Iowahawk Says What Needs To Be Said

by Little Miss Attila on May 3, 2011

. . . That there have been a lot of people celebrating bin Laden’s death who wouldn’t have, had it not occurred on Obama’s watch:

Like many Americans I had all but abandoned hope that we would ever capture or kill the 9/11 mastermind, and had resigned myself to the idea he would die an old man thumbing his nose at us from some comfortable cave in Waziristan. Well, I can happily report that I completely underestimated the skill, courage, and perseverence of America’s military. And, almost as happily, I can report that I also completely underestimated the capacity of America’s erstwhile “peace community” for turning on a dime and embracing the kind of all-American xenophobic flag-waving bloodlust they only recently decried. So today I stand proudly with my new friends of the formerly antiwar left in a mindlessly jingoistic salute to President Obama for an extralegal military assassination well done.

Yes, it’s true that some pre-January 2009 antiwar activists have remained morally and logically consistent in their opposition to America’s military presence in the Mideast; but, thank God, it appears now they were only a tiny, insignificant minority. Recent events have happily made clear that the antiwar movement of 2001-8 was overwhelmingly dominated by a vast silent hypocritical majority of craven political opportunists awaiting a Democratic administration to gleefully celebrate the covert execution of a man whom, until 28 months ago, they would have described as a “tragic civilian casualty.”

Who is to credit for this rebirth in American national unity? First and foremost, we must cite the leadership of President Obama. Like many Americans – and the Nobel Peace Prize committee – I naively feared he was actually serious when he initially proposed shutting down Guantanamo, trying detainees in American civilian courts, and prior consultation with the international community. Little did I know that this untested young Commander-in-Chief would muster the courage to read his weekly Gallup numbers and, in one daring unilateral extra-judicial targeted hit job, toss aside every single idiotic foreign policy principle of his election campaign. Perhaps most satisfyingly, it was a mission made possible thanks to information extracted by methods he previously banned as “illegal torture.”

{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }

ponce May 3, 2011 at 9:06 am

Nice to see the fringe right is busy keeping America safe from straw men while Obama’s out killing terrorists.

Reply

I R A Darth Aggie May 3, 2011 at 10:37 am

So, all of SEAL Team 6 are registered Democrats?

I’m thinking “no”, but YMMV.

Reply

Little Miss Attila May 3, 2011 at 9:11 am

Nice to see that when there’s a Dem in the White House it’s okay to kill terrorists.

Reply

ponce May 3, 2011 at 9:55 am

Nice to see that when there’s a Dem in the White House we can kill terrorists.

Reply

Texan99 May 3, 2011 at 3:44 pm

I’m waiting for someone to file suit to overturn his murder on the ground that the intelligence that led to his hideout was obtained illegally. I don’t think they Mirandized him, either. These people simply must be taught that they’ve got to work within the criminal justice system.

Reply

Ric Locke May 3, 2011 at 4:30 pm

It won’t make any difference except to let ponce & associates preen for a while. Let them. It’s kind of amusing.

It is now May of 2011. The elections are in November of 2012. That’s eighteen months. The guy in the fable didn’t have that long to teach the horse to sing.

Shutting down the Gulf added at least $1 to the price of gas. Now Obama & Co. are going to shut down Texas oil production, which will add another $1.50 or so to the pump pain.

We can’t have food, because little brown fish and ADM’s profits are more important. We can’t have gas, because lizards, Saving the World, and BP’s profits are more important. Even if we could have food, we can’t ship it to where it’s needed because it costs too much for fuel. At this rate, in a year and a half we’ll be recalling $5 bread and $10 gas with wistful tears. In November 2012, response to a hypothetical exit-poll question will be divided between “Osama who?” (the majority) and “Osama? Don’t you mean Obama?”

Regards,
Ric

Reply

Darleen Click May 3, 2011 at 7:01 pm

It’s worth noting, too, Ric, that California’s snowpack this year was 175% of and the feds are still refusing to turn the water on for Central Valley … where significant amounts of America’s food was grown.

And we are still under drought water conservation restrictions for homeowners

Reply

ponce May 3, 2011 at 9:45 pm

Ayn Rand would be afraid of your looter whining Lurleen.

Get out there and dig your own well and stop mooching off the taxpayers!

Reply

Darrell May 4, 2011 at 4:18 am

She calls you “looter” and you repeat it against her.
At least we have no doubt about your mental age–“Booger-head” ponce.
Quoting your name should be an instant refund for anyone who’s ever paid to go to that
community college you nest at.

Reply

kishnevi May 3, 2011 at 7:14 pm

To return to the main topic–I think Iowahawk is wrong here. Maybe he is confusing the anti-war crowd with the Democratic party–which was never true, even during Bush’s term of office–or maybe he’s judging only what the MSM reports–his remark is accurate about the MSM and the Democratic party. But the same people who criticized Bush have been criticizing Obama (of course the MSM doesn’t want people to notice that), and none of them would object to killing OBL whether it was done before or after 1/20/09. The phrase one of them used is probably accurate for them all “grim satisfaction”. But these people are not a tiny insignificant minority–they may be a minority, but the only losses in membership have been Democratic party hacks and MSM hacks.

Also involved in the dynamic is the fact that the focus for many people was Iraq, and many of them were not opposed to invading Afghanistan, because it had the direct links to terrorism and 9/11 that Iraq did not. And now that Afghanistan is pushing out Iraq in the war news, those people are less liable to criticize a war effort in a battlefield they approved of to begin with.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: