SRSLY? Bush official criticizes Obama for killing too many terrorists

It appears that the President can't win for trying.

He relies on the teleprompter, critics cry from their prepared speech read off of a teleprompter.

He won't cut spending, they wail, as they refuse to participate in a panel to help cut the deficit.

And now, he's soft on terror, they moan, as they complain that he's killing too many terrorists.

What is so astonishing is that the public buys anything the GOP is selling.

via HuffPost

At a panel on national security policy at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Friday, a prominent lawyer from the Bush administration's Department of Justice said he was concerned that the higher number of terrorist executions taking place under Obama was compromising U.S. intelligence operations.

"Why have executions increased?" asked Viet Dinh, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and one of the authors of the USA Patriot Act. Citing a recent Washington Post article on the increased targeted killing of terrorists, Dinh complained that "the president and vice president expound this fact as a fact that they are actually successful in war."

Oh noes!! Teleprompter..er...er...ers!!

via Cesca

Jim DeMint in his CPAC speech yesterday: "You can't govern from a teleprompter."

He read that from a teleprompter. See...



Meanwhile, here's Mitt Romney -- a Republican frontrunner for the 2012 nomination -- during his CPAC speech yesterday:


And Dick Armey:


Liz Cheney:


Dick Cheney:

Rachel infiltrates CPAC

I wish I was a lesbian. I love her.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

BURN! "Family Guy" actress with Downs hits back at Palin

My name is Andrea Fay Friedman. I was born with Down syndrome. I played the role of Ellen on the "Extra Large Medium" episode of Family Guy that was broadcast on Valentine's day. Although they gave me red hair on the show, I am really a blonde. I also wore a red wig for my role in " Smudge" but I was a blonde in "Life Goes On". I guess former Governor Palin does not have a sense of humor. I thought the line "I am the daughter of the former governor of Alaska" was very funny. I think the word is "sarcasm".

In my family we think laughing is good. My parents raised me to have a sense of humor and to live a normal life. My mother did not carry me around under her arm like a loaf of French bread the way former Governor Palin carries her son Trig around looking for sympathy and votes.

Ouch.

Two questions: 1) Doesn't Seth McFarlane get credit for using a Downs actress to voice a Downs character? He could have easily used any voice actor, but it brings some real depth to it to use an actor with Downs. And one who understands humor, sarcasm and satire to boot.

2) Why does Rush Limbaugh get a satire pass for using 'retard', but an actual diabled person doesn't get a satire pass when giving voice to her own disability?

Sarah is such a hypocrite. She stands for nothing other than feathering her own nest.

2/20 UPDATE*****
Seth McFarlane discusses the controversy on the season premiere of Real Time with Bill Maher

Save freedom and protect democracy: Invade a hospital

Artwork by Jake Lewis, via Andrew Sullivan



If you like Lewis' work, check this out.

Recovery schmercovery. The stimulus was bad.

Or not.

Limbaugh revists McNabb controversy. Unsuccessfully.

(Pro Football Talk)

It's been more than six years since Rush Limbaugh, in his capacity as a commentator for ESPN, referred to Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb as "overrated" because "the media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well."

But those comments still crop up from time to time in the NFL.

During the 2009 season, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell was grilled about Limbaugh while testifying before Congress. And on his show Friday, Limbaugh himself brought up his comments from the 2003 season in pointing out that ESPN's Erik Kuselias had also referred to McNabb as "overrated."

Kuselias was guest hosting ESPN Radio's Mike and Mike in the Morning on Friday when he said of McNabb, "He's had a public fight with Rush Limbaugh, I don't mean the two of them, it was a polarizing issue. He's a had a public fight with T.O. He's been sort of underrated in his own city and maybe overrated nationally at the same time, it's been crazy!"

Limbaugh broadcast those comments on his own show and then added, "What was that? Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa hold it a minute. Is he still working there? Erik Kuselias has just said Donovan McNabb has been overrated nationally. Erik Kuselias just said that McNabb's been overrated nationally. Erik, if they zap you outta there, call me. I got some ideas."

Jon Bois of SBNation.com flagged the comments from Friday's show and pointed out that what Kuselias said isn't the same thing as what Limbaugh said in 2003. But it's clear that more than six years after Limbaugh resigned from ESPN, those comments about McNabb won't soon be forgotten.

What Limbaugh either doesn't or won't recognize is that it's not the "overrated" part that caused the problem. It's what followed that... the idea that the media were engaging in the sports equivalent of social engineering by raising up an unqualified black man.

An overrated black man with 6 Pro-Bowls, 8 playoff berths in 10 years, 5 division titles, 5 NFC Championship Games and 1 Super Bowl appearance.

He was wrong then and he's wrong now. Six years later, Limbaugh cannot let it go.

Yup. Secessionists and teapartiers and wingnuts.... oh my.

What, was this guy too busy to come?

Liberal and conservative defined, they're not what you think

Huffington Post has an excellent article by Timothy Ferris about liberal and conservative, arguing that liberal is not the opposite of conservative, but rather a position open to both conservatives and progressives (the true opposites of conservatism). I've cut out, for brevity, the parts relating to science, but you really should read the whole thing here.

Liberalism (as defined by John Locke and embodied in the Bill of Rights) is based on the hypothesis that people ought to be maximally free, with the government intervening only to the extent required to protect their freedoms against abridgment by their compatriots or by enemies abroad. This was a radical idea in the eighteenth century, when few people had much education and the general public was routinely slandered as ignorant and untrustworthy. Locke himself feared that the public was so mired in "passion and superstition" as to be apt, as Voltaire put it, to act irrationally and "speak without thinking." Sharing such qualms, many of the American founders described the newborn United States as akin to a scientific experiment. "No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying," wrote Thomas Jefferson in 1804, "and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth."

Liberal democracy--the form of government in which a majority can elect leaders but not constrain human rights--has survived innumerable social experiments to become the choice of more than a third of all humanity and the stated preference of most of the remainder. (Even outright despots feel obliged to pay lip service to its inevitability, if only as a distant prospect to be realized once the populace is "ready.") Yet in the United States--and, increasingly, in parts of Europe as well--the term liberal has come to mean the political Left. This has served only to cloudy the political waters. Those on the Left are free to call themselves anything they like--such as progressive, a term many have been taking up lately--but they ought not to be called liberals. Liberalism is an independent political philosophy, with no inherent connection to either the Left or the Right.

Political dynamics become a lot clearer if we replac(e) the old, one-dimensional, Left/Right political spectrum--a relic of the way delegates happened to be seated in the National Assembly circa 1789--with a two-dimensional diamond:

Such diagrams have the virtue of putting opposing philosophies in opposite positions, rather than trying to squeeze them all into a one-dimensional line. The opposite of conservatism, which cherishes practices that experience has shown to work in the past, is progressivism, which looks to the future. The opposite of liberalism is not conservatism but totalitarianism, the elevation of state power at the expense of human rights.

Fear-monger THIS: Taliban’s 2nd-in-command nabbed in Pakistan

And buried in 6 point type in the middle of the MSNBC.com homepage (gotta flog the Olympics) is this:

Taliban’s 2nd-in-command nabbed in Pakistan
Bin Laden associate is most senior Afghan Taliban leader caught since ’01

Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the No. 2 behind Afghan Taliban founder Mullah Mohammad Omar and a close associate of Osama bin Laden, was captured in a joint CIA-Pakistani operation in the southern Pakistani port city of Karachi

...
His capture represents a significant success for the administration of President Barack Obama, which has vowed to kill or seize Taliban and al-Qaida leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan. It follows the ramping up of CIA missile strikes against militant targets along the border between the two countries that have reportedly killed many midlevel commanders.

"This is a major terrorist who has been at the core of Taliban operations for years. Having him off the battlefield means the near-term disruption of plotting against coalition forces in Afghanistan," a U.S. counterterrorism official told NBC News.

...
The New York Times said it learned of the operation against Baradar last Thursday but delayed reporting it at the request of White House officials who argued that publicizing it would end a valuable intelligence-gathering effort by making Baradar's associates aware of his capture.

Note the last paragraph. The announcement of his arrest was delayed because HE WAS BEING INTERROGATED.

Soft on terror, my ass.

Terror fear-mongering: truth vs. fiction

Excellent article from Daniel Klaidman in Newsweek:

Jostling before the midterms has begun, and so too has the GOP's ritualistic hazing of Democrats on national security. At every turn Republicans are hammering the Obama administration for "capitulating" in the fight against terrorism. But their macho rhetoric actually sends a message of weakness: we can't try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in the same civilian courts that have convicted dozens of other international terrorists because Al Qaeda might attack New York. (When since 9/11 has New York not been a target of Al Qaeda?) Our criminal-justice system can't deal with a failed underwear bomber. The GOP assault may be smart politics, but in the long run it damages U.S. security by undermining our confidence and resiliency in the face of certain attacks to come.

...
Americans are historically a tough lot. But the policies and rhetoric of the Bush-Cheney years, which set the tone for the current GOP attacks, are infantilizing: be very afraid, we're told, and let the government take care of you. The tough-guy bluster has led to a permanent state of anxiety—and a slew of counterproductive policies, from harsh visa restrictions to waterboarding. Our politicians rail about apocalyptic threats while TSA officers pat down toddlers at the airport. The irony is that many potentially lethal terror attacks—from United Flight 93 to Richard Reid to the underwear bomber—have been foiled by regular citizens. The aim of terrorists is to make people feel powerless and afraid. Un-fortunately, not every plot will be foiled. But if that's the standard we and our leaders set for ourselves, we are doomed to perpetuate dumb policies that flow from irrational fears. Just what the terrorists want.

NYT Poll: Bush still blamed for economy

At least this NYT poll shows there's SOME measure of reality operating.

(CNN)

More than a year after President George W. Bush left office, more Americans continue to blame his administration over any other entity for the nation's economic woes, according to a new poll.

In a New York Times/CBS News survey out Friday, 31 percent of Americans said the Bush administration is at fault for the current state of the economy while only 7 percent pointed their finger at President Obama and his team.

An additional 23 percent said the fault lies with Wall Street institutions while 13 percent assign the blame to Congress. Nearly 10 percent said the blame lies with all of them.

They don't even know what they stand for

via Cesca

John Boehner several days ago:

"If the President intends to present any kind of legislative proposal at this discussion, will he make it available to members of Congress and the American people at least 72 hours beforehand?"

As Benen notes, in response, the White House agreed to release the healthcare plan online 72 hours before the summit. Which, of course, Boehner bitched about, suggesting that no proposal be presented. Just a blank sheet of paper.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are vigorously opposing policies they used to endorse.

From a deficit commission to PAYGO, cap-and-trade to a financial industry bailout, civilian trials for terrorist suspects to stimulus aid for their districts, it's become routine for Republicans to embrace and reject the same proposals, almost at the same time.

And, even though they voted against the stimulus and are currently campaigning against it, they're petitioning various governmental departments to hand over stimulus money to their districts:

More than a dozen Republican lawmakers supported stimulus-funding requests submitted to the Department of Labor, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Forest Service, in letters obtained by The Wall Street Journal through the Freedom of Information Act.

What the hell is this? What do they stand for? Last night, Rachel Maddow described the Republicans as not caring about policy. That's putting it nicely. They're a party that only stands for the opposite of what the Democrats stand for. No wonder Republican voters are so insane right now.