Featured Post

Castro and the Nazis: Makes Perfect Sense

As we come up on the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, we see newly declassified German intelligence documents reporting that Fi...

Thursday, October 31, 2013

Obama and The Hate That Dares Not Speak Its Name

Well, folks, we paid for it for so we might as well enjoy the show, The Greatest Show on Earth, that is.

I write, of course, about the great gnashing of teeth, the rending of garments, the bleat of shorn sheep fearing a visit to the slaughter house comes next; yes, I refer to the outcry of well-paid media liberals progressives--cash for clunkers--from whose eyes the scales apparently have fallen to reveal that the Great One, The Healer of the Earth, has feet of clay.

Ah, where is today's Goya to depict the gory glory of the Progressive Saturn eating his own children?




Or is it, in this case, the children eating Saturn? One or the other, still a great show.

First in the buffet line we see progressive commentator extraordinaire Richard Cohen of the Washington Post. He writes that in the case of Obama we have a "Question of Competence." He praises candidate Obama but then notes that (emphasis added),
this same man has lately so mishandled both domestic and foreign policy that he is in mortal peril of altering his image. This unsettling and uncharacteristic incompetence became shockingly clear when Obama failed to come to grips with the Syrian civil war. I did not agree with the president's do-nothing policy, but at least it was both a policy and intellectually coherent. What followed, though, was both intellectually incoherent and pathetically inconsistent -- a "red line" that came out of nowhere and then mysteriously evaporated, and a missile strike that was threatened and then abandoned. It was a policy so wavering that if Obama were driving, he would be forced to take a breathalyzer. 
The debacle of the Affordable Care Act's website raised similar questions about confidence. This was supposed to be Obama's Big Deal. The president has other accomplishments -- navigating out of the Great Recession was no minor feat -- but restoring the status quo does not get your face on Mount Rushmore. It takes achievement, a program -- something new and wonderful. The Affordable Care Act was supposed to be it. 
Something went wrong. People could not sign up. Why? Not sure. Who's at fault? Apparently no one. <...>
History will someday provide perspective and say, possibly, that Syria and Obamacare did not matter. I doubt it. At the least, they help validate the once-frivolous Republican charges of incompetence. A competent president would beware. As Casey Stengel might note, strike three is coming up.
Here, my friends, we see Poor Richard as the effects of the gallons of tainted Kool-Aid he has ingested begin to wear off. Note, however, that the toxins have not completely left his system, to wit, his silly comment about "once frivolous Republican charges of incompetence," but gradually the hypnotic drugs wear off. Reality is such a downer.

Next, over at the vegan station, we see CNN's Anderson Cooper, the oh-so-precious progressive darling, berating the administration for dishonesty on Obamacare (here, here, and here.) So now, now, we are getting some "investigative" reporting from CNN? Really? Now AC is letting the American people in on the great "secret" he has uncovered, i.e., Obamacare is built on lies. Maybe, just maybe, this would have been a good thing to have "discovered" about a year ago? Wasn't hard, but, anyhow, welcome to the club, better late than never.

At the salad bar, we find FOX News' favorite liberal commentator, Kirsten Powers, who spent a couple of years promoting the glories of Obamacare, but now reaches the reluctant conclusion that,
“The problem is, that the promises, that the basic fundamental promise that the president made has not been borne out for people,” Powers said on Fox News’s “America’s Newsroom.” 
“It’s true there are a lot of people who won’t see insurance change, I guess if you work for a corporation or something, but for people, if you’re in the individual market, I don’t know a single person who hasn’t seen their insurance go up by double,” she added.
A bit later, Powers shows that she has begun to understand some economic numbers, unlike the typical progressive (my bolding),
“If the president had said, ‘If you like your plan can keep it for double the price,’ I don’t think that people probably would have been as supportive. So I think that his primary problem is that he made a promise that he is not following through on.”
Ya think? Really? Hey, Ms. Powers, congrats on acquiring such deep wisdom. "People probably" would not have supported a doubling of their insurance premiums . . . thank goodness for a university education.

Then, ripping into the prime rib, we have everybody's favorite deranged commentator, Chris "Obama sends a tingle up my leg" Matthews of MSNBC. Mr. Mathews, the most fanatical of fanatical Obamistas, shone with eagerness to tear apart anybody who expressed even a mild doubt about the Obama misadministration's ludicrous story on the Benghazi disaster. He helped that misadministration put out the absurd "It's YouTube's fault" line, and blasted Republicans who dared question it. That was then, this is now. It seems that now, well, he has "questions,"
Where was the U.S. Cavalry, to use an American image. Where were the people that could’ve come or tried to get there within how many hours it took to save the lives of the people still living? Where were they and why weren’t they called to do it? I’m going to ask that question until I get an answer.” <...>
"[T]he questions I have about this are what was the State Department’s role in real-time, not beforehand, but at the time of the attack in defending the lives of their people, especially the U.S. ambassador, who was a friend, a friend of the Secretary of State’s, Hillary Clinton? What was their actions, what was the tick-tock? What did they do when they got the warning of the attack?”
As a former FSO it is just too difficult for me even to extend a very belated welcome to Mathews as he ostensibly tries to clamber aboard the USS Full-of-Doubts. He was so repellent, so disgusting, such an enabler of the Obama/Clinton/Rice mendacity on the Benghazi murders that I can't even write about it.

So what's happening? Is there some genuine "getting of wisdom" among the Obamabots in the media? Are they the proverbial liberal progressives who have been mugged by reality? Maybe.

They might also just be snake oil salesmen who want to make sure they get no blame for the horrendous side-effects of the magical potions they sold to the low-info Boobi who comprise the mainstay of Obama's support: instant rewrite of history. Maybe, maybe, maybe, but I don't think so. They, after all, know that they can't be thrown under the Obama bus because the wheels already have come off it: not enough ground clearance under there for all of them.

I think the real explanation for their turning on Obama is that they want him to fail because they're racists.

That's it.


56 comments:

  1. "They're racists."

    Priceless.

    You certainly have as much proof of them being racists as they had of us being so... The only difference is they really are.

    ReplyDelete
  2. They know that Obama isn't running again ... and liberalism is. So they can subomnibusinate him, as he has done to so many others.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Was it the Greyhound Terminal at 3:00 for the omnibus race?

      Delete
    2. My theory is the little propaganda weasels are abandoning Die Schwarzen Führer in a mad lemming-like scramble to pretend to be 'journalists' again, so when 16 rolls around and one of those evil republicans is in office, the can go back to the vicious little scumbags they are. Otherwise, they would just be RAT propaganda ministry locked out.

      Delete
    3. a6z, I was making an argument down the thread, and now realize that you said it first. Had to figure out what "subomnibusination" was, before I figured it out. Agree completely. At the end of the day, anyone, truly anyone will get thrown under the bus, if that is what it takes to keep the big strategy moving forward. Karma can be cruel, BO.

      Delete
    4. In the Czech Republic, formerly Bohemia, they do these things better. They defenestrate.

      Delete
    5. "They know that Obama isn't running again ... and liberalism is. So they can subomnibusinate him, as he has done to so many others." Absolutely, hence the big effort on immigration to have the next "core" constituency to hang their hat and policy momentum on.
      But Obama is a different problem for the Dems. SOP for the Libs will be to elevate him to progressive sainthood and be sent off to Hawaii. But with his ego will he stay in heaven?

      Delete
    6. It did take some years before Jimmy Carter started opining again. Funny, because at last someone is worse than he was,

      Delete
  3. Mr. Mathews, the most fanatical of fanatical Obamistas, shone with eagerness to tear apart anybody who so much as expressed even a mild doubt about the Obama misadministration's ludicrous story on the Benghazi disaster. He helped that misadministration put out the absurd "It's YouTube's fault" line, and blasted Republicans who dared question it.

    And Petraeus outdid even Matthews by testifying before a congressional committee that it was the video.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. cut petraeus some slack cuz they had the goods on him and his troubles?
      I can't explain it any other way...

      Delete
    2. Petraeus has a history of blaming Muslim violence on "insults to Islam", and on Israel,, so I think he just did what came naturally to him.

      Delete
    3. Agreed, second Anon. He just did what came naturally.

      Delete
    4. Alas, military genius, like other kinds, does not generalize. No pun intended, for once.

      Delete
  4. They are hysterical because Obamacare may be causing the first major paradigm shift in government in eight decades. It has upset the image of federal government competence that had its roots in the 1930s and became a prevailing view after 1941. The so called greatest generation saw government as the force behind what was for many the defining moment in their lives-WII. Programs such as Social Security meant they were the first generation who had little to no responsibility to care for parents- or to provide stable marriages in order to raise children who could take care of them in their own old age. What is the younger generation's take on government? The young men I lknow certainly do not share this view of an ever benevolent federal government. Many young women see the government as a substitute family but they also wonder why they are so very unhappy. Already struggling to find full time employment and pay off student debt, the government is now trying to coerce the young into buying an overpriced product they don't need The entirely predictable result will be civil disobedience on a massive scale.

    Remember that the left will always sacrifice the individual in favor of the agenda. Thus Obamacare must be failing because of Obama. The alternative explanation that the social welfare start is no longer sustainable is simply unthinkable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon.....good post. "They are hysterical because Obamacare may be causing the first major paradigm shift in government in eight decades". Spot on. Also known as "The Fourth Turning". Massive civil disobedience will come out of necessity.

      Delete
    2. The young (except the well-connected) are necessarily a weaker constituency than the established. So the more that goods are politically distributed, the more the young are exploited. So the young would be wise to be against expanded government.

      However, only a small proportion of people are wise, and necessarily a much smaller proportion of young people. So most have been complicit in their own exploitation.

      I hope you are right that this effect is slowing down, or reversing. But I await more convincing evidence than I have yet seen.

      Delete
  5. As you say Diplomad, it's rather difficult trying to make room for Matthews under the bus especially when you take into consideration the question,

    "Why does one suppose the insurance companies are turning out in great support of Obamacare?"

    From 2010:

    The fact that the health insurance industry supported Obamacare from the very beginning was entirely missed by the mainstream press. This is perhaps understandable, since a) the mainstream press does not understand the dynamics of the healthcare system, and b) during the Obamacare drama, the health insurance companies had been assigned, and had graciously accepted, their vital role as the Forces of Evil. To the famously credulous members of the mainstream press, it was easy to imagine that the insurers were actually among the opposition.

    But the insurance industry supported Obamacare from the start – and even before the start. During the Presidential race of 2008, for instance, managed care companies donated far more money to both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton than to any Republican candidate, even though both of these Democratic candidates publicly castigated the insurance companies for producing most of the problems in American healthcare, and promised to institute reforms that would drastically cramp their style and reduce their profits.


    http://covertrationingblog.com/weird-fact-about-insurance-companies/why-the-health-insurance-industry-supported-obamacare

    This whole thing could've been avoided "Tingles" Matthews - had you looked at all (and taken a it from the X-Files The answer is out there.) This would not have been such a surprise.

    Still - I have to admit a degree of enjoying all this gnashing of teeth.

    Arkie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They were paying protection money.

      Delete
    2. Precisely.

      Ark

      Delete
    3. Not entirely. Obamacare does relieve them of a great deal of competition--notice how much less competition in the insurance market there is already. Among insurers there are big winners as well as big losers; and the prospective big winners had a pretty good idea of who they would be.

      Delete
    4. Well Alpha Six, you do have a point.

      But then that excerpt was from August '10. In my opinion pretty good forecasting.

      And I'm pretty sure the Obums'll be casting about soon as they can manage to get the website up and running, they're gonna be casting about for "somebody" to take a seat in the dumptank so the Dems can "deflect attention" (Good Luck with that).

      Arkie

      Delete
  6. paul_vincent_zecchinoOctober 31, 2013 at 7:36 AM

    The marxstream medianiks, Big Time Wrestling, and Ed Wood films share a trait in common: nothing you see or hear is believable.

    These hi-rent tele-mannequins will gass off whatever leftist tripe is necessary to protect dear leader from the reality that Marxism kills. By the millions.

    Steam Heat Socialists, Lamborghini Leninists, Mercedes Marxists, Birkenstock Bolsheviks, and Trust Fund Trotskyites can be relied upon to say whatever is necessary to promote and defend their utopian 'vision' for the world. Their vision consisting of a Marxist police state with them at the top, lolling around in marxhattan apartments as we step 'n' fetch for them.

    Those few of us, of course, fortunate to survive the Affordable Genocide Act.

    The marxstream media tele-poodles like Anderson et al provide cheape theatre for the gullible, same as do wrestling and the meisterstuck's of great auteur, Maximo Wood. Nothing you see or hear is believable.


    Count on these Leninist lice to craft language which will gradually draw blame away from their sacred calf love idol dear leader and project it onto various and sundry innocents.

    It's a similar principle in electronic warfare, range gate pull-off or gate stealing: mimic public outrage (the legit signals) all the while crafting language which pulls blame from the true target, and shifts it to innocents.

    Nero was pretty good at it. Get caught looting the till? Again? No troubles mate, set the city ablaze and blame those pesky Christians. There, now that oughta do it. Whadda ya say, Cassius, lets you 'n' me go have a bowl of lentils then we'll grab some temple virgins, huh? Huh? Let the city burn....

    I digress. OK, back to woik...

    That's the marxstream media's job: do as marx directed, 'accuse others of what we do' and protect the regime. By all necessary means.

    The Affordable Genocide Act has a few very, very minor - piffling, even - glitches because of Reagan era cutbacks, along with Calvin Coolidge's refusal to yield to his era's anarchists.

    See? Blame-shifting a la marxstream media is easy once you git started! Plus it's fun, too!

    Let's all have some fun!

    Personally, as Saylor Ripley (Nicholas Cage) said in 'Wild At Heart', "I blame society'. See how easy it is?

    Who do you blame?



    "Blame you. Blame me. Blame that fat guy behind the tree."

    But never dear leader and his cabal of badly aging 60s acid-head arrested development Kampus Kommiesars. No no, that won't do. Not at all.

    Let's go bash some them right-wing loonatics, then we can go git us some lentils & girlies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Trust Fund Trotskyites". I do miss the old days. Sort of like there is some unfinished business out there.

      Delete
    2. I hope you never start your own blog. I'd be out of business . . .

      Delete
    3. I hope you do start your own blog, Mr. Zecchino.

      Diplomad, never fear. If you have the stamina to keep writing, your business is only beginning to boom.

      Delete
  7. "Stealing"? from paul_vincent_zecchino

    (Yes Whitewall, I acknowledge your mentioning "we" do this regularly here as a matter of course.)

    But Mr. Zecchino opens it with his fine phrase:

    "The Affordable Genocide Act." (And I expand on it with this 4 pages adding - albeit from another subject Dip posted "unrelated" advising to monitor bureaucracies rather than heads of State) just four pages. Here:

    http://www.alliancedefendingfreedom.org/content/docs/facts/obamacare-and-its-mandates.pdf

    Arkie

    ReplyDelete
  8. These clueless old boomer progressives are suddenly waking up to the fact that their decision to join the spin team in 2008 and 2012 is coming back to haunt them. We will see a great gnashing of teeth at places like WAPO as Bezos sees just how rapidly his new hobby circles the bowl with the other floaters of the State Run Media™ : MSNBC/CNN/PBS/ABC/CBS/NYT/WAPO. And the individual reporters who are most corrupt will be first to turn as the rats leave the burning ships. Tingles is obviously looking for a new job.

    ReplyDelete
  9. My version of Occam's Razor. Pin all the bad stuff on Obama, and his personal incompetence, to clear the way for Hillary in '16.

    Dutch

    ReplyDelete
  10. My version of Occam's Razor. Pin all the bad stuff on Obama, and his personal incompetence, to clear the way for Hillary in '16.

    Dutch

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not bad. O's made a living out of running against "the Man" even though he is "the Man". It's their way of never having responsibility for anything. Their weakness is that's the only way they know how to run.

      Delete
    2. The "pin the stuff on Obama" crowd is the media and some of the Congressmen. Just gently, slightly, so they can be complicit in supporting a "clean slate" for Hillary. O and his own apparachniks are done, finito, and it is obvious now. Time to triangulate and minimize the broader damage to the Dems. Notice how low key Reid and Pelosi have been lately?

      Dutch

      Delete
    3. I can agree with you. But that makes Mathews "Ben Ghazi" outburst a little odd, you'd think the Hillaryites would want that not talked about, unless Mathews is going to noisily find the "acceptable Clinton answer" and thus try to put it to bed early.

      Delete
    4. Probably Matthews "airing it out", but maybe in a way that is trying to push that one onto O too. From O: "I know nothing about anything". From MSM: "It was all him, all of it".

      D

      Delete
    5. Since I've posted before I think Hillary is farting smoke rings (meaning, I see no possibility she can escape the taint of serving this Misadministration, especially now that HillaryCare can be viewed as "Mother to ObamaCare") it's my general belief Hillary is serving the role as "First Distraction."

      Mind - I'm not inviting Dip's readers - all 14 of us, to lay down actual money on a Will she/she Will wager ... for one thing I don't have enough money to cover all the bets that'd be certain to come my way. Rather my thinking on the subject of another "Clinton Run" has to do with Chelsea.

      "WTF Arkie," I hear ya'll shout, "Could you possibly be on about?"

      Chelsea lapped "Mother's Milk" and if ever I could hope for an "Out of the mouths of babes" [not literally mind, tho' old I ain't blind] read what I've bolded. If that ain't a clue to Demo political aspirations, I don't know what is:

      ' ... whenever a reporter has asked whether she plans to run for elected office, she wonders, "Why is that news? I understand why maybe it was news the first time, but not now. And I understand why the CNN correspondent and the BBC correspondent would have asked about it, but not why it would have had kind of a ripple effect -- because it's something to which I've had a consistent answer and something I've had a very consistent feeling about."

      Instead of recycling stale political guesswork, she says, "I wish that there was more interest in the work we're doing ... on the part of the mainstream press -- the work that we're grateful to do and the work that I personally am now grateful to be part of. "

      And if that doesn't attract more journalistic attention, she is willing to confess that "I personally am obsessed with diarrhea."

      Anybody who can make the mainstream news with an obsession like that is (forgive me) bound to run!

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-conason/what-really-makes-chelsea_b_3740812.html

      Ark


      Delete
    6. It is the national shame and disgrace that, after all we have seen of Shrillary Shrew, there isn't a national outcry against her even thinking of holding public office again. This is the woman whose first attempt to spin troubles with the Islamic world was to blame Americans' (and their sojourners) First Amendment rights, for Pete's sake! This is the woman of lies, cries, and alibis who was saved from exposure before Congressional committees only by the incompetence of the Republicans. This is the woman whose "lost" Whitewater records miraculously reappear the minute the Statute of Limitations runs out!

      Shrillary Shrew clearly has shown that neither the POTUS she served not herself are anywhere near fit to answer the phone at 3:30 AM during a national crisis. Yet all indications are that she plans to run, and that her media shills are all dutifully in place.

      Delete
    7. Hillary was busy dodging sniper fire down in the Bosnian territory.

      V

      Delete
    8. Well Kepha,

      http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/poll-hillary-clinton-approval-sinks-99162.html

      Ark

      Delete
    9. Anonymous, forty-six percent of our people still approving of Shrillary Shrew is still a national disgrace. If we had a truly informed and caring population, the number would be absolute zero.

      Delete
  11. The media are showing a little leg, questioning Obama's competence, but not enough to sink him. No, they DO NOT want to sink him. He is their Precious. He is the One. They are THIS CLOSE to single-payer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don’t know whether BeckyC, you had to bother with that first link I posted above. But your observation as to “whither & when Single-Payer” is spot on.

      (The link above is actually from Part II of a post containing four parts, I continue lastly [in the finest tradition of what I now dub, WhiteArking – Whitewall’s previous iteration “We all steal here anyway”] from Part IV):

      Again excerpting from 2010:

      “…It has major implications both to supporters of Obamacare, especially the ones who hope for an eventual single-payer outcome, and to opponents of Obamacare, many of whom hope to repeal it after the 2010 mid-term elections.

      “For the health insurance industry to have supported Obamacare, especially in the manner that it did, leads us to three conclusions.

      “[..] [..] [..] …The insurance industry has taught them that running the American healthcare system, especially under a covert rationing paradigm, is a messy, ugly and painful job, and further, that it is destined to turn out badly … many of the Progressives who are now in a position of leadership, and who are on the brink of achieving at long last a primary goal of the Progressive agenda – government control of healthcare – are aware of this fact.

      “Furthermore, the insurance industry has taught them, if such a lesson was even necessary, just what a great boon it is to have at one’s disposal a ready villain, especially a villain which assumes the form of a business, and in particular a villain which is satisfied to play its assigned villainous role whenever called upon to do so. When things go south with Obamacare, as things will, it will go a lot easier for our Progressive leaders if they still have the insurance industry – even in a greatly diminished form – to blame. Having a foil to absorb the blame will not solve the problem, of course, but it will buy the Progressives more time, during which they can do what Progressives always do, and institute another round of “tough regulations” to hold the villains in closer check.”

      http://covertrationingblog.com/weird-fact-about-insurance-companies/what-it-means-that-the-health-insurance-industry-saved-obamacare

      Arkie

      Delete
  12. With the focus on the here-and-now let’s look a year into the future. That’s when the corporate mandate kicks in after year delay. Watch for companies with medical benefit plans to unload this to the exchanges. That’s when the other 90% of the population gets a chance to use that wonderful website to find their new, improved medical coverage.

    Here’s how it will probably play out: many companies will give their employees a budget to buy their own insurance. That’s when the real sticker shock will hit. And money spent on insurance can’t be spent on other things like clothes, fuel, cars, homes, restaurants, electronic toys and all the things that make the consumer sector the biggest part of the US economy.

    Can you say recession? I thought you could.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am so hoping this whole nightmare is dead and gone by then. Like many of us still lucky enough to have a full-time job, I have insurance through my company one more season. While it is much more expensive, with higher deductibles and lower percent coverage, than at any other time in the 20+ years since I graduated, got a full time job and had benefits through my company, it's still pocket change compared to what I am hearing private insurance is costing through this boondoggle. A whole generation of us took for granted employer-subsidized insurance - and thanks to a bunch of fools voting for Obama, next year if this doesn't somehow get put back right, we all get to spend money on insurance as well as any actual medical costs instead of all the nice things we might have wanted to spend money on.

      Delete
    2. Of course, even with the main Obamacare semi-monopoly shut down, the progressives will insist that the mandates for "improved" coverage remain. And the costs will remain as well. Yep, we'll pay for contraception and maternity coverage for single men and ....

      Delete
    3. Yes indeed. I'm over 60 and just shy of Medicare and my new policy come Jan1 will have maternity benefits in it. I am so gratified. What to do with these benefits. I asked my wife if maybe I could trade her in for a young "trophy wife". I will spare the readers the rest of the conversation.

      Delete
    4. Whitewall, at least you can still type. ;-)

      Delete
    5. Veng, I am thankful for that. I make numerous errors when doing so and it took me a week to learn that White Out would not allow me to correct them. The stuff just runs down the screen.

      Delete
  13. Thoughtful post, excellent commenters, what's not to love?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. I have to say that this blog draws some extraordinarily smart and literate commentators--with a sense of humor.

      Delete
    2. So you've given up referring to "the six people who read this"?

      Delete
    3. I think by now the readership has probably raced all the way up to maybe 13 or so? Humor does help. I have dropped a couple of blogs in favor of this one. Besides, the steal-able material here is endless.

      Delete
  14. That's one thing that nobody seems to be explaining to "the folks" When the times comes to buy your own insurance on the exchanges, THEN they will realize that those dollars being spent on insurance are dollars they already had excessively taxed. When THAT realization hits, it's going to be FUN! I am SOOOO looking forward to watching this trainwreck finally go off the bridge into the cavern.

    LibertyGrace'sGrandma

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder if the dear people are smart enough to do the math in the way you propose, Deadra.

      JosieQ'a Grandpa
      Kepha

      Delete
  15. The canon failed to fire. And now The One's own words, repeated over and over ad nauseam have pierced the veil. But for the moment, I am enjoying the prick in the balloon of young supporters. Socialism is great until it becomes personal.

    Nobody's likin' the Trabant.

    pmc

    ReplyDelete
  16. Diplomad Sir?

    As it happens today is an anniversary - Trick or Treat notwithstanding - but as it happens ("Treat" being the more rather than any Tricks - and I first thought, "Okay, here goes my first comment. I wonder my reception?")

    I thank you Sir.

    This site has proved - though rare in blogdom - one of the rarest of all. One where somebody (generally indisposed to thinking, "Well, we Mil-People have something in common after-all with the Bureaucracy [admitting I didn't think there were any "Out of the Box" thinkers at State] ... well I suppose I should, have a duty to in fact, admit I was wrong.

    I make my admission on this specific day because Diplomad Sir, you had the courage to post - at what I'm guessing was and proved to be more the greater than the lesser loss.

    What I admire most on your site Diplomad is that you don't "out-of-hand" delete comments from people who might deign to disagree - rather you (if not all commenters) spend the time to debate the merits - and mostly what I admire Diplomad Sir is, when an argument has merit, you acknowledge and adjust.

    Two examples - McCain & Graham.

    Well. Younger "Trick or Treaters" are showing up and I'm losing my train of thought but the Dip post from this time last year is:

    http://thediplomad.blogspot.com/2012/10/magreb-madness-we-will-pay-more-for.html

    (Notice Diplomad - fellow Readers - makes explicit AQIM).

    Arkie

    ReplyDelete