This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Terror War

  • Revolt in the Senate, or common sense?

    Today’s lesson in media bias – two very different takes on Senator Warner’s revelation yesterday after returning from Iraq. The first from the Washington Post entitled “Warner calls for pullouts by Christmas“;

    Sen. John W. Warner, one of the most influential Republican voices in Congress on national security, called on President Bush yesterday to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq in time for Christmas as a new intelligence report concluded that political leaders in Baghdad are “unable to govern effectively.” Warner’s declaration — after the Virginia senator’s recent four-day trip to the Middle East — roiled the political environment ahead of a much-anticipated progress report to be delivered Sept. 11 by Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. Although Warner had already broken with Bush’s strategy, this was the first time he endorsed pulling troops out by a specific date.

    Hmm, no direct quotes, just a reporter’s interpretation of what Warner said – and it sounds like he was pretty firm about withdrawing troops doesn’t it? Now from the Washington Examiner, a story entitled US General Wary of Withdrawal;

    Warner, R-Va., former chairman of the Armed Services Committee and Navy secretary during the Vietnam War, said Thursday that Bush would be sending a powerful message to Iraq’s government that the U.S. commitment there is not open-ended. Warner says the president should get to decide when and how many troops should leave. He also did not mention any places where he thought reductions were possible in Iraq, where some regions are worse than others.

    Sounds like two different speeches doesn’t it? And an even more different approach from the Washington Times;

    The updated National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a consensus view of the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and other services, says “measurable” security improvements were made in war-torn Iraq since January and will expand modestly in the next 12 months with continued military pressure on insurgents.

    Within hours of the report”s release, Sen. John W. Warner of Virginia called on President Bush to bring some U.S. troops home by Christmas, and Army Secretary Pete Geren ruled out extending troop deployments beyond the current 15 months.

    So despite the fact that the Post wants us to believe there’s a revolt against the President in the Senate led by Senator Warner, the real truth is that Warner actually concurs with the anticipated proposal by General Petareus that we begin drawing down the troops – and the President.

  • Hillary; Terror helps Republicans

    According to the NY Post this morning, Hillary told supporters that a terrorist attack on the US would help Republicans in the 2008 election;

    Discussing the possibility of a new nightmare assault while campaigning in New Hampshire, Clinton also insisted she is the Democratic candidate best equipped to deal with it.

    “It’s a horrible prospect to ask yourself, ‘What if? What if?’ But if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world,” Clinton told supporters in Concord.

    “So I think I’m the best of the Democrats to deal with that,” she added.

    Of course she’s correct that it would indeed help Republicans – but she sidesteps the entire issue of “why” it helps Republicans. Maybe Democrats know the answer and don’t need to discuss it – but they need to face the issue regardless. Democrats are HORRIBLE on national defense. The whole damned world knows it, and now Hillary says that she admits it, too. Not that she’ll do anything about it, though.

    Democrats have been terrible on National Defense since Korea. The last good thing Democrats did for our national defense without having a political reason for doing it was sending troops to Greece to turn back the communists there in 1948 – every move since has been a political calculation.

    The only reason Johnson sent troops to Vietnam was to overcome the Republican charge that Democrats had been soft on China. Kennedy started out well supporting the Bay of Pigs invasion, then collapsed for political reasons. Carter forgot he had a military, and Clinton, well, Clinton used military operations to distract the public from his domestic lies and scandals.

    So instead of being better on National Defense, Democrats concocted the “bumper sticker slogan” defense – that Republicans manufactured a needless, illegal war for political reasons in order to minimize the importance of the war against terror. But the only people who really believe that are the head-in-the-sand internet freakazoids who engage in discussions from behind the safety of their computer screens.

    Seems to me that a Democrat candidate that was truly concerned about this nation would try and convince their party to be better on National Defense – instead of caving in to the squeaky wheels.

  • Expand the war to end the war

    Rowan Scarborough of the Washington Examiner fuels the anti-Iran debate with more evidence that the Quds Force which President Bush recently designated as a terrorist organization is operating in Iraq;

    One analyst estimates that more than 300 members of al Quds Force, the terrorist arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, are operating in southern Iraq. The Revolutionary Guards answer directly to Tehran’s ruling mullahs.

    The intelligence about al Quds comes from an Iranian resistance group, retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney told The Examiner.

    “They have penetrated into the Tehran system,” McInerney said of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (MEK). “Everything they have put out has always check out.” He said that despite new U.S.-Iran talks in Baghdad, Quds operations inside Iraq are increasing, not decreasing.

    Army Maj. Rick Lynch, who oversees U.S. troops in an area south of Baghdad, told reporters on Sunday he believes 50 Quds operatives alone are operating in his sector.

    While al Qaeda’s main weapon is the vehicle-borne suicide bomber targeted at civilians, Quds Force specializes in building huge roadside bombs (explosively formed projectiles) primarily designed to kill American troops.

    “The damage to U.S. forces right now is greater from Quds than from al Qaeda,” McInerney said.

    We’ve known since the inception of this war against terror that Iran has been behind every move that’s been made against us. Some Taliban and al Qaeda leaders escaped from Afghanistan into Iran, there is supported evidence that Hussein moved some of his weaponry to Syria and Iran before the US bombs fell. He famously flew his jets to Iran to protect his air force before the Gulf War, it stands to reason he sent more stuff before this war.

    Now we have evidence (but really who needs evidence in war – I ask you) that Iran is physically operating against our interests and against democratic Iraqi interests. So what do we do? Shrug our shoulders and bow to the wishes of the US anti-war crowd? Or do we light up the Iraqi borders between Syria and Iran?

    In the realm of diplomacy, the Europeans, despite the fact that they support sanctions against Iran for their nuclear program, won’t participate out of pure greed. From the Washington Times’ David Sands;

    Among them: EU members Germany and Austria, as well as India, which just signed a major nuclear cooperation agreement with the United States that Mr. Burns had a central role in negotiating, and Turkey.

    Mr. Burns said the United States had not insisted on a “quid pro quo” with India to give up its lucrative oil trade or pipeline projects with Iran. But he said the United States was forcefully telling India and Iran’s other trading partners that Tehran does not represent a good investment or credit risk with a package of U.N. sanctions hanging over its economy.

    “If countries around the world want diplomacy to be the way to resolve problems with Iran, then there has to be a harder-edged diplomacy. There has to be some teeth,” he said.

    And at home, the political wing of radical Islamists (otherwise known as the US Congress) is busy undermining the democratically-elected government of Iraq, says the Washington Post;

    Declaring the government of Iraq “non-functional,” the influential chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee said yesterday that Iraq’s parliament should oust Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his cabinet if they are unable to forge a political compromise with rival factions in a matter of days.

    “I hope the parliament will vote the Maliki government out of office and will have the wisdom to replace it with a less sectarian and more unifying prime minister and government,” Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) said after a three-day trip to Iraq and Jordan.

    I guess it’s much easier to criticize our allies than it is to criticize the enemy. Why doesn’t Levin grow a pair of cojones and announce that Ahmadinijahd is “non-functional”?

    The same goes for the inhuman way that prisoners are treated in Iran. Nearly every week we’re subjected to the lies and scare-mongering of Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, but what about the treatment of Iranians by their own government?

    My new friend, Kamangir, an Iranian student who toils from the safety of Canada to translate Iranian news sources, report some new tragedy nearly every day. Yesterday, he wrote;

    Mahmoud Moghimi and the brothers Mohammad and Davood Sharei were executed in Saveh, Iran,  despite the controversy surrounding their case. The execution was announced for Monday, but was carried out a day earlier, disrupting their lawyer’s efforts in proceeding with legal actions to stop it. Jahani, the defense lawyer of the executed individuals stated “if they had not executed them before noon, we had gotten the cancellation verdict.

    Two weeks ago, Kamangir translated;

    “The executed individuals have been tortured beforehand”, stated Shiva Nazar Ahari, a human rights’ activist, to Rooz.

    The interview was carried out right before the execution of fifteen individuals, a short while ago. Shiva says “They were arrested more than eighty days ago and fifteen of them are to be executed today. The families do not know if their sons are among the ones to be executed. Whenever they talk about execution, all the parents get excited. To my understanding, the Judiciary is intentionally doing this to hurt the families. That is while according to the Human Rights Law, the detainee’s family must be informed of their whereabouts and health immediately.” 

    Yet, we get to hear the Left whine about our “mistreatment” of the killers and thugs in Guantanamo. I guess because it’s so much easier to cricize someone when you know they won’t retaliate – sissies.

    Where is the NY Times and the Washington Post on these REAL atrocities? Well, when the Islamists finally get themselves a nuclear weapon, I guess all of the pain and suffering in the world will end, won’t it?

  • Lieberman; al Qaeda’s travel agent

    Today’s Wall Street Journal carries a commentary by Joe Lieberman entitiled Al Qaeda’s Travel Agent – it gives me hope that someone, anyone from the Senate recognizes Syria as a threat to the troops in Iraq – instead of someone to whom we can play nice;

    Recently declassified American intelligence reveals just how much al Qaeda in Iraq is dependent for its survival on the support it receives from the broader, global al Qaeda network, and how most of that support flows into Iraq through one country — Syria. Al Qaeda in Iraq is sustained by a transnational network of facilitators and human smugglers, who replenish its supply of suicide bombers — approximately 60 to 80 Islamist extremists, recruited every month from across the Middle East, North Africa and Europe, and sent to meet their al Qaeda handlers in Syria, from where they are taken to Iraq to blow themselves up to kill countless others.

    Although small in number, these foreign fighters are a vital strategic asset to al Qaeda in Iraq, providing it with the essential human ammunition it needs to conduct high-visibility, mass-casualty suicide bombings, such as we saw last week in northern Iraq. In fact, the U.S. military estimates that between 80% and 90% of suicide attacks in Iraq are perpetrated by foreign fighters, making them the deadliest weapon in al Qaeda’s war arsenal. Without them, al Qaeda in Iraq would be critically, perhaps even fatally, weakened.

    That is why we now must focus on disrupting this flow of suicide bombers — and that means focusing on Syria, through which up to 80% of the Iraq-bound extremists transit.

    Even though this old news to anyone has read an article on the Syria-Iran connection, it’s just heartening to hear a politician, any politician involve Syria in a discussion of security in Iraq. Lieberman goes on to point out that, if Syria, particularly Assad was interested in securing the area, it wouldn’t be that hard – if he wanted to, that is;

    Before al Qaeda’s foreign fighters can make their way across the Syrian border into Iraq, however, they must first reach Syria — and the overwhelming majority does so, according to U.S. intelligence estimates, by flying into Damascus International Airport, making the airport the central hub of al Qaeda travel in the Middle East, and the most vulnerable chokepoint in al Qaeda’s war against Iraq and the U.S. in Iraq.

    Syrian President Bashar al Assad cannot seriously claim that he is incapable of exercising effective control over the main airport in his capital city. Syria is a police state, with sprawling domestic intelligence and security services. The notion that al Qaeda recruits are slipping into and through the Damascus airport unbeknownst to the local Mukhabarat is totally unbelievable.

    I’ve always said that it’s ridiculous to expect that Syria couldn’t stop the influx of fighters into Iraq – which is essentially what Pelosi’s trip to make kissy-face Assad last Spring told the world. I wonder if she asked him to tighten airport security (since she has the same access to intelligence that Lieberman has) while she was passing along false peace messages.

    But Lieberman admitting this in public is fairly unique, since no one else in the Senate is brave enough to even mention Syria – in any discussion. Lieberman doesn’t stop there, though. He goes on to outline a course of action for the Senate and the Administration;

    When Congress reconvenes next month, we should set aside whatever differences divide us on Iraq and send a clear and unambiguous message to the Syrian regime, as we did last month to the Iranian regime, that the transit of al Qaeda suicide bombers through Syria on their way to Iraq is completely unacceptable, and it must stop.

    We in the U.S. government should also begin developing a range of options to consider taking against Damascus International, unless the Syrian government takes appropriate action, and soon.

    Imagine that! Barack Obama should take notes – Lieberman is actually threatening our enemies instead of threatening our allies. This could be the dawning of a whole new age.

    Proving the Left still doesn’t get the whole idea of this war, The Carpetbagger Report claims that Lieberman wants to start a “third war” with Syria. Hey, fellas, it’s all the same war. Just like Nixon’s excursions into Cambodia wasn’t opening up a “new front” – it was all a part of fighting the North Vietnamese. This is all part of defeating tyranny and radical Islam in the Middle East.

    And Think Progress’ commenters’ antisemitism is showing.

  • Disparging the vision against tyranny

    In a half-mocking tone, Peter Baker in the Washington Post describes another Bush failure – his failure to end tyranny;

    By the time he arrived in Prague in June for a democracy conference, President Bush was frustrated. He had committed his presidency to working toward the goal of “ending tyranny in our world,” yet the march of freedom seemed stalled. Just as aggravating was the sense that his own government was not committed to his vision.

    As he sat down with opposition leaders from authoritarian societies around the world, he gave voice to his exasperation. “You’re not the only dissident,” Bush told Saad Eddin Ibrahim, a leader in the resistance to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. “I too am a dissident in Washington. Bureaucracy in the United States does not help change. It seems that Mubarak succeeded in brainwashing them.”

    Baker goes on to blame the failed Bush vision of ending tyranny in the world on bureaucrats in the State Department, Republican candidates for president, even the Vice President.

    But Baker doesn’t blame Democrats – you know, those guys who stood on the roof of Hussein’s palace on the eve of our attack and declared Hussein to be a more honest broker than the President. Those guys who deliver false messages of peace to tyrannts against the advice of the White House, the guys who do their best to keep the Iraqis scared that we’re going to pull out and leave them to their own devices.Those folks that coddle every dictator they can get their puny arms around. Sacrificing the lives and well being of our planet’s citizens for purely political reasons. All for the Bush Derangement Syndrome – sacrificing human lives at the alter of Al Gore’s and John Kerry’s political defeat – such petty, petty little cretins.

    And those career diplomats in the State Department who figure that turmoil in the world is their job security:

    But some officials worry about alienating a friend in a region where Russia is reasserting influence. Assistant Secretary of State Richard A. Boucher has argued for giving Nazarbayev more time to reform. The discord has gotten so personal that rivals have dubbed him Boucherbayev. In an interview, Boucher said those promoting democracy are not responsible for the broader picture. “We have to work on an overall relationship,” he said. “The issue of democracy is not to be able to denounce people. The issue is to make progress.”

    Still, after an invigorating start in 2005, progress has been harder to find. Among those worried about the project is Sharansky, whose book so inspired Bush. “I give him an A for bringing the idea and maybe a C for implementation,” said Sharansky, now chairman of the Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies at the Shalem Center in Israel. “There is a gap between what he says and what the State Department does,” and he is not consistent enough.

    The challenge Bush faced, Sharansky added, was to bring Washington together behind his goal.

    “It didn’t happen,” he said. “And that’s the real tragedy.”

    What a rational person can’t tell these arrogant imbeciles is that those tyrannts who oppress their people don’t respond to kind words and cajolery – that’s why we call them tyrannts. Regimes who hang dissidents in public, threaten the media and the families of dissident students don’t respond to diplomatic gestures. No matter how hard you wish it to be so.

    I’d never thought I’d see the day that the US government wouldn’t stand behind the President on such an essential issue as spreading Democracy and improving conditions for people world wide. Yet, here we are.

  • Politics of the surge

    Bad news for the Democrats is always good news for the country. And the bad news is that the latest strategy in Iraq seems to be working. Even Der Speigel, the German publication and certain writers for the NY Times can’t help but notice that Iraq is a becoming a safer place. And of course the Left is rushing out to blunt the good news and provide al Qaeda, the Democrat Party’s military arm, some hope. from the Washington Examiner;

    Pro-surge analysts contend al Qaeda is on its heels and desperate in the face of a six-month-old U.S. troop reinforcement.

    But Anthony H. Cordesman, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, offered a gloomy assessment.

    “Al Qaeda is far from defeated. It still has major support from some tribes, and significant al Qaeda operating areas exist,” Cordesman said. The struggle against al Qaeda has become perhaps the most important military objective in Iraq. The outcome will likely determine whether warring sects can reconcile and whether U.S. troops can start coming home next year.

    […]

    While the U.S. command has trumpeted the killing and capturing of scores of al Qaeda leaders this summer, Cordesman concluded, “Al Qaeda continues to show considerable resilience in rebuilding its leadership and key cadres.”

    As if to underscore Cordesman’s analysis, al Qaeda struck this week in what may turn out to be its most deadly coordinated attack of the war. Four massive truck bombs exploded in three Iraq villages near the Syrian border. The death toll may reach 500.

    So because the cowards are still able to attack unarmed citizens with massive stocks of home-made explosives, that proves we’re not doing damage to al Qaeda.

    Curt of Flopping Aces illustrates the internals from the latest propaganda poll from CNN;

    Quite curious how in the world CNN can spin a poll where they ask a question of only half a sample and proclaim it proof that America distrusts our military leaders:

    Of course, the reason that Americans can’t trust their military officers (if it were even true) is because they don’t get the news of the war from outlets like CNN. they have to get the truth from sources like Bill Roggio;

    Al Qaeda in Iraq continues to face opposition from Sunni insurgent groups. In the Buhriz district in Diyala province, the 1920s Revolution Brigades assisted Iraqi police in fending off an attack of upwards of 60 al Qaeda fighters. Multinational Forces Iraq identified the Sunni insurgents as the “Baqubah Guardians,” however IraqSlogger reported the al-Ishreen Revolution Brigades (1920s Revolution Brigades) engaged in the fight. Multinational Forces Iraq described the fighting, and notes the coordination between the insurgent group, the local police, and US attack helicopters:

    And you have to red all the way to the bottom of the Examiner story to read;

    “I think that we are within sight of defeating this organization in Iraq if we continue to press, but it will be able to conduct periodic spectacular attacks for a long time to come,” he said. Cordesman conceded that the six-month surge of five U.S. Army brigades and 30,000 extra Iraqi troops in Baghdad “did enable [the coalition] to make some gains against al Qaeda.”

    Most analysts also agree that Anbar province, once the most restive Sunni area in Iraq, has become one of the quietest, as Sunni tribal leaders end an alliance with al Qaeda and join the coalition. Attacks in its two largest cities — Ramadi and Fallujah — are down sharply.

    And outlets like the Washington Post and the Associated Press still call al Qaeda “Sunni insurgents” just in case someone might get the idea that this isn’t a civil war like it was a year ago;

    U.S. troops clashed with suspected Sunni insurgents holed up in a mosque north of Baghdad and launched an air-to-ground Hellfire missile into the structure. One American soldier was killed in the fighting, the military said Friday.

    The soldier was killed and another was wounded when troops stationed at a nearby outpost came under heavy small-arms fire from the Honest Mohammed Mosque late Thursday in Tarmiyah as they targeted about six insurgents who were believed sheltered inside, according to the military.

    And the Washington Post buries on page 18 that there is a coalition taking root among Sunnis, Kurds and some of the Shi’ite factions in Iraq;

    As Iraqi politicians flew north on Thursday to survey the devastation in two villages ruined by bombings, Shiite and Kurdish political leaders in Baghdad announced the formation of a new alliance intended to begin mending the fractured government and defuse the forces behind such violence.

    For weeks, politicians have discussed an alliance among the four leading Shiite and Kurdish parties, with the hope that marginalized Sunni factions would join the coalition. But politicians from the largest Sunni bloc in parliament said they would remain apart from the new group, asserting that the ruling Shiites still have not met their demands for greater participation. The Sunnis’ stance effectively undermines the coalition’s chances of breaking the political gridlock that has frustrated U.S. and Iraqi officials.

    And of course, they blunt the good news with minority opinions where they should find some hope instead;

    “We have lost hope, frankly, that this coalition will be the ideal solution to the strangling political crisis that the country is going through,” said Abdul Kareem Samarrae, a Sunni lawmaker, on al-Hurra television. “We hope that this is a genuine chance to solve those problems, but we think that this is merely a political cover for a government in its last few days or weeks.”

    What the media and the Democrats have disregarded is that the reason the surge is working is because Americans have demonstrated our resolve to the Iraqis – for the last three years iraqis have been reticient about making any real commitment to their own security because of the cut-and-run talk that pours out of the crooked mouths of Demorats and their willing accomplices in the press.

    The surge proves to Iraqis that this President and this administration is committed to the Iraqi people, while the Democrats are committed to their defeat – and the defeat of this nation as well.

  • Hezbollah recruiting in Venezuela

    Just when you think things in Venezuela can’t get more weird, things get more weird. I just ran across this from Jungle Mom at The Jungle Hut;

    If the United States were to attack Iran, the only country ruled by God, we would counter-attack in Latin America and even inside the United States itself. We have the means and we know how to go about it. We will sabotage the transportation of oil from Latin America to the US. You have been warned.

    Sounds like Ahmadinejad! This statement is from Hezbollah Latin America, also known as Hezbollah Venezuela. Signed by Teodoro, called Commander Teodoro. He was a guevarists guerrilla that organized disorder in the Maracaibo region in the past. He was in born Ciudad Bolivar, and was converted to Islam. (Funny how commies convert to Islam!) He is a Chavista.

    Teodoro is running a social experiment among the Guajiros of Venezuela. Anyone who has paid attention to the news of Venezuela will realize that the evangelical missionaries were removed by the government of Chavez and no new religious worker’s visas have been granted for over 2 years.

    While Chavez accuses the North American missionaries of being “spies” and genocide, coercing conversions to Christianity, Chavez proclaims that Shi’ite Iranian “missionaries” are welcome to live and work among the tribes.

    Any anti-American port in a storm. I’d guess it’s to make little suicide bombers that can slip across our borders and blend in a little better than an Arab.

  • Obama; US forces only “air-raiding” Afghan civilians

    I wonder what was going through Barack Obama’s mind Monday when he decided to declare that US forces in Afghanistan were “air-raiding” Afghan villages.

    “We’ve got to get the job done there,” he said of Afghanistan. “And that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there.”

    First of all, I’m not sure “air-raiding” is even a word – I know it’s not a word anyone I’ve ever met would use. It must be one of those pseudo-warrior words that pin heads use to make other pin heads think they might know something about air strikes.

    And if all we’re doing is “air-raiding” villages and homes in Afghanistan, what is the 10th Mountain Division (the Army’s premier light infantry division) doing in Afghanistan? I’ll grant that they have 10th Aviation Brigade for support – but only inasmuch as it aids the infantry battalions with lift and fire missions. 

    I think Obama is just painfully inexperienced in military matters, even more than most Senators. I wonder when the last time he was in Afghanistan, and I wonder where he gets the idea that the US is only “air-raiding” Afghan homes – probably from his equally ignorant staff weinies.

    Now, our air attacks on Serbia – that was problematic, i wonder where he stands on that fiasco?

    I get the distinct impression that Obama thinks he’s getting elected to President based purely on the color of his skin, because he hasn’t really made an effort to learn anything about the job, or the matters involved in being President. From the Washington Examiner;

    The flap comes three weeks after Obama promised that if elected president, he would meet without pre-conditions with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea. That pledge was called “irresponsible and frankly naive” by rival Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

    Eight days later, eager to rebut Clinton’s charge, Obama said that as president, he might send U.S. troops into Pakistan to fight terrorists not targeted by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf.

    “If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will,” he vowed.

    Critics called this overly hawkish, prompting Obama to modulate again the next day by ruling out the use of nuclear weapons to fight terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

    “I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance,” he told the AP before pausing.

    “Involving civilians,” he added. “Let me scratch that. There’s been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That’s not on the table.”

    That’s the backpedaling of a campaign that’s unprepared to advance their candidate on anything more than his visage. It’s clear to me that the people in Obama’s campaign staff would prefer that he just stand on stage silently while supporters throw money and votes at him. And you know you suck if Hillary Clinton calls you stupid.

    It’s equally clear that Obama never had any intention of doing anything towards cultivating his image as leader – like John Kerry and Al Gore before him, he just felt he deserved to be President and we ought to just give it to him.

    Here’s a candidate that’s obviously a Class I Dullard – when will the media begin to portray him as such? If he were Republican, it’d already be a foregone conclusion.