In making what is probably the best speech of his presidency, Obama lavished praise on McChrystal, restated the mission and made a compelling case for why we're in Afghanistan, and picked the best man for the job in naming General Petraeus as McChrystal's replacement.
I’ve just told my national security team that now is the time for all of us to come together. Doing so is not an option, but an obligation. I welcome debate among my team, but I won’t tolerate division. All of us have personal interests; all of us have opinions. Our politics often fuels conflict, but we have to renew our sense of common purpose and meet our responsibilities to one another, and to our troops who are in harm’s way, and to our country.
We need to remember what this is all about. Our nation is at war. We face a very tough fight in Afghanistan. But Americans don’t flinch in the face of difficult truths or difficult tasks. We persist and we persevere. We will not tolerate a safe haven for terrorists who want to destroy Afghan security from within, and launch attacks against innocent men, women, and children in our country and around the world.
So make no mistake: We have a clear goal. We are going to break the Taliban’s momentum. We are going to build Afghan capacity. We are going to relentlessly apply pressure on al Qaeda and its leadership, strengthening the ability of both Afghanistan and Pakistan to do the same.
That’s the strategy that we agreed to last fall; that is the policy that we are carrying out, in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
“We have just witnessed a historically significant moment in the Obama presidency,” said Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.). “It’s a decisive show of leadership.”
And his replacement, Gen. David Petraeus, is virtually guaranteed a quick and easy Senate confirmation to take over the Afghan war. As Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), put it, Petraeus’s confirmation “may be the fastest in the history of the Armed Services Committee.” House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), added: “I believe he is the right person to take over this command.”
What Olbermann fails to mention is that the 11 pm rerun of the O'Reilly Factor had 1.1 million viewers, compared to 800,000 for Olbermann's 8 PM Countdown. As to Olbermann's Lady Gaga quip, evidently Olbermann is just jealous after getting shot down by has been porn stars.
In her June 16 news release, Halvorson said that, although communities around the Gulf of Mexico have come together to begin cleaning up the massive disaster, Washington Republicans are “plotting to hand you the bill and let BP off the hook.”
“Join me in standing up to Washington insiders who want to let their friends in big oil get off without paying the price,” she noted in asking in the release for campaign contributions.
“Donate $5, $10, or even $25 to help me keep the pressure on BP to finish the cleanup and put our fellow Americans back on their feet.”
She's taken the familiar and misguided liberal strategy of "rather than fixing the problem, lets throw money at it" to a new level. Not content simply telling us where to throw the cash, she's telling us to give the money to her, so she can throw it. Correction, misguided and arrogant. If you're really interested in helping, instead of giving your money to Halvorson to light on fire, try one of these guys first: Nature Conservancy, the National Wildlife Federation, or the United Way.
Being too lazy to serve her district is one thing, but using the largest environmental disaster our country has ever seen to shamelessly raise campaign funds is another thing entirely. Whether it stems from desperation, ignorance, or plain greed, she should apologize to residents of the 11th district and gulf coast inhabitants affected by the disaster for her callous plea for your hard earned cash.
Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and Howard Fineman react to President Obama's Oval Office Address on the oil spill. Here are the highlights of what the trio said:
Olbermann: "It was a great speech if you were on another planet for the last 57 days."
Matthews compared Obama to Carter.
Olbermann: "Nothing specific at all was said."
Matthews: "No direction."
Howard Fineman: "He wasn't specific enough."
Olbermann: "I don't think he aimed low, I don't think he aimed at all. It's startling."
Howard Fineman: Obama should be acting like a "commander-in-chief."
Matthews: Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] Chu has a Nobel prize. "I'll barf if he does it one more time."
Matthews: "A lot of meritocracy, a lot of blue ribbon talk."
"I was down there a month ago, before most of these talking heads were even paying attention to the Gulf. A month ago I was meeting with fishermen down there, standing in the rain talking about what a potential crisis this could be. And I don't sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar, we talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick."
Everyone from Frank Rich to Spike Lee has been calling on Obama to show some emotion and "go off" and get angry over the oil spill. And he responds with this vulgarity. First we had Rahm Emanuel's "f---ing retards" gem then Joe Biden's F-bomb slip, and now Obama's looking to find out "who's ass to kick", something that seems strangely difficult to do while reading a teleprompter. Evidently liberal parents don't get tired of having their children learn vulgar words from their highest officials. Kind of makes you long for a good old fashioned Bill Clinton joke. Which bring's me to the story below...
The president finally went down to take a look at the oil disaster last week –- which is weird because I didn't even know there were golf courses near the Gulf. To show his concern, Obama is thinking about returning some of the nearly $1 million the oil industry donated to his campaign.
Ha, ha -- just kidding. He's not returning any oil money. But the situation has gotten so urgent that Obama did take time off from his golf game to praise the Phoenix Suns for protesting Arizona’s new immigration law.
He really did endorse the Phoenix Suns, which -- like most of his endorsements -- has resulted in their being eliminated by the Los Angeles Lakers over the weekend. (Did I dream this, or was it just yesterday that President Obama was congratulating Al and Tipper Gore on their long and happy marriage?)
On a press call hosted by a pro-Israel organization, Rep. Brad Sherman, Democrat of California, told reporters that he intends to seek the prosecution of any U.S. citizens who were aboard or involved with the Freedom Flotilla.
“The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 makes it absolutely illegal for any American to give food, money, school supplies, paper clips, concrete or weapons to Hamas or any of its officials,” Sherman said on the Israel Project call. “And so I will be asking the Attorney General to prosecute any American involved in what was clearly an effort to give items of value to a terrorist organization.”
Sherman also said that he plans on working with the Department of Homeland Security to make sure that any non-U.S. citizen involved with or aboard the Flotilla are excluded from entering the U.S ….
The Congressman, known as a pro-Israel stalwart who has, in the past, joined as the sole Democrat on Republican criticisms of Obama’s foreign policy toward Israel, denied that there was a “hunger crisis” or “humanitarian crisis” in the Gaza Strip. “The health circumstances in Gaza are better than they are in many American cities,” he added later.
Questions about the legality of the Israeli blockade and its enforcement in international waters were quickly dismissed by Sherman, who said that the U.S. had itself blockaded Germany in both World Wars, Japan in the Second, and Cuba during the missile crisis.
The beauty of the almost unanimous international condemnation of Israel for attempting to stop the terrorist flotilla like gentlemen -- using paint guns? -- instead of using serious military force, should send a message to Jews: You can't win by being polite to terrorists who have a schoolyard bully mentality. Weakness brings out even more outrageous behavior in bullies.
Next flotilla that violently resists a search -- just sink it. Torpedo it. See how many more flotillas follow. The condemnation won't be any different. Better that than even one more Jew being injured while boarding these floating Jenins.
“I think Israel has an absolute right to deal with its security interest,” he told Charlie Rose on his interview show. “I mean, again, look, you can argue whether Israel should have dropped people onto that ship or not and the — but the truth of the matter is, Israel has a right to know — they're at war with Hamas — has a right to know whether or not arms are being smuggled in.”
“So what's the big deal here? What's the big deal of insisting [aid] go straight to Gaza?” Biden asked.
AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobbying group, rushed out a statement enthusiastically endorsing his position. “He’s clearly a friend of Israel and what he did was a very courageous thing to do in the face of worldwide criticism,” said Jack Rosen, a Biden friend who chairs the American Council for World Jewry.
In a week that included Obama's there is no drilling, yes there is, no there's not confusion and Hillary getting the Queen's birthday wrong, the grown up in the room of the Obama regime would appear to be Joe Biden, at least until he reccommends dividing Arizona into three parts.
A Cairo court on Saturday upheld a ruling to strip Egyptian men married to Israeli women of their citizenship in a case that has highlighted national sentiment towards Israel.
Judge Mohammed al-Husseini, sitting on the Supreme Administrative Court, said the interior ministry must ask the cabinet to take the necessary steps to strip Egyptian men married to Israeli women, and their children, of their citizenship.
The court said that each case should be considered separately, in a ruling that cannot be appealed.
The ruling reflects Egyptian sentiment towards Israel, more than 30 years after Egypt signed an unpopular peace deal with the Jewish state.
So, six Muslim nations attacked Israel and informed all Israeli Muslims to leave beforehand. They fled to Jordan. Israel wins in six days. The Jordanian King started killing the refugee Muslims due to his anger over losing. Tens of thousands were murdered before they could flee back to Israel. Now, they are stuck in the West Bank due to their own traitorous actions. Remind me again why I should feel sorry for them?
Well not the Rachel Corrie, aka St. Pancake. She's still dead. This is just an Irish ship named after the terrorist sympthizer who got in a head butting contest with an IDF D9R Armored Bulldozer.
Three Navy ships were tailing the boat Rachel Corrie a few dozen kilometers from the blockaded Gaza Strip Saturday morning and were calling on it to divert to Ashdod, the military and activists on board the boat said. There were no reports of violence.
Earlier reports had suggested that the Rachel Corrie had been boarded, but the army and the boat’s passenger’s later said this was not true.
The ship was trying to breach the three-year-old blockade to deliver a load of aid to the coastal territory.
"There were two warships in the back of them ... and a smaller boat was approaching," said activist Greta Berlin of the Free Gaza movement, which sent the ship. She was speaking from the movement's headquarters in Cyprus and was citing a passenger on board.
By about 7 a.m., troops still had not boarded the Rachel Corrie, when it was 40 kilometers from Gaza, said Free Gaza's lawyer, Audrey Bomse. Shortly after, the Free Gaza office in Cyprus lost contact with the ship, Berlin said.
All of this interest in the Free Gaza movement has sparked a renewed curiosity in Rachel Corrie and her life. A new biography Rage 0, Machine 1; The Rachel Corrie Story, is shooting up the Amazon charts as we speak.
How about an alternate headline? Oh, maybe something like "Local idiot who joined global jihadists with links to al Qaeda terrorist network in ill-advised attempt to run Israeli blockade in bogus "humanitarian" mission while smuggling contraband and attacking Israeli commandos, is lucky as hell not to be dead or in jail for the rest of her life." That seems a little more accurate.
Sarah Silverman has lashed out against Fox News — and the network has responded.
The comedienne, whose Comedy Central show was recently canceled, says the network propagates racism in her book, "The Bedwetter: Stories of Courage, Redemption, and Pee."
"The entire Fox News Channel is a 24-hour-a-day racism engine, but it's all coded, all implied," she wrote (via NewsBusters). "Lou Dobbs used to scream on CNN about 'immigration,' not 'filthy Mexicans.'"
Silverman didn't just target Fox News — she said the entire right wing is marked by a subtle form of racism.
"Right-wing Americans who appear in mainstream media are not out there calling black people 'n*ggers,' or saying, 'The Klan has good ideas,'" she wrote. "Instead, they're questioning the legitimacy of Obama's presidency by accusing him of being born in Africa or of being a Muslim. Or they're having tea parties and calling Obama a 'communist' and a 'Nazi.'"
Fox News' response?
"Sarah's anger is understandable having recently lost her television show," a Fox News spokesperson said in response. "We sympathize with her need for attention considering her book is languishing near 300 on Amazon.com."
Remember the last has-been to pick a fight with Fox News, LL Cool J? I just feel sorry for her downstairs neighbors in case her recent difficulties trigger a relapse of her nocturnal misadventures.
Red Bull Formula One Drivers Sebastian Vettel and Mark Webber, in happier times.
By now we've all seen the lap 41 incident. And were it just two rival drivers colliding, we wouldn't be half as interested. But it involved teammates. And not just teammates (I mean would anyone really care if Jarno Trulli and Heikki Kovaleinen put each other in the fence?) but teammates who just happen to be leading both the Driver's and Constructor's championships.
On lap 48 of the Turkish Grand Prix, Red Bull teammates Mark Webber and Sebastian Vettel are running first and second respectively. As they approach turn 12, (see above circuit layout) a sharp left hand turn, Webber, who's in the lead, holds a line center left, and in fact goes even further left as Vettel passes. Vettel, from second place, pulls out from behind Webber and jinks right before overtaking him on the left. As Vettel completes his pass from the extreme left of the circuit his right rear wheel makes contact with Webber's left front wheel, causing Vettel to spin and retire with a punctured right rear tire, and causing Webber to overshoot the corner. He would rejoin and finish in third place. Now, there's all types of speculation regarding strategical details of the incident regarding fuel loads, engine settings, team orders, etc. However, we're concerned with the crime scene, not what happened in the pits. First, the video. The incident is seen from two viewpoints: first a wide angle shot of both cars, then on board with Sebastian Vettel.
What do you see from the above video? After watching it, whom would you say is at fault? Popular opinion has placed the blame on Sebastian Vettel, (not just because he's German and aggressive) with most journalists and fans basing their opinion on the video evidence of Webber holding his line and Vettel turning right and making contact when he is only about 80% past Webber. A popular SpeedChannel commentator even said that Webber protected the racing line and that Vettel should have known what to expect when passing an aggressive driver like Mark Webber, evidently attempting some type of blame the victim defense.
Mark Webber is wrong. And here's why. Mark Webber apologists maintain that Webber held the racing line and Vettel turned into him. That's not correct. Mark Webber held his line, not the racing line. The "racing line" (An imaginary line around a circuit that has been proven to be the most efficient and quickest route around the circuit) for the entry to the approaching sharp left hander is to the far right. As an example (and to show off my excellent MS Paint skills) look at the picture below. Click to enlarge.
The picture on the right is taken from Mark Webber's qualifying lap. The picture on the left is from lap 41, at the moment Vettel and Webber made contact. Notice where Webber's car is on the right picture. As a reference I've circled the 150 meter board. In the right picture, taken from his qualifying lap, you can see that Webber is to the right side of the track, on the racing line, setting up his car for the correct entry to turn 12. That's the racing line. Now look at the left picture, and the video if necessary, and see where Webber's car is on the track when Vettel made contact. Definitely not on the racing line, as so many Webber supporters have claimed.
Therein lies the crucial difference. Mark Webber did not maintain the racing line. Actually what Webber did is very carefully and intentionally hold his steering wheel straight and he admitted as much after the race, as though this somehow made everything OK. Holding the steering wheel straight ahead at that moment is definitely not the same thing as holding the racing line. Now who had a right to the racing line? I would argue that Vettel was clearly ahead at the point of contact. He wasn't past Webber, otherwise there would have been no contact, but he was definitely ahead, and if on approach to the corner had Webber turned into him, there would be no debate as to who was at fault. So the corner clearly belongs to Vettel, but contact was made before reaching the turn-in point, so we're left with who had a right to the racing line. Webber has said repeatedly in post race interviews, that the contact happened, "well before the braking zone" and I think he's right, I seem to remember him braking somewhere shortly after the 100 meter board. By virtue of the fact that Vettel had not passed him completely, the racing line, the far right portion of the track, belongs to Webber. The best that Vettel can hope for, without having passed Webber completely before the corner, is an out braking attempt off line before turn-in. Vettel did what racing drivers in any formula do every day, expect that the driver they are overtaking will, at the very least, make an attempt to return to the racing line before the corner entry. The fact that Webber made no attempt to return to racing line indicates that he was happy forcing the issue which, at best, would result in both drivers either missing the corner or slowing so greatly that the pursuing McLarens would have gone past.
If Webber had been on the racing line on the approach to the corner, and Vettel, being mostly past, had attempted to push over into Webber, then it would be a grey zone, two into one, "racing incident" type scenario, with probably 75% of the blame going to Vettel. In this case though, Mark Webber saw that he had no chance to defend the position and stubbornly held his wheel straight, well off the racing line, and Vettel and Red Bull paid the price.
