Sources: Raiders knew mission a one-shot deal

Navy Times  "Those who planned the secret mission to get Osama bin Laden in Pakistan knew it was a one-shot deal, and it nearly went terribly wrong.
"The U.S. deliberately hid the operation from Pakistan, and predicted that national outrage over the breach of Pakistani sovereignty would make it impossible to try again if the raid on bin Laden’s suspected redoubt came up dry.

"Once the raiders reached their target, things started to go awry almost immediately, officials briefed on the operation said."  Kimberly Dozier - The Associated Press

Hat tip to Clark Best, Tillamook County, Oregon. Mr. Best, a former Navy man, also added the comment below:

"Read the article written by the Associated Press. It is slightly biased to the left. For one thing, note the term "raiders" used to describe SEAL COMMANDOS instead of the proper description -- "commandos!!" Raiders has a negative, connotation to it, implying that we INVADED on a whim, like pirates, Pakistan just because we wanted to or could. And I do NOT believe that Obama did not ask WHO actually shot the bastard when he met with SEAL Team SIX!! Just more BS from the AP -- as usual."

Here's one to go with our two-for-one special:

America Needs Better Villains than Porn-Addicted Jihadists  "Our previous enemies could have destroyed our country, but our current ones mean we have a longer wait to get to our terminals at the airport."

Frank J. Fleming writes political humor at IMAO.us and always makes sure his byline is handled according to Islamic traditions.

I realize Islamists are dead serious, but don't you get a perverse (pardon my choice of words) pleasure out of being able to laugh at them a bit? Who was it that said, "Lord, help me make my enemies look ridiculous"?

Tell Me What They’re Reading and I’ll Tell You Who Will Win

Barry Rubin  "There’s an interesting point about pre-World War One Europe that applies very well to today’s international situation as well. In The Guns of August, Barbara Tuchman pointed out the difference between what the British and Germans were reading on the eve of the war.
"In 1909, Norman Angell, a British member of parliament, wrote a pamphlet, “The Great Illusion,” that became a best-seller. It argued that since war had become so terrible and governments were rational and would understand this, another major international war was impossible.
"But in Germany they were reading Friedrich von Bernhardi’s Germany and the Next War, where he argues that “war is a biological necessity” based on the law of nature, the struggle for existence.
"Germany was preparing for war; Britain was pacifist. The same process repeated itself before World War Two. And the same process was again repeated in the brief time before the end of World War Two and the Cold War."

toonpool

Newt Gingrich

Haley Rips Gingrich Over Budget Comments  "Said Haley: "What he said was absolutely unfortunate. Here you've got Representative Ryan trying to bring common sense to this world of insanity, and Newt absolutely cut him off at the knees. When you have a conservative fighting for real change, the last thing we need is a presidential candidate cutting him off at the knees." "


http://www.life.com/image/82193487



Newt’s Done! So, Apparently, Is The GOP!  "So, we can look for the GOP to really go after the US Senate in an attempt to box-in Obama after 2012. However, Obama will rule by executive order right up ‘til we have a constitutional crisis. I mean, the country has to reign in a president’s ability to rule by fiat, through executive orders, by-passing the Congress, which is purportedly, the people’s voice. There can be no doubt Obama is abusing that privilege and it must be stopped."  Freedom Fighter's Journal

Ground to Dust in 24 Hours  "The criticism from so many different quarters suggests the degree to which Representative Paul Ryan, in only a matter of months, has shifted the political and philosophical debate within conservatism. Although he himself is quite a large figure in the history of the modern GOP, Gingrich thought it would be a good idea to launch a withering attack on the Ryan plan—and for his pains he found himself ground to dust in fewer than 24 hours. Other Republican presidential candidates must have taken notice."

Videos:

Charles Krauthammer: Newt Gingrich Is "Done"

Hume Slams Gingrich's Hypocrisy: "Provocative Thinker" But "Promiscuous Talker"

Thank you, Newt! Newt's Political Suicide, Paul Ryan's Rise  "By showing his hand and his face in attempting to discredit Paul Ryan, he discredited himself." Atlas Shrugs



Newt responds, says conservatives are taking him out of context; Update: Newt’s statement  "Gingrich says that conservatives have taken his remarks out of context, although he admits that the “social engineering” may have been a little too strong. He tells Gallagher that his response was to David Gregory’s question about whether Republicans should force a Medicare reform over public opposition, saying it would be the same “social engineering” mistake Democrats made with ObamaCare:" Video included.



Newt Gingrich Tells PJTV Paul Ryan’s Path to Prosperity Is ‘A Very Bold Budget’  "On Sunday, Newt attacked Paul Ryan’s Path to Prosperity as “too big a jump.” He also said, “I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering.”

"But in Iowa, at the Conservative Principles Conference in March, Newt was praising the plan. He told PJTV’s Tony Katz that the Ryan plan offered “a very bold budget that includes entitlement reforms, it includes very significant cuts in government spending.”"



Gingrich to House GOP: Drop Dead  "Yet now he is trashing Mr. Ryan for thinking far more deeply about health care, and in a far more principled fashion, than Mr. Gingrich ever has. The episode reveals the Georgian's weakness as a candidate, and especially as a potential President—to wit, his odd combination of partisan, divisive rhetoric and poll-driven policy timidity."

 Some Other Gingrich Flip-Flops: Libya, Dede Scozzafava, and Cap and Trade  "But in 2007 Gingrich favored "mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system." In 2008, he even produced a video with Nancy Pelosi on the urgent need to stop global warming: (Video)

"The good news for Gingrich is that almost the entire 2012 field has flip-flopped on cap and trade. The bad news is that he can't say the same about his flip-flops on Medicare reform, Dede Scozzafava, and the Libyan war."

Gas Prices Are High Because the Liberals Want It that Way

The left is aided and abetted by
cartoons reflecting this kind
 of thought.

Gary Wickert    "A president who truly wants lower gas prices can increase the supply of oil by opening up more areas offshore and in ANWR for domestic drilling and easing regulations. We have plenty of domestic resources to drill, and plenty of companies willing to drill for it if the left and their misguided environmental, big-government and anti-capitalist policies would just get out of the way. Increased domestic production would stimulate U.S. job growth and provide a tremendous boost to our economy. It would lower gas prices, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and shield us from the effects of instability in the Middle East and price fixing by OPEC.

"But these things aren’t going to happen if the president wants just the opposite. The result of our president’s policies has been decreasing oil production, increasing gas prices, and a mass exodus of oil companies sending operations and rigs overseas to “greener” pastures."
Gary Wickert is a board-certified trial lawyer, living in Cedarburg, Wisconsin with his wife and two sons. He has a political column in Reality News and has been an op-ed contributor for Ozaukee County's News Graphic as well as a feature writer for several Wisconsin magazines. He is also the author of several legal treatises on a variety of subjects and currently serves as supervisor in the town of Cedarburg. In 1980, Gary finished second to Mr. T in NBC's nationally-televised "America's Toughest Bouncer" hosted by Bryant Gumbel.

Are Oil Companies Greedy?  Or are consumers and politicians greedy to expect oil companies to take huge risks drilling for oil in hostile environments without compensation?

"The oil companies took far more risk than you and I took in buying MSFT and other stocks in the 1990's. Intel used Billions of its capital to build IC manufacturing plants in the US and countries friendly to the US. Exxon and other oil companies had to drill many dry holes in places where hurricanes destroy drilling platforms and oil rigs. They also have to go to places like the Middle East where terrorists want to blow them up. Don't you think they deserve a fair return on their investment? The reason the oil they discovered is so valuable now is because of the risks of getting more of it from the Middle East are high. Roughly one third of the price of oil is due to fear over Iran getting nuclear energy plus speculators and supply/demand issues related to not having enough refinery capacity."

U.S. Government Shuts Out Increased Alaskan Oil Production  "At the same time that Shell was denied a drilling permit by the U.S. Government, Russia is making deals with oil companies to drill for oil off its coast in the Arctic Ocean." Canada Free Press

Neal Boortz: The Bottom Line About Oil Company Tax Breaks  "By and large, these are the exact same tax breaks under the same laws that every other corporation or business in America gets.  Politicians realize there is no political gain to be realized by threatening the tax breaks of Big Shoes or Big Lumber.  So Big Oil is the target."   That's it; this is the entire article. What more need be said?  

Well, maybe this: 'Taking Money Back'  "OK … (this gets so old) … nobody is giving any money back to the oil companies. These tax “breaks,” if you will, only allow the oil companies to keep money that they have earned. This is a favorite tactic of the progs – this “give back” wording. This language supports the prog philosophy that all wealth essentially belongs to the government … money that is allowed to remain with the person or the business that actually earned it is referred to as a “tax expenditure” and liberals rant and rave about how the government really needs to get that money back. Get that money back, of course, so that it can fund more liberal dependency-generating programs."   Neal Boortz

Just wanted to be sure you saw these last words.

After bin Laden: Top Five Agenda Items for Obama’s Middle East Speech

Heritage  "...2. Put the U.S.–Israeli alliance first.
"The popular uprisings have demonstrated that the Israeli–Arab conflict is not the source of all problems in the Middle East. Thus, the White House was wrong from the start to make peace negotiations the foundation of its regional policy. The U.S. can help the two sides reach a peace settlement, but Arabs and Israelis must negotiate directly with each other. They cannot wait for Washington to do all the heavy diplomatic lifting or impose a settlement. Furthermore, at present the Palestinians are hardly the best partner for peace—they have partnered with Hamas, a terrorist group that denies the right of the Israeli nation to exist and mourns the demise of Osama bin Laden. The U.S. should be reaffirming that its first commitment and concern is strengthening its alliance with the region’s strongest democracy and the country that shares common cause with the United States."  Cartoon from MidEastTruth



http://terrellaftermath.com/



The Most (Un)Wanted Judges



Legal Schnauzer



 Pajamas Media  "President Obama’s nominees believe that once they are sitting in their lifetime-tenured positions on the federal bench, they can create, invent, originate, construct, and initiate whatever “laws” they believe are necessary to change America culturally, politically, and economically into the liberal utopia they believe it should be — even if the rest of us have to be dragged kicking and screaming into their ideal world. They represent a great danger to our liberty, our freedom, our way of life, and the rule of law."

Hans A. von Spakovsky is a Senior Legal Fellow, and Deborah O’Malley is a Visiting Research Associate, in the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.





Just a few decisions from the liberal judiciary hall of fame:

Leftist Judge Rules ObamaGov can force US Citizens to buy its products

Far left Activist Judge rules against Wisconsin Union law

One Leftist Judge Slaps Down Seven Million Voters in California

Leftist Judges Declare Soledad Cross ‘Unconstitutional’