" is a dryer setting.

          by david78209 on Fri May 31, 2013 at 09:29:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Need more and better unions (4+ / 0-)

            More and better democrats?  Fagetaboudit!  What we really need is more and better unions.

            Or more and better journalists.

            Or maybe more and better teachers.

            The effort to get more and better democrats has given us Pres. Obama, and "control" (cough, cough) of the senate.   Pres. Obama has largely continued the polices of the GW Bush administration into a third term and looks to be making it 4 terms of tax cuts for the richest, failed endless wars, and a climate-changing energy policy.

            dkos is a nice enough political forum, but I do not support the push for "more and better democrats" when what we get is little different from conservative policies.

            "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

            by Hugh Jim Bissell on Fri May 31, 2013 at 09:53:18 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Why did you put quote marks around (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            3goldens, Nada Lemming

            escalated?

            What we saw in 1968 was the hijacking of our Party by right wing assholes who wanted to kill little brown dudes SO badly that they were willing to throw away the activism and votes of everyone under 30, and make Nixon president rather than allow the nomination of any candidate with even the most vestigial ability to see 'Comyinests' as human beings.

            We 'got Nixon' because we let right-wing shit bags run shit.

            Same reason we 'got Truman' instead of Wallace.

            "The thing about smart motherfuckers is that they sound like crazy motherfuckers to dumb motherfuckers." Robert Kirkman

            by JesseCW on Fri May 31, 2013 at 03:00:16 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I used quotes because (0+ / 0-)

              I wasn't sure some of the younger folks would remember what the term meant.  I try to keep in mind that I'm no spring chicken.
              Not that the quotes made it any clearer, I suppose.
              But they were only single quotes, not double ones...

              We're all pretty strange one way or another; some of us just hide it better. "Normal" is a dryer setting.

              by david78209 on Fri May 31, 2013 at 06:36:15 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  We're a national security state with a trillion (8+ / 0-)

    dollar plus annual expenditure on military and arms and intelligence.

    Can we be real about this?

    If drone strikes and a few other localized skirmishing keep the brass busy and out of real wars, that's about the best we can hope for.

    These are sideline issues. They mean nothing.

    •  President claiming untrammeled right to kill (19+ / 0-)

      citizens is disturbing (his claiming the untrammeled right to kill non-citizens isn't great, either).  It's bad enough to kill a radio imam b/c he allegedly incited the underwear bomber, but killing his teenage son, too, crosses some pretty serious lines.

      Yes, other presidents have authorized off the books killings.  Killing about 4000 people (many of them civilians) by executive fiat in an ongoing program that apparently will kill many more is, however, a wholesale abandonment of the rule of law.  This program apparently will continue indefinitely--how many here would like to see a President Christie or a President Jeb Bush continue it in 2017?

      I also note that, in a time when there is a rough "bipartisan" consensus that social programs must be slashed, why does the trillion $ MIC to which you refer remain a sacred cow?  Why not use the bully pulpit to at least address the worst excesses of the MIC? Giving it a blank check in a time of "austerity" while exerting monarchical powers of life and death is about as far from a constitutional system as I can envision.  

      Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

      by RFK Lives on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:40:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We are, in fact, very close to feudalism with (13+ / 0-)

        "Free Market Capitalism" requiring us to swear oaths of fealty to be allowed to rent our labor to masters who dribble out survival wages often not covering food and shelter, let alone luxuries such as health care or education.

        "Free Market" just means "free to exploit labor" - which is all of us; everyone who must work for a living.  Those who have vast sums of money - the ownership - and live off their rents, whether literal or figurative, are the new masters.

        Banks are too elite to prosecute. They may commit crimes at will.

        Corporations are too elite to control via our courts. They may exploit and cheat their customers who have had their recourse of class action taken away by the Supreme Court.

        With a point of a finger, people are executed overseas regardless of location, citizenship, or even certainty about who they are.

        Massive police force and brutality enforce the rulers will and cower the population who have adopted a Stockholm Syndrome-like reaction to the security state.

        Double-speak has been the norm for decades.

        How is this any different from feudalism?  We have flush toilets?  (Personally, thank heavens for that, but still...)  

        We vote, but nothing changes. Elections are a chimera; pablum for the masses. Flickering screens, massive and tiny, entertain us and keep our minds off our powerlessness.   Power is concentrated outside government and "government" serves only the wealthy masters.

        How is this different from feudalism, simply with more technology?

        "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

        by YucatanMan on Fri May 31, 2013 at 08:48:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wiki is my friend (0+ / 0-)
          Since the 1970s, when Elizabeth A. R. Brown published The Tyranny of a Construct (1974), many have re-examined the evidence and concluded that feudalism is an unworkable term and should be removed entirely from scholarly and educational discussion, or at least used only with severe qualification and warning.
          and
          Outside a European context, the concept of feudalism is normally used only by analogy (called semi-feudal), most often in discussions of feudal Japan under the shoguns, and sometimes medieval and Gondarine Ethiopia.[9] However, some have taken the feudalism analogy further, seeing it in places as diverse as ancient Egypt, the Parthian empire, the Indian subcontinent, and the Antebellum and Jim Crow American South.
          emphasis added.

          We are free to rent our labor to whomever we want -- unlike serfs living in castles.  I'm not disputing our exploited labor, rigged judicial system, banks and other corporations above the law, continuous wars on the poor and anyone the President chooses and political prisoners.  All are traits of an evil empire but not necessarily a feudal one.  These traits seem similar to those of cold-war communist Russia.  Just shows that any system can (and will?) be corrupted by the powerful.

          Even Democrats can be asses. Look at Rahm Emanuel.

          by Helpless on Fri May 31, 2013 at 11:06:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I appreciate your points and it is interesting how (4+ / 0-)

            we can quibble about the precise meaning of the term "feudal" but,

            We are free to rent our labor to whomever we want -- unlike serfs living in castles.
            Really?  Have you looked around any inner cities or poor suburbs lately? The "free" part is in quite a bit of dispute. Mainly, it applies to upper-middle class workers who would have a variety of options due to their skills and education.  

            I don't believe "free" applies to the average American worker or working family.  They take whatever they can find to avoid starving and, even then, are not paid much (or at all) above poverty level wages.  Median incomes are around $50,000.

            Half the nation makes less than that. Unemployment is still at historically high levels and crisis levels for young workers. Where are they "free" to work?  Nowhere! Nowhere at all! There are no jobs for them. If they somehow accidentally snag a job, they need to hold onto it. They aren't "free" to select from a variety of jobs, period.

            Even educated, qualified workers are often unable to leave the area in which they live due to homes still underwater on their mortgages. And those who do find good salaries are often bound to continue working, even under demanding and difficult circumstances because there are no other jobs out there (or 100 applications for every opening) at similar levels.

            If skilled workers get too cranky, they can always be replaced by H1B visa holders.  600 were in my building within the sight of a month.  Boom.  Taxis start pulling up, dropping off visa holding IT workers the same day that American citizens are given their walking papers.

            Conceptually, we are "free" to work for anyone we want. In reality, the vast majority of workers have to scramble to accept what work is available. And then scramble and be humbled to keep it.

            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

            by YucatanMan on Fri May 31, 2013 at 02:33:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  He's choosing his battles (6+ / 0-)

    I've noticed he consistently tries to maintain a hard line stand on "terror". I think he does this to undermine any validity to right wing criticism that he is "soft on terror." He has several inititiaves still in the offing here, he can't afford to allow detractors to force him into an ineffectual lame duck president prematurely, which could potentially shift the prevailing political winds (God fobid) back to the right wing's favor.
    That's my take anyway.

    •  But if he is so good about anticipating and (8+ / 0-)

      pre-empting right wing criticism, then why doesn't he use those abilities to press for help for the poor and working classes?  Why do his policies benefit the wealthy, almost exclusively? Why do his policies inevitably continue right wing programs?  How is that deflecting criticism?  It is more like being hostage to whatever right wingers want.... or their willing accomplice.

      George W Bush could not have dreamed of a more pro-Wall Street administration than this one.

      "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

      by YucatanMan on Fri May 31, 2013 at 08:51:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Please. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        hooper

        "help for the poor and working classes"? His ACA will extend health care to 16 million people who are currently uninsured, by 2019....IF he can prevent the right wing from destroying it in it's infancy (which they are STILL hell bent on doing).
        Take a good look at the political landscape with which he has to contend. It is in fact "hostage taking", but it's the system he has to work with.
        This is chess, not checkers.

        •  15 million poor and working people get their (4+ / 0-)

          rent money swiped and given to Humana executives, and you call it an achievement.

          You're on someone's side, but it's sure as fuck not ours.

          "The thing about smart motherfuckers is that they sound like crazy motherfuckers to dumb motherfuckers." Robert Kirkman

          by JesseCW on Fri May 31, 2013 at 03:03:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  That health care is not being "extended" for free. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SpecialKinFlag

          Your "16 million people" are being required to hand over their money to For Profit insurance companies.

          They'll get some form of health care coverage in return but it will be at least 20% less (the profits allowed to medical insurance companies under ACA) than if they were covered by single payer.  

          Twenty percent of premiums paid out of personal (and often very limited) income mandated to be handed over for corporate profits.

          And that is "taking care of" poor people?  Ho ho ho... What bitter Santa Claus delivers that kind of loving care?

          "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

          by YucatanMan on Fri May 31, 2013 at 08:25:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh, well lets just wave a magic wand.. (0+ / 0-)

            and bless everyone with single payer shall we? Let me know when that's in place, OK?
            Bottom line, it's the best Obama could do considering the cirumstances. Got to live in the real world here, sorry.

    •  Choosing battles (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      alice kleeman

      Then why not announce his "hit list" (similar to the FBI's 10 most wanted) before assassinating them?  Give them the opportunity to turn themselves in.  Will it drive them underground? You ask.  Do you not think actual terrorists already know they're on the list?  

      Even Democrats can be asses. Look at Rahm Emanuel.

      by Helpless on Fri May 31, 2013 at 11:11:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I knew we were in for it (9+ / 0-)

    about 2 days after the first inauguration, when someone asked him about torture and he said "I'm not going to second guess these professionals."

    Yeah I voted for him again. WTF was I supposed to do, vote for Romney?

    •  No, vote for the person who represents you (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      aliasalias, Mr Robert

      What a fail!!!

      There is no rule that says you have to vote for either a democrat or a republican.  There are other political parties.  And you can even write in any name you want.  This gives you a choice of roughly seven billion other living candidates.

      So you should vote for whoever you think best represents you.  If that person is a democrat, then vote for them.  If you think the democratic candidate is someone who excuses torture and claims an unconstitutional executive privilege to decide who should be assasinated, then you should not vote for that person and vote for someone else.

      I myself voted for Obama in 2008.  But I voted for Jill Stein in 2012.  Three terms of GW Bush policies was enough for me.

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Fri May 31, 2013 at 09:05:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Naahh, I don't buy that (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        hooper, Helpless

        It's an excellent thing to vote with one's heart, but if those heartfelt Naderites had any sense, Bush would never have been president.  

        I also voted for Menendez even though I always thought him the cheapest kind of Jersey City political hack, because I was damned if I would give GWB a senator.

        •  Nader losing the election for Gore is bullshit (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          aliasalias, Nada Lemming

          every 3rd party candidate got more than 600 votes. Half of all Democrats in Florida stayed home. Nader was right to run against the sold out parties...

          "WAR IS PEACE FREEDOM IS SLAVERY FOX NEWS IS JOURNALISM"

          by FakeNews on Fri May 31, 2013 at 10:19:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  By all means, maintain the status quo (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          aliasalias

          I voted for Nader in 2000.  The reason why GW Bush became president have nothing to do with votes cast, and everything to do with a branch of the government deciding that legally cast votes should not be counted and that the government would appoint the president of its choice.

          As a matter of it survival, both the republican and democratic parties will tell you to avoid any candidates except republicans and democrats candidates(respectively), because the last thing the two mainstream political parties want is any sort of competition.  But as I have said before, the republican and democratic parties do not serve your interests, they only serve the interests of the wealthy and corporate sponsors.  (Hint: why has this democratic president protected fraudulent bankers from prosecution?  Whay has this democratic president failed to prosecute torturers?)

          If all you ever do is only what you have previously done, then all you will ever get is what you previously have gotten.

          Complaining won't help.  You need to try a different course of action.

          "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

          by Hugh Jim Bissell on Fri May 31, 2013 at 10:32:45 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Same here, Jill Stein, no regreats n/t (0+ / 0-)

        The only trouble with retirement is...I never get a day off!

        by Mr Robert on Fri May 31, 2013 at 12:17:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The hand gesture that went along (6+ / 0-)

    ..with

    We must demand the military's Commander-in-Chief put a stop to this stain on our nation's soul . . . as I have been urging for five long years.
    ..only including three fingers and a thumb probably wasn't purposeful, but it made me smile sadly.
  •  Ted Rall has a good take on that speech. (8+ / 0-)

    He's been focused on drones a lot lately, but today's cartoon is a biting indictment of, not Obama, but us.  (Well, some of us, anyway).

    I am become Man, the destroyer of worlds

    by tle on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:20:51 AM PDT

  •  Because, without good jokes, the Terrorists... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    alice kleeman

    WIN!

  •   heh (9+ / 0-)
    Be sure to comment, share and let me know what you think.
    That smacks of desperation. I see a need for you to fling poo to garner attention and gain back a dwindling audience. Pathetic.

    You asked what I think, that is what I think.

    You have your opinion, I have mine.

    •  I know, right? (7+ / 0-)

      Here we go again. We're coming up on the midterms and there will of course be those who take that opportunity to make the problem about Barack Obama and the Democrats, as opposed to the republicans who have a chance to take the senate. SIGH. If we have a repeat of 2010, or worse, then maybe some will realize what a real problem is. You'd think that would have been clear by now, but no.

      "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

      by StellaRay on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:37:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The attention starved egomaniacs (4+ / 0-)

        will always find something to grandstand over. Doing this in their natural habitat would mean that it would scarecly be noticed.

        •  Do either of you think that one (7+ / 0-)

          cannot criticize Obama while working hard for other Democrats?  Do either of you think I will not be voting for Markey in the special election to become our junior Senator in MA?  Or that I will stay home and not vote for progressive Democrats in the midterms?  

          Just waitin' around for the new Amy Winehouse album

          by jarbyus on Fri May 31, 2013 at 08:55:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Fiori's not "criticizing". He's sliming to the (0+ / 0-)

            crowd.

            •  This isn't sliming (9+ / 0-)

              to the crowd. It's a good parody of Obama's slimy speech. The crowd as you call it seems to be most people who listened to his double speak, speech. He out did himself with this twisty rhetorical Orwellian speech. It should be satirized as it was in itself an obvious misfire that in no way mitigated what this administration is implementing in the name of 'keeping us safe'. I prefer bush's 'terrist's are gonna kill yer family' at least he didn't cover his nasty ass GWOT agenda in smarmy hypocritical double speak that made no sense. He slimed himself.      

              •  More sliming. HR-able, but why bother? (0+ / 0-)
                •  What do you consider HRable in this comment? (6+ / 0-)

                  I'm not aware of any DKos policies that make Democratic politicians immune from criticism, no matter how harsh or downright nasty that criticism is.

                  Racist comments are indeed out of bounds, HRable and grounds for banning if persistent; other than that however, Mr. Obama has no more immunity to insults than did George Bush. The D on his hat grants him no privilege in this regard.

                  The fact that Barack Obama is himself a Kossack is irrelevant, since the rules against "insults" don't apply to public figures... and no figure is more public than the President of the United States.

                  When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

                  by PhilJD on Fri May 31, 2013 at 01:11:35 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I've noticed that some people here (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    triv33, shaharazade

                    take a criticism of Obama as a personal insult.  

                    •  And I've noticed that some people here (0+ / 0-)

                      will find any way to diminish the holders of opinions that don't agree with theirs. Why do YOU need to make it personal?

                      Why can't you accept that some people don't agree w/certain criticisms of Obama and want to speak up for that the way others want to speak up against him?

                      Do you consider any opinion that doesn't agree w/yours a personal insult? Me either. And it would be nice if people could stick to the issues and man up to their disagreements w/out diminishing other opinions by saying those that hold them are more narcissistic than you are.

                      "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

                      by StellaRay on Fri May 31, 2013 at 08:13:13 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  This is the person you should have replied to (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        triv33

                        re the HR, which is what my comment was about:

                        http://www.dailykos.com/...

                        •  But I wanted to reply to you, (0+ / 0-)

                          regardless of where you think my replies belong. I'm not doing this to be a shit, or have a fight w/you. I've read many of your comments over the years, and I respect you even if I don't always agree w/you.

                          I'm very aware which poster you were referring to---a poster who thought a comment was HR-able. That does not mean he/she felt personally insulted by the comment. It probably means the poster felt passionate about his disagreement w/the post he/she was replying to. (And in the end, did not HR.)

                          That is not the same as feeling personally insulted that anyone would dare criticize Obama, and to say so is just another way of saying "some people" are just too starry eyed over Obama, too big of a fan boy/girl, to see the truth.

                          Again, this is a judgement on one's person, not a discussion on the issues. Neither you or I know the personal motivations of those we talk w/here. We may think we can guess, but that's all it is.  A guess, and best left out of the conversation.

                          "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

                          by StellaRay on Fri May 31, 2013 at 09:45:04 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

              •  Obama made a lot of sense (0+ / 0-)

                to me w/his speech. And your use of the word "Orwellian" to describe it is as unfathomable to me as my beliefs are to you.

                But when you tell me you prefer Bush's take on the matter, then I do have to say to you, you have options. You can become a republican! Because they agree w/you, and like the "terrist's are gonna kill yer family" approach. I really don't see much light between what they say and what you're saying. And when you get to the point where you're telling me Bush was the better over Obama, well...gee. The dictionary doesn't have words.

                "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

                by StellaRay on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:01:16 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •   Oh get real (0+ / 0-)

                  I don't support the Bushies take on this bogus GWOT never did. I voted supported campaigned and contributed more then I could afford to Obama's primary campaign. Took 6 weeks off work and hit the streets. Why would I become a Republican? I'm a fucking dirty hippie liberal. I never expected Obama or the Dems to live up to my ideology but I did expect a halt to the lawlessness and a return to the rule of law. How absurd you are to tell liberal Democrat's that they are like the Bushies. lol. Get a grip. This administration has not only supported the Bushies Republican doctrine but expanded their abuses of power to the max.  

                  •  Here's where you and I differ. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    shaharazade

                    I think you are very real, and your feelings are as real as mine, although as I stated w/out insulting you, "my beliefs may be as unfathomable to you as yours are to me." So I won't insult you by telling you to "get a grip." I assume you think you have a grip, like we all do.

                    But you told me you preferred Bush's take on the matter. Yes, you said that. And your "fucking dirty hippie liberal" credentials don't change that. And, what you mean by "a halt to the lawlessness and a return to the rule of law" is about as wide open for debate as it can be. You do not acknowledge that. I do.

                    Don't tell me I'm absurd for telling YOU, not liberal Democrat's per say, that they are like Bushies when you just told me you "preferred Bush's take on it." Yes, I'm holding you to your words. And then you double down by telling me that this administration has "not only supported the Bushies Republican doctrine, but expanded their abuses of power to the max"

                    That is your opinion, and I disagree. That is all.

                    "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

                    by StellaRay on Sat Jun 01, 2013 at 08:43:35 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

      •  We're always coming up on something... (8+ / 0-)

        so it never is the "right" time to criticize the administration. That seems to be the position, anyway, of some of the more ardent DKos supporters of Team D.

        I accept the logic behind uniting around elections, but there will never be a better, politically "safer" moment to express opposition to the reprehensible Obama foreign policy than a year and a half before the 2014 midterms.  

        We're coming up on the midterms

        When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

        by PhilJD on Fri May 31, 2013 at 12:36:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  2010 was the direct result of you and yours (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Nada Lemming, SpecialKinFlag

        treating the American voters like shit and taking them for granted.

        You did that.

        We warned you what was going to happen if you did not change course.  You refused to do so.  You cost us the House for a fucking decade.

        You refuse to admit what you did, you blamed those who told you "Fire is hot and will burn you if you touch it", and now you're planning to jam a hand in the blaze and blame us again.

        "The thing about smart motherfuckers is that they sound like crazy motherfuckers to dumb motherfuckers." Robert Kirkman

        by JesseCW on Fri May 31, 2013 at 03:06:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I agree with this statement, but probably not (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SpecialKinFlag

        for the same reasons you do.

        If we have a repeat of 2010, or worse, then maybe some will realize what a real problem is.
        If they Dems get their asses handed to them again in 2014, they only have themselves to blame, and the list is endless.
  •  heh... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    polecat, citizenx, litoralis, Aquarius40
    Be sure to comment, share and let me know what you think.
    Lame. Glad I'm no longer making any financial contributions to DailyKos.

    No one knows what it's like, To be the bad man, To be the sad man, behind blue eyes....

    by blueyedace2 on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:27:08 AM PDT

  •  The US media, and this site to some degree, (8+ / 0-)

    seems to have interpreted that speech as Obama's "the war is over" statement.

    The foreign media, however, almost universal saw it along these lines: Barack Obama defends use of drones in 'just war' (i.e., as a justification for his war policies).

    But what do they know, they're foreigners!

  •  Now watch this drone! (3+ / 0-)

    Only funny line.

    Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
    I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
    —Spike Milligan

    by polecat on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:29:04 AM PDT

  •  Sorry, but to call this president (16+ / 0-)

    "the peace and love" candidate of 2008 is just willful denial. Apparently many don't remember the democratic debates of 2008, when Hillary and Obama were having a one off on who could be tougher on terrorism---which culminated in Hillary getting caught in a big fat lie about her landing on that air strip.

    I am tired of people who saw what they wanted to see in Barack Obama blaming that on him. You can have your disagreements with him, I sure do. But there has NEVER been a "peace and love" candidate for the American presidency, w/the possible exception of Eugene McCarthy, and he got drowned at the polls for opposing what is still the most useless AND lethal war of our times.

    Barack Obama, like every presidential candidate, made promises he couldn't keep. This isn't news, and it isn't worthy of this kind of hyperbole. Running for the presidency is an aspirational thing. Being the president is another thing all together.

    "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

    by StellaRay on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:31:32 AM PDT

    •  Obama was flayed in the press for saying (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      litoralis, StellaRay, hooper, jj32

      he would go into Pakistan to get Bin Laden if he needed to (IIRC, he might've just said it in general if there was a terror cell there that needed to be eliminated). 'Doesn't have the diplomatic touch' they said. He damn well did it though, didn't he? Pakistan is also the only state complaining about any strikes right now, and IMO they lost any credibility with that when 1. they admitted no control over their western territories and 2. they harbored Bin Laden.

      I was gonna listen to that, but then, um, I just carried on living my life. - Aldous Snow

      by GoGoGoEverton on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:49:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  "They harbored Bin Laden" (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        citizenx, hooper, GoGoGoEverton

        Yep. I wish people would get some perspective on this. What do you think would have happened if Hitler hadn't offed himself and had tried to hide out somewhere? The United states would have moved heaven and earth to find him and take him out. If they could have gotten him and brought him to trial, fine. But if not, they'd have gotten him any way they could.

        This is not an "Obama thing." This is what people at war do. And you can putter the day away discussing whether the word "war" should be used in regards to terrorism, and you'll just be engaged in a semantics issue of little importance to how Americans feel about 9/11---and would feel about any future act of terrorism on that scale.

        "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

        by StellaRay on Fri May 31, 2013 at 09:17:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There's a paradox here that I want to diary but (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          StellaRay

          it'll likely just get trolled into oblivion:

          If there IS a legitimate global war on terror, than you could argue war crimes have been committed with indefinite detentions, etc...but then it also justifies the airstrikes.

          If there ISN'T a legitimate global war on terror, then they really are Cheney's 'enemy combatants' or w/e the going term is, and activities around them are not subject to Geneva, etc.

          Either way, the same crowd isn't going to be happy.

          I was gonna listen to that, but then, um, I just carried on living my life. - Aldous Snow

          by GoGoGoEverton on Fri May 31, 2013 at 10:23:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  It's worth asking though whether candidate Obama (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      3goldens, triv33

      made promises he didn't intend to keep, even if he could.

      When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

      by PhilJD on Fri May 31, 2013 at 01:14:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We can ask all we want, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PhilJD

        but we will not ever know or get a definitive answer on that. Those who have more mistrust than trust of this president will tell you they know the answer, and visa versa. It is simply not a provable point, but rather a merry-go-round of useless bickering and I find it tiresome.

        There is so much work to be done in this country, and to sit around and debate whether Obama is a stinking liar or a saint is not for me part of that work. It's a distraction, and one so lacking in the subtleties, perspective and complexities inherent in the question as to be a waste of time.

        This is what we have. A Democratic president with 3 years left and the mid terms coming up. We need to keep the senate, period. That should be everyone's priority here, starting about now. Politics is not a purist's game.

        "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

        by StellaRay on Fri May 31, 2013 at 03:29:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  obama has been a disaster - (11+ / 1-)

    true - not quite as bad as the Bush junta or the right wing alternatives,  but a abject failure for progressive leadership.

    The drone war and official policy of assassination is only one example.

    His "leadership" has been weak and indifferent.  His penchant for capitulation and compromise has blocked any real progress.

    Sure - people will say "Obamacare"!!  but that is basically a Rmoney plan to give private, for-profit insurers a huge payday.  It does some modestly good things, yes, but it hits low income working people hard, it does not change the cost equation for american industry, it is a half measure at best - AND very likely to be repealed as soon as the worm turns!

    His Justice Dept. is perhaps WORSE than froggy under Bush.  Their hounding of any whistleblower (e.g. Manning) and increased attacks on medical marijuana are only a couple examples.  Don't get started on the lack of prosecution of HSBC and others or war criminals.

    Environment?  well, he did say "weatherproofing" early on.  But since has increased opening of BLM to extraction, increased drilling, appointed frackers to EPA, and Keystone?   don't look now, but he will approve it.

    Occupy fairness?  Obama administration took the lead in training local swap goon squads on how bust down citizen protest.

    Obama gives good speech alright.  but judge him by his deeds, not his alleged intentions.

    His lack of leadership early suppressed turnout and handed the gavel to Boehner and the tea crazies in 2010.  Looks like a repeat performance coming in 2014.

    We need to focus netroots on backing and electing REAL leaders.  They are out there - Grayson, Warren, Sharrod, Dean, Franken, et. al.   Krugman.  Lets remake the Democratic Party!!

    •  a real progressive will not get elected (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aquarius40, hooper

      I don't think a real progressive can get elected.  The media will kill him the way they killed Howard Dean.  The media is big business and knows what big business interests are and now it is more deregulated and more corporatist than it used to be.  Progressives will have to fund their own media, but it won't happen.  They will only complain about the existing media.

      •  A self-fulfilling prophecy (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mr Robert, Lucy2009, Nada Lemming

        Of course progressives can't win if the progressive themselves refuse to vote for progressive candidates, and spend their efforts adn money on electing democrats who enact republican policies.

        And BTW, media and news outlets may be big business, but they have a shrinking share of viewers' eyes.  More and more, viewers are rejecting mainstream news shows and newspapers.  

        And speaking of big business, do you remember all those ads for republican candidates on the pages of dk last fall?  Electing more and better who?

        When you hear someone say something like "progressives can not get elected" what you are hearing is the message of the corporations and wealthy interests who want to prevent you from voting for a progressive candidate because they already own the democratic and republican parties.

        "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

        by Hugh Jim Bissell on Fri May 31, 2013 at 11:15:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  A much much more Progressive candidate (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lucy2009, PhilJD, Nada Lemming

        than President Obama got elected by the largest majority in a generation.

        His name was Senator Obama.  It was only five years ago.  You liked him a lot.

        "The thing about smart motherfuckers is that they sound like crazy motherfuckers to dumb motherfuckers." Robert Kirkman

        by JesseCW on Fri May 31, 2013 at 03:10:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  If that's true (0+ / 0-)

        Them how did he beat Hillary while using the language of a progressive?  

        Bad things aren't bad! And anyway, there's mitigation!

        by Nada Lemming on Fri May 31, 2013 at 06:29:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Just like that FDR was a disaster (8+ / 0-)

      when he put Japanese Americans in concentration camps, tried to balance the budget in the late 30's and worsened the economy, started a social security program that intentionally excluded majority black and female dominated professions etc.

      I just cannot get through my head how people think Obama is some kind of jack booted fascist thug, but love FDR who committed probably the worst violation of civil liberties in the history of the country.

      He also hated people being "on the dole" (i.e. those Reagan "welfare queens" who just love being on government assistance) etc etc.

      It just drives me nuts that "progressives" have ZERO sense of historical perspective.

      You can look back 12 years to see our last "Democratic" president who was a proud champion for:

      NAFTA
      DADT
      DOMA
      Welfare "reform"
      Financial Deregulation
      Failed HCR

      And who also used missile strikes against Sudan and Iraq while ignoring mass genocide in Rwanda.

      How far do you have to go back to find a "successful" Democratic president?

      Oh, and Alan Grayson is our next real leader? Really? Sigh, I should just move to Canada or Europe at this point I think.

      When we stop putting leaders from the past up on pedestals and ignoring their flaws, we can start seeing our present leaders for what they really are.

      by PhillyJeff on Fri May 31, 2013 at 08:02:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  comparisons? really? (7+ / 0-)

        I don't compare Obama to FDR, or Clinton, or any past President.

        I compare him to what we need him to be doing.

        I don't expect perfection - but I do expect an overall consistent effort in the right direction.  Leadership in the direction that I think we owe to our children and future generations.

        Of which, sadly, I don't see from Obama.

        Climate change?  no real leadership - no fracking way
        Economic policy?  no real leadership - Geitner, Summers, HSBC?
        Transparency ?  no real leadership - gag rules, AP spying, Bradley Manning
        National defense?  no real leadership - formal policy of summary execution - including american citizens - only makes more and more determined enemies
        Equal justice and government of laws?  nope - Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice all live free and "respected"
        Health care?  not so much - windfall for insurance industry leaves us still way behind civilized world

        Compared to the major issues and challenges of TODAY, Obama (and the DNC bosses) get a F.  

        I voted for him twice.  Alright.  

        At least Grayson takes the issues head on.  Not  Presidential, I agree with that - but we need more of his moxie and motivation.  Grayson plain talk speaks directly to the reality of average citizen.  He should have a bigger role in motivating the electorate.  We need firebrands!

        •  It's easy to "take issues straight on" when you're (0+ / 0-)

          not really serious about getting elected or governing.  Like big hero Ron Paul, Grayson can say what he wants without risking anything.  

          We'll never solve the purity vs pragmatism question.  Why bother trying?

          It's the wrong question, imo.  More useful:  "What are we/you doing"?  Kvetching to the choir doesn't count.

      •  A few things in your lack of nuanced "history" (5+ / 0-)

        1. All social security systems started in all other countries excluded those professions because farm workers were hard to register back then. I know it's very tough apparently for some people to learn this, but anyone who knows about SS systems will say this. Zero historical perspective? Look in the mirror.

        2. Given that FDR implemented the New Deal and kept people from starving to death with it while laying the foundation for the modern welfare state by establishing Aid to Dependent Children in 1935, the first federal program offering cash payments to the poor, it's a funny way of showing how much he "hated people on the dole." Not to mention the WPA kept people, all people from starving to death despite dealing with a Congress with racist Dixiecrats on every committee(who watered down his housing policies among other things.

        3. Nobody excuses what FDR did National Security wise as far as the Japanese Internment, but given what's happening in Guantanamo and how the President and some of his supporters disregard the suffering of Arabs locked up and killed in drone strikes, it doesn't really offer as much contrast as you would like to think. FDR regulated the financial system for 50 years until the Rubinites in Obama's cabinet tore it down.

        You can look back 12 years to see our last "Democratic" president who was a proud champion for:

        NAFTA
        DADT
        DOMA
        Welfare "reform"
        Financial Deregulation
        Failed HCR

        Like I said you don't really seem to know whom is in Obama's cabinet. Remember, "We can't have the same people who got us into this?" The Larry Summers of our discontent. LTCM falling down like the destruction of wealth of the black and Latino communities with get out of jail free cards for those that perpetuate it.

        There's nothing original about this type of revisionists history. It bores me like this site is starting to. That is, except for the excellent work of Mr. Fiore.

        I don't negotiate grand bargains with deficit terrorists!

        by priceman on Fri May 31, 2013 at 04:29:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  And don't forget the record number of (11+ / 0-)

      deportations under "I will enact comprehensive immigration reform in my first year in office" Obama's administration.

      His appointees required deportation quotas (5 page PDF) as revealed by the Washington Post years ago. He ramped up deportations to levels unseen by any previous president. In fact, he's deported more people in his first four years than Bush did in eight.

      While he talks about focusing on deporting criminals, his agencies actually went after single mothers, college students, high school students, working fathers and others who had zero criminal activity whatsoever.  He continues to permit the kangaroo courts by which roomfuls of immigrants are "tried" and "convicted" en masse, sentenced to prison time, then deported.

      I cannot remember any president in my lifetime who said such wonderful things about what he would do for immigrants at the exact same time that he was pursuing ever more restrictive and punitive policies via his very own appointees.  His deportation record speaks for itself:

      In four years, Mr. Obama’s administration has deported as many illegal immigrants as the administration of George W. Bush did in his two terms, largely by embracing, expanding and refining Bush-era programs to find people and send them home. By the end of this year, deportations under Mr. Obama are on track to reach two million, or nearly the same number of deportations in the United States from 1892 to 1997.
      There is simply no other way to characterize this than "two-faced."  Pleasant speeches and awful actions behind the nice words.
      “What you do speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say."
      — Ralph Waldo Emerson

      "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

      by YucatanMan on Fri May 31, 2013 at 09:07:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Aquarius40, don't hide rate because (9+ / 0-)

      of disagreement.  There is NOTHING in yragnetman's comment that is so terrible it has to be hidden from others who might read it.  Also, if you're going to hide rate, at least have the decency to explain why you disagree with the commenter.

      "A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more." - from the prophet Jeremiah

      by 3goldens on Fri May 31, 2013 at 10:14:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Obama is as he does. And given our generally (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jarbyus, 3goldens, Nada Lemming

    somnolent and obeisant press, we don't know the half of it--and neither does the press.

    Journalism has a checkered history and this is one of the black squares eras.  Which suits the ruling elite to a T: the less we know, the more they can get away with.  And that reminds me, look at the New Democrat Coalition website, read their mission statement, and notice that Ami Bera, much lauded here, is a member.  I just sent off sternly worded letters to Kyrsten Sinema and Carolyn McCarthy, who keep pinging my Inbox with tin cup appeals.  Both of them standing ready, as the mission statement puts it, to deal away my earned benefits.  As is Ami, for those who thought him otherwise.

    Don't make excuses.  Make your opinions known to the people you're pissed at.  Make the effort to move the needle because you're never going to be able to elect people who follow thru on campaign hot air.  Take a page out of the tbaggies playbook and kick the shit out of shirkers.  Starting, IMO, with Chained CPI Pelosi.  Stop going along as if that will get you along.  You're just seen as weak and stupid, deserving to be fucked over.  Politics is about power and there's not a person in the game anywhere who isn't a power compulsive.

    “The road to success is always under construction” --Lily Tomlin

    by CarolinNJ on Fri May 31, 2013 at 07:55:09 AM PDT

  •  See this has bought out (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens, Nada Lemming

    the unconditionals. Not one solid critique or argument between them just the usual unfocused knee jerk reactions.

    •  At least the other people who agree with the (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BlackSheep1, doroma

      diarist are expressing their own point of view rather than simply disparaging the viewpoint of those who disagree with them.

    •  Fits his constituency (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      citizenx

      You see, the Democratic Party is more of a coalition than the GOP. Its Presidents naturally reflect this. Were Carter and Clinton uncompromising liberals? Of course not.
      If you want a more liberal President, elect a more liberal Congress.
      It is not unusual at all for a Democratic President to allow himself or herself considerable wiggle-room in speeches. Go look up what candidate Jimmy Carter said about legalizing marihuana.

      Censorship is rogue government.

      by scott5js on Fri May 31, 2013 at 08:26:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not intended as reply (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      3goldens

      I really meant my comment to be a primary comment, not a reply.

      Censorship is rogue government.

      by scott5js on Fri May 31, 2013 at 08:30:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm glad to have a Democratic President who is (9+ / 0-)

    clear-eyed about the dangers out there.  I'm also glad we don't have a Republican President who gets his ideas about national security from watching action movies.

  •  You asked: (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    citizenx, hooper, rwyckoff46, dmd76
    Be sure to comment, share and let me know what you think
    What do I think?

     I think this unprofessional, mawkish "cartoon" is a steaming load of shite, but at least it fits the "greater community" narrative around here. Would a white President be drawn bestriding a massive penis-shaped drone this way? That's just my first objection.

    This "satire" isn't funny. It isn't thought-provoking. It's nasty-spirited and juvenile, and it's poorly executed technically besides being inaccurate and having zero basis in or connection to reality, which is what this community claims to be about. It does have one marvelous aspect: where did you find a voice with so little affect to do the narrative?

    That's what I think. I even cleaned the language up, and I'm sorry it's not all little words that would be easy for you to understand.

    LBJ, Lady Bird, Van Cliburn, Ike, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

    by BlackSheep1 on Fri May 31, 2013 at 09:04:06 AM PDT

    •  But, but, but he won a Pulitzer Prize (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BlackSheep1

      just like Judy Miller and Thomas Friedman!

    •  What does that say about you that you see this? (5+ / 0-)
      I think this unprofessional, mawkish "cartoon" is a steaming load of shite, but at least it fits the "greater community" narrative around here. Would a white President be drawn bestriding a massive penis-shaped drone this way? That's just my first objection.
      I guess you never saw Dr. Strangelove so you're not very adapt at satire.

      I guess that explains it or whatever reason your mind induces stereotypes right off the bat. Mine doesn't. That's actually what a drone looks like.

      Since you failed to refute anything in this accurate cartoon, I'll just assume you can't. In fact, I know you can't, but we didn't need to know what was going through your mind so please keep that part to yourself next time.

      I don't negotiate grand bargains with deficit terrorists!

      by priceman on Fri May 31, 2013 at 04:37:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  you're inferring what's going through my mind (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AaronInSanDiego

        but you're not at all addressing the concern I raised.

        Would Fiore have drawn w or dick sitting on that drone that way?
        Would he have drawn Clinton in that pose?

        Our President was never about peace and love.
        Our President was never about making everybody's dreams come true.
        That's not the job.

        But thanks, as the Bartles and Jaymes commercials used to say, for your support.

        LBJ, Lady Bird, Van Cliburn, Ike, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

        by BlackSheep1 on Fri May 31, 2013 at 09:28:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Clinton (4+ / 0-)

          Didn't kill anyone with drones, so analogy fail.  Bush didn't think of putting missiles on them til halfway through his presidency, and didn't brag as far as I know about using them.  Whereas Obama joked about "You won't see it coming."  referring to boys who try to date his daughter.  Mere days after he killed an actual American teenager with one.  Try as you might to make it about a penis and then about a black penis, it says more about you than the cartoonist.  Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.  

          Bad things aren't bad! And anyway, there's mitigation!

          by Nada Lemming on Fri May 31, 2013 at 11:07:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  I suport the drone strikes. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hooper, rwyckoff46

    The switch on drone policies is going to begin in 2014 when we withdraw for Afghanistan. Why do  some young people think things happen immediately?

    Frankly those terrorist targeted have killed more innocent civilians than any drone program. Much of the information about killing of civilians is propaganda put out by the terrorists themselves.

    Too much has been made by the left about  the American 'citizens"( just terrorists) who were killed by drones. It is not like hundreds innocent civilians are being killed. My god these guys were recruiting and training terrorist to come to the U.s. and commit terrorist acts.

    However I do think it is time to limit drone strikes. Even thought the leaders of Pakistan really have allowed these strikes they deny it. It is time to let these people in the middle east fight their own battles and blow each other up if the like & cut off their foreign aid.

  •  The Doublespeak from Obama (6+ / 0-)

    is outright frightening...

    I didn't abandon the fight, I abandoned the Party that abandoned the fight...

    by Jazzenterprises on Fri May 31, 2013 at 09:23:59 AM PDT

    •  The dude is definitely hard core. (0+ / 0-)

      How else to describe him, I hate to drag this one back from the "ages" - but in my early years it was called "grinning in your face"...  I am so displeased with Obama - maybe the "Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP)" stories are true.

      "WAR IS PEACE FREEDOM IS SLAVERY FOX NEWS IS JOURNALISM"

      by FakeNews on Fri May 31, 2013 at 10:37:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Obama HATES America (0+ / 0-)

    He wants to relax the War on Terror because he is secretly a Muslim. He was born in Kenya, not in Hawaii.
    It is only a matter of months before he sets up Death Panels.

    Censorship is rogue government.

    by scott5js on Fri May 31, 2013 at 09:39:01 AM PDT

  •  you all unrealistic (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rwyckoff46

    Much of what you think the president should be doing is up to Congress to do.

    Obama is doing a great job in very difficult times and up against not only the far right, but the far left, who both are very much alike.

  •  the cartoon is great, Mr. Fiore (0+ / 0-)

    Wish I'd stayed out of the 'obamasux' comments.

    "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

    by Sybil Liberty on Fri May 31, 2013 at 12:08:37 PM PDT

  •  You nailed it! n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    3goldens, Nada Lemming, gooderservice

    The only trouble with retirement is...I never get a day off!

    by Mr Robert on Fri May 31, 2013 at 12:33:47 PM PDT

  •  Brilliant work, Mr. Fiore. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Nada Lemming, triv33

    You are always an inspiration.

    I don't negotiate grand bargains with deficit terrorists!

    by priceman on Fri May 31, 2013 at 04:37:54 PM PDT

  •  Interesting mix of clever and childish, (0+ / 0-)

    incisive and simplistic. That's what I think.

    Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

    by AaronInSanDiego on Fri May 31, 2013 at 10:36:06 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site