The New York Obama-Times suddenly argues that withdrawing from a conflict (that isn’t really one, per Ogabelini, since our drone strikes don’t equate to “hostilities” or some such liberal horse manure) is detrimental to our nation’s credibility. No, we’re not shitting you:

One measure, sponsored by Representative Thomas Rooney and apparently backed by the House leadership, would allow financing only for American surveillance, search-and-rescue missions, planning and aerial refueling. Republicans say that if it passes, the Pentagon would have to halt drone strikes and attacks on Libyan air defenses.

They claimed it would do minimal damage to the alliance and its campaign because the United States would still be providing some support. But the damage to this country’s credibility, and its leadership of NATO, would be enormous. Any sign that the United States is bailing out could lead others to follow.

Gee… We wonder why on earth the editorial board at the New York Premature Surrender Times needed 8 years of caterwauling about “needless wars” before they came to this realization.

No, we don’t. All it took was for their Anointed Lightworker to ascend to the throne instead of that evil, horrid Bush. Then suddenly the New York Pravda was perfectly OK with any act of war of ours, no matter how flimsy and inconsistent the justification, and to question the Administration is just downright… UNPATRIOTIC!

Apparently it’s OK to question somebody’s patriotism after all, according to the New York Double Standard, as long as that somebody has the “wrong” political opinions.

They then went on to babble about “national security”, but decided that the hypocrisy and sheer lunacy of claiming that our national security is the slightest at risk here was too much, even for Pravda on the Hudson, so they scrubbed that out of the online version, but the original read like this:

We also believe Congress has an important role to play in this debate. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee plans to vote on the Kerry-McCain measure next week. The majority leader, Harry Reid, has said he has the votes in the Senate. Thankfully, some Senate Republicans also seem to understand the importance of the United States following through on its national security commitments.

Our much vaunted “national security commitments” to keep thugs from shooting their own civilians. Unless said thugs are named Ahmadinnerjacket or Assad, of course. We’ll just “bear witness” to those slaughters.


UPDATE: The Hildebeest is now questioning the patriotism of those who disagree with Ogabelini too:

But the bottom line is, whose side are you on? Are you on Qadhafi’s side or are you on the side of the aspirations of the Libyan people and the international coalition that has been created to support them? For the Obama Administration, the answer to that question is very easy.

Fortunately, we already have the perfect retort for that one:

I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you’re not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration.

Nicely put, Hildebeest.

It’s fun watching liberal fascist idiots arguing with themselves. Schizophrenia, it’s what’s for breakfast!

(H/t Hot Air).

0 0 votes
Article Rating

By Emperor Misha I

Ruler of all I survey -- and then some.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments