Obama Aces Pirate Challenge

[budgie]

Let's face it: If the rescue of Capt. Richard Phillips had failed, the foes of President Obama's foreign policy would have thrown the Book of Handy Jimmy Carter Epithets at him.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/15/AR2009041502902.html

[Zarak]

Obama is definitely a hero when it comes to the Captain Phillips rescue. It takes a lot of courage to sit in an office and say "yes" or "no". I think President Obama deserves the Medal of Honor for his service in this particular case. In fact, he was so heroic, all criticism of him is immediately moot.

[non]

Obama is definitely a hero when it comes to the Captain Phillips rescue. It takes a lot of courage to sit in an office and say "yes" or "no". I think President Obama deserves the Medal of Honor for his service in this particular case. In fact, he was so heroic, all criticism of him is immediately moot.
...and if things had gone terribly wrong, or, the oppurtunity had not presented itself, would it had been President Obama's fault?
For many, it would have been. I'm certainly not trying to accuse you of this, but, I recall on Saturday hearing alot of pissing and hissing, at other places, that it was all President Obama's fault that it had dragged on so long. There's nothing really surprising about that, mind you. It's all very banal.
We can all agree that he was on the phone receiving updates, and that's all.

[BearInBunnySuit]

"Let's face it: If the rescue of Capt. Richard Phillips had failed, the foes of President Obama's foreign policy would have thrown the Book of Handy Jimmy Carter Epithets at him."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/15/AR2009041502902.html

Had the rescue of the captain failed, can you really blame people for drawing comparisons between Carter and Obama? And would it just be the foes that throw those epithets at O? Probably not.

I'm just glad that the captain and the crew are safe. Had it not concluded the way it did, the discussions and the finger-pointing would have gotten much uglier. And yes, I was very glad to hear that Obama gave the go-ahead to use force altho as the captain said, the SEALS/Navy deserve all the credit for delivering when it mattered.

[Hispeed1]

"Aces" pirate challenge? Uhh-this was just one instance. There are still a lot of pirates/criminals over there. It's not over yet...

[non]

Had the rescue of the captain failed, can you really blame people for drawing comparisons between Carter and Obama? And would it just be the foes that throw those epithets at O? Probably not.

I'm just glad that the captain and the crew are safe. Had it not concluded the way it did, the discussions and the finger-pointing would have gotten much uglier. And yes, I was very glad to hear that Obama gave the go-ahead to use force altho as the captain said, the SEALS/Navy deserve all the credit for delivering when it mattered.
I would blame people for not figuring out that neither Carter or Obama or any other POTUS can control a situation like the ones being discussed.
Do people still actually blame Carter for the hostage rescue debacle? ( Honestly, I don't know. I haven't actually heard it referrenced for some time.)

[Redguy]

[x] Save the Captain.
[ ] Don't save the Captain.

I aced it too.

It was a job well done for everyone involved including the President. Hats off to the Navy for doing an excellent job.

[Hippo]

Obama is definitely a hero when it comes to the Captain Phillips rescue. It takes a lot of courage to sit in an office and say "yes" or "no". I think President Obama deserves the Medal of Honor for his service in this particular case. In fact, he was so heroic, all criticism of him is immediately moot.

dont...know...if...serious

[shocker1]

Obama inherited a great and effective military.

[Tribun]

dont...know...if...serious

x2

medal of honor? :roll:

[budgie]

Obama inherited a great and effective military.

So did Bush.

[LRPV]

Obama inherited a great and effective military.


So did Bush.

Thread successfully derailed...

[Bia]

"Aces" pirate challenge? Uhh-this was just one instance. There are still a lot of pirates/criminals over there. It's not over yet...
I'm sure the point of the original post, had the operation turned out a failure... many many people would blame Obama and forgive nothing.

[thesarge]

I don't consider this a monumental feat for any president. The main consideration would be the political ramifications of a failure weighed against success.

Just like Carter and his failure in Iran and Reagan's Beirut barracks, and Clinton's Mogadishu Obama would be to blame for a failure.

BTW Obama was handed a greatly improved military over what Bush was handed.

"Between 1992 and 2000, the Clinton Administration cut national defense by more than half a million personnel and $50 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars. The Army alone has lost four active divisions and two Reserve divisions. The number of total active personnel in the Air Force has decreased by nearly 30 percent. In the Navy, the total number of ships has decreased from around 393 ships in the fleet in 1992 to 316 today (2000). Even the Marines have dropped 22,000 personnel."

Aside from the obvious reduction in force there was a worse reduction in readiness and supply as well as many other factors that greatly jeopardized our military ability.

If you consider this an improved military handed Bush I have a bridge I want to sell you, cheap.

[cx2115]

"Aces" pirate challenge? Uhh-this was just one instance. There are still a lot of pirates/criminals over there. It's not over yet...
I remember reading a piece by Michael Yon recently; commenting on people who were de-facto wishing harm on US/Allied forces and innocents simply to see egg on Bushs face. Interesting to see that mindset manifesting on the opposite side of the political fence...

[szr]

Obama Aces Pirate Challengex2

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED



BTW, budgie, I faxed you my Obama Adoration Society membership application. Did you get it?

[California Joe]

I give Obama credit for simply not micromanaging the situation, for taking the advice of his military advisors and letting the people on the ground make the proper calls. That's what he was supposed to do.

He shouldn't be lauded as some armchair military genius, nor excoriated if the situation had unfortunately gone to sh*t.

He performed like a decent manager and delegated to the specialists.

[11 Bravo]

Obama is definitely a hero when it comes to the Captain Phillips rescue. It takes a lot of courage to sit in an office and say "yes" or "no". I think President Obama deserves the Medal of Honor for his service in this particular case. In fact, he was so heroic, all criticism of him is immediately moot.


I think John'effing Kerry should be the one to pin the deserved MOH on the chosen one's lapel... yeah he's to holy to have it hung around his neck like the rest of the herd.

[commanding]

Obama is definitely a hero when it comes to the Captain Phillips rescue. It takes a lot of courage to sit in an office and say "yes" or "no". I think President Obama deserves the Medal of Honor for his service in this particular case. In fact, he was so heroic, all criticism of him is immediately moot.
I am guessing your comments are being sarcastic? Of course the Medal of Honor is only awarded to military personal, for the highest achiement.
I dislike Obama terribly, I think he is the wrong man, with the wrong ideas, at a critical time in history. I will however, give him credit, that at least he did not screw the rescue up.....if he done anything that botched the rescue, I would have been on him like white on rice.
It is one of the few things under his watch, that I have agreed with. Most everything else, including his stance on guns, abortion, etc, I disagree with him to the tenth power. He has too little experience managing anything of government, and he is a tax and spend liberal.

[thesarge]

I remember reading a piece by Michael Yon recently; commenting on people who were de-facto wishing harm on US/Allied forces and innocents simply to see egg on Bushs face.

Kinda like the current administration, Obama himself, releasing top secret documents on interrogation techniques?


Interesting to see that mindset manifesting on the opposite side of the political fence...

This is just a dumbass statement. Back it up with some evidence where someone that doesn't agree with Obama stated they wished harm on any body just to see egg on Obama's face.

[California Joe]

I don't consider this a monumental feat for any president. The main consideration would be the political ramifications of a failure weighed against success.

Just like Carter and his failure in Iran and Reagan's Beirut barracks, and Clinton's Mogadishu Obama would be to blame for a failure.

We agree on this Sarge. Like I said in my previous post...Frankly there isn't much else that's relevant to the actual hostage rescue incident. It worked so the President doesn't get bad press from it. That's all. Anyone that plays up his actual role in it is delusional. He did what he was supposed to and it worked. Period.

[gaz]

Horsesh*t has he passed the pirate challenge - f*cker hasn't met me yet.

[Expert Marksman 126]

I have no way to verify this. Nor can I vouch for the writer.



Radm Lou Sarosdy USN Ret. writes


Having spoken to some SEAL pals here in Virginia Beach yesterday and asking why this thing dragged out for 4 days, I got the following:

1. BHO wouldn't authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.

2. Once they arrived, BHO imposed restrictions on their ROE that they couldn't do anything unless the hostage's life was in "imminent" danger

3. The first time the hostage jumped, the SEALS had the raggies all sighted in, but could not fire due to ROE restriction

4. When the navy RIB came under fire as it approached with supplies, no fire was returned due to ROE restrictions. As the raggies were shooting at the RIB, they were exposed and the SEALS had them all dialed in

5. BHO specifically denied two rescue plans developed by the Bainbridge CPN and SEAL teams

6. Bainbridge CPN and SEAL team CDR finally decide they have the OpArea and OSC authority to solely determine risk to hostage. 4 hours later, 3 dead raggies

7. BHO immediately claims credit for his "daring and decisive" behaviour. As usual with him, it's BS

So per our last email thread, I'm downgrading Oohbaby's performace to D-. Only reason it's not an F is that the hostage survived

Read the following accurate account



[Philips’ first leap into the warm, dark water of the Indian Ocean hadn’t worked out as well. With the
[Bainbridge in range and a rescue by his country’s Navy possible, Philips threw himself off of his
[lifeboat prison, enabling Navy shooters onboard the destroyer a clear shot at his captors — and none
was taken.

The guidance from National Command Authority — the president of the United States, Barack Obama — had been clear: a peaceful solution was the only acceptable outcome to this standoff unless the hostage’s life was in clear, extreme danger

]The next day, a small Navy boat approaching the floating raft was fired on by the Somali pirates — and
again no fire was returned and no pirates killed. This was again due to the cautious stance assumed by
Navy personnel thanks to the combination of a lack of clear guidance from Washington and a mandate
from the commander in chief’s staff not to act until Obama, a man with no background of dealing with such issues and no track record of decisiveness, decided that any outcome other than a “peaceful solution” would be acceptable.

After taking fire from the Somali kidnappers again Saturday night, the onscenecommander decided he’d had enough

Keeping his authority to act in the case of a clear and present danger to the hostage’s life and having heard nothing from Washington since yet another request to mount a rescue operation had been denied the day before, the Navy officer — unnamed in all media reports to date — decided the AK47 one captor had leveled at Philips’ back was a threat to the hostage’s life and ordered the NSWC team to take their shots

Three rounds downrange later, all three brigands became enemy KIA and Philips was safe

There is upside, downside, and spinside to the series of events over the last week that culminated in
yesterday’s dramatic rescue of an American hostage

Almost immediately following word of the rescue, the Obama administration and its supporters claimed
victory against pirates in the Indian Ocean and [1] declared that the dramatic end to the standoff put
paid to questions of the inexperienced president’s toughness and decisiveness

Despite the Obama administration’s (and its sycophants’) attempt to spin yesterday’s success as a result of bold, decisive leadership by the unexperienced president, the reality is nothing of the sort

What should have been a standoff lasting only hours
as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its
team of NSWC operators to steam to the location — became an embarrassing four day and counting
standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship.

[thesarge]

I have no way to verify this. Nor can I vouch for the writer.



Radm Lou Sarosdy USN Ret. writes

..



Having spoken to some SEAL pals ....

That's the word I get from a family member in the Teams. Wonder how long the kool aid drinkers will believe in the O.

[California Joe]

Well there you go. It must be true cause it's on the interwebs.

[Zarak]

Stuff

When you copy and paste things, provide a source. :|

[gustav]

When you copy and paste things, provide a source. :|

What source? This is a rumour spread on the interweb...

[Zarak]

What source? This is a rumour spread on the interweb...

Obviously. But even then one should say, "I got this in a chain mail," or whatnot.

[Expert Marksman 126]

When you copy and paste things, provide a source. :|

It was sent to me. I don't know from where, which is why I said I can't vouch for the source.

[Macs.]

It was sent to me. I don't know from where, which is why I said I can't vouch for the source.

I posted this before, but here we go again:


I have not had time to read all 100 plus pages of this thread....so maybe this has been posted before...but got this from a friend who is a retired fighter pilot from Nam, and has worked for the Federal govt. for decades:



This story seems to get around the internet.

http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&rlz=1G1GGLQ_DEDE323&q=BHO+wouldn%27t+authorize+the+DEVGRU%2FNSWC+SEAL+teams+to+the+scene+for+36&btnG=Suche&meta=

Over 800 results already, and it's always something along the lines of...



Received this from an old friend. Source unknown but clearly from someone on active duty or with close connections.
...
Interesting...from a friend who should know.
...
written by a former Navy SEAL.
...
Here's the latest from Navy Seals. Excuse the language. I didn't write this, a SEAL did.
...
Interesting...from a friend who should know.Like after many of such events, it sounds like a typical BS chainmail that makes it rounds. No one seems to have a real source, it's always "a friend/a guy I know/someone who is down THERE/ a EX-SEAL" claimed as source.

Doesn't sound very likely that one insider down there has sent out a thousand eMails to his friends and pals.

And as it was reported from the beginning, it was said that Obama gave away his "command" of this operation to the military and other goverment officials. Would be strange if he micro-managed every little hostage taking.

[Bia]

I have no way to verify this. Nor can I vouch for the writer.
I have no way to verify this but rumor is you're a PeterPuffer.


I can type that right? Cause it was said to me by another in a secret location... you know behind the scenes discussion from a reputable member.

[bugkill]

LMAO, I cannot believe that we got people on here pissing and moaning about who the f**k gets credit for the rescue. The bottom line is that the president made the right call and the US Navy (not just the Seals) did their f**king jobs.

This was a situation that could of been a complete disaster and those Seals would not have been able to fire one damn shot unless the CIC gave the order. There is a difference between an operation out in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a rescue on the high seas. The president laid out his conditions and gave the Seals the go-ahead to do their work, simple as that.

Everyone involved should be congratulated, not just the shooters. The credit goes to everyone involved and people that hate President Obama should swallow their pride and just say that he made the right decision in this rescue. It does not mean that you will vote for him in 2012 or become a democrat. I hated when liberals spoke bad about Bush all the time and I don't want to hear it about Obama either when it is not warranted.

This rescue was an american victory and ALL involved gets credit, end of story.

[thesarge]

One of many starting to appear. This is just a congressman and a republican at that so for now it's just another wacked out chain mail source on the interwebs or might as well be.

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090413/LOCAL04/90413058

[Bia]

Just remember folks the original post of this thread wasnt giving O credit...

It was.... had there been a failure... many many people would, no matter the senerio... blame Obama 100%

[thesarge]

The president laid out his conditions and gave the Seals the go-ahead to do their work, simple as that.

I feel so much better about our ability to get the REAL story since we now appear to have an inside source. Which office do you work out of in the WH? Inquiring minds want to know.

[bugkill]

I feel so much better about our ability to get the REAL story since we now appear to have an inside source. Which office do you work out of in the WH? Inquiring minds want to know.

Dude, it's called the common f**kin' sense office. Those Seals do not fire a shot unless the president has given the proper authorization to use force. The president does not have to be the one that says "Take the shot", he only needed to lay out the conditions for when the shot is taken, after that, the tactical commanders handle the rest.

The bottom line is that the president had confidence in the Seals and the US Navy. If he didn't, Philips would have been either dead or a prisoner in Somolia. Many of you lack the understanding of how this s**t works when you are dealing with a hostage situation that is being watched around the world and you ignore the responsibilities that the president has in this situation.

If you think for one second that the White House was not involved in this operation, you are truly blinded by hate for Obama. If the Seals would have missed one shot and one of those pirates had wasted Philips, the president would have been ripped to shreds for giving the go-ahead. But since it was successful, people do not want to give him credit for having faith in the military to handle the job.

Obama did what a president is supposed to do and that was make a decision on how to handle the situation. He gave his orders and the military carried it out, simple as that. To sit and talk about how much credit he should get is simply ridiculous. Everyone should be congratulated for a job well done, not picking out the "heroes" and all that bulls**t.

The Seals did what they are paid to do and this country made an investment in their skills in order to handle situations like this. They are not heroes, they are Seals, a title that they EARNED. I'm getting sick and tired of the "hero" word and how it is constantly tossed around whenever something gets done. The captain is not a hero and neither is any of his crew. They survived a scary incident on the seas and one was rescued in the process by professionals who make a living preparing for moments like that.

[Chulo]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/15/AR2009041502902.html
HUMM>> did anyone notice that Obama did nothing before the rescue, and they were very standoffish on its happenings, but as soon as it was deemed successful the white house was all ready to take credit?

They wanted it both ways. Stay off it before, and if its successful, then take credit, if it fails then plead minimum interaction.

All that the news said during that time was "they are getttin updates" or "Lets stick to the more important things" or "Hey, look a new dog"
but once the SEALS did their jobs, suddenly the White House was all up in it

[gustav]

I don't know if it works as France, but, during a hostage rescue a few months ago who happened on Somali soil, once the hostages were released the snipers had the pirates who tried to escape in their sights. They asked authorization directly from the president if they could "finish the job" but Sarkozy refused and they let them go away.

[California Joe]

HUMM>> did anyone notice that Obama did nothing before the rescue, and they were very standoffish on its happenings, but as soon as it was deemed successful the white house was all ready to take credit?

They wanted it both ways. Stay off it before, and if its successful, then take credit, if it fails then plead minimum interaction.

All that the news said during that time was "they are getttin updates" or "Lets stick to the more important things" or "Hey, look a new dog"
but once the SEALS did their jobs, suddenly the White House was all up in it

Jesus Christ, Chulo, come on. Did you want him on CNN saying "Don't worry there are SEAL shooters onboard, they'll be dealing with them soon."

WTF don't people get about the fact that it is always political?

I have no goddamned idea what Obamas input into this was, but for chrissakes he has a few pretty decent military minds advising him you know. Does anyone really think he was listening to the briefings going "I dunno fellas, I may be related to one of the pirates and head shots are yucky"...

He probably wasn't keen on having Capt. Phillips head blown off for a variety of reasons. Regardless of political leanings.

Fact is, he's never going to make the people who don't want him on the job happy. No matter what. Just like the Left did to W.

[bugkill]

HUMM>> did anyone notice that Obama did nothing before the rescue, and they were very standoffish on its happenings, but as soon as it was deemed successful the white house was all ready to take credit?

They wanted it both ways. Stay off it before, and if its successful, then take credit, if it fails then plead minimum interaction.

All that the news said during that time was "they are getttin updates" or "Lets stick to the more important things" or "Hey, look a new dog"
but once the SEALS did their jobs, suddenly the White House was all up in it

Oh yeah, the military and other agencies took it upon themselves to deal with the situation without any authorization from the White House. You gotta be kidding me, right? We have an american citizen captured by pirates and you are saying that the White House did not take any calls on the situation?

Oh jeez.

[shocker1]

HUMM>> did anyone notice that Obama did nothing before the rescue, and they were very standoffish on its happenings, but as soon as it was deemed successful the white house was all ready to take credit?

They wanted it both ways. Stay off it before, and if its successful, then take credit, if it fails then plead minimum interaction.

All that the news said during that time was "they are getttin updates" or "Lets stick to the more important things" or "Hey, look a new dog"
but once the SEALS did their jobs, suddenly the White House was all up in it
This is where I see the President doing the right thing. Keeping his comments out of the situation, allowing the folks on the ground to handle it. It is a little disingenuous to attack Obama even when the situation turns out well. For once I agree with budgie cause Obama would be under extreme attack from all sides if this went bad.

That said he was handed the best military machine our nation has ever known. That was my point earlier. It was not an attempt at derailment but rather pointing out that and evoke budgie's response. Job well done and received the exact kneejerk Bushobia that I expected. The title drew my critical side out as it is a little ridiculous. When things go bad the Obama crew jumps to point out he has not been Pres for long, he inherited it from Bush and all that. It is in many instances a valid point.

I and many of us all felt enormous pride and happiness at the news of the end of the Captain's safe rescue. The way it went down had America fuk yeah written all over it. http://smileydatabase.com/s/1068.gif

[tennesseedave]

I'll give the President credit for allowing the military to do their job. That did more for troop morale than any inaugural ball or trips to Baghdad could ever accomplish.

[bugkill]

This is where I see the President doing the right thing. Keeping his comments out of the situation, allowing the folks on the ground to handle it. It is a little disingenuous to attack Obama even when the situation turns out well. For once I agree with budgie cause Obama would be under extreme attack from all sides if this went bad.

That said he was handed the best military machine our nation has ever known. That was my point earlier. It was not an attempt at derailment but rather pointing out that and evoke budgie's response. Job well done and received the exact kneejerk Bushobia that I expected. The title drew my critical side out as it is a little ridiculous. When things go bad the Obama crew jumps to point out he has not been Pres for long, he inherited it from Bush and all that. It is in many instances a valid point.

I and many of us all felt enormous pride and happiness at the news of the end of the Captain's safe rescue. The way it went down had America fuk yeah written all over it. http://smileydatabase.com/s/1068.gif

He was handed a military that has been deployed out the ass for the last 7 years on two fronts. Yes, we are strong military, but by no means did Obama inherit a military in great standing. We have had a ton of issues for the last several years and we are now in a transition. Bush has put this miltary through some tough times and his decision to go into Iraq was a major problem for us.

I do not blame Bush for sending us into Afghanistan and he did not start that war, but he fumbled the ball in Iraq. The timing of that war and the way it was carried out will leave scars for many years after we get out of there. We did our jobs and did incredible work, but we are not stronger than what we were before we left.

[shocker1]

He was handed a military that has been deployed out the ass for the last 7 years on two fronts. Yes, we are strong military, but by no means did Obama inherit a military in great standing. We have had a ton of issues for the last several years and we are now in a transition. Bush has put this miltary through some tough times and his decision to go into Iraq was a major problem for us.

I do not blame Bush for sending us into Afghanistan and he did not start that war, but he fumbled the ball in Iraq. The timing of that war and the way it was carried out will leave scars for many years after we get out of there. We did our jobs and did incredible work, but we are not stronger than what we were before we left.
I disagree, while I do agree with your opinion on how Iraq went down. For better or worse we are stronger for it. Equipment, over worked manpower ect have been under strain and need attention. It remains to be seen how Obama will deal with those issues. However, we are sharp as a tack and have experience for those split second decisions on the ground. That is my point and a valid one.

[Bia]

HUMM>> did anyone notice that Obama did nothing before the rescue, and they were very standoffish on its happenings, but as soon as it was deemed successful the white house was all ready to take credit?

They wanted it both ways. Stay off it before, and if its successful, then take credit, if it fails then plead minimum interaction.

All that the news said during that time was "they are getttin updates" or "Lets stick to the more important things" or "Hey, look a new dog"
but once the SEALS did their jobs, suddenly the White House was all up in it
No... I didnt notice that at all.

Kinda obvious since that isnt what happened.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

At the end of the day Obama is the CinC of the US armed forces. The SEALS are his minions and therefore it was a team effort.

Good job

[Expert Marksman 126]

At the end of the day Obama is the CinC of the US armed forces. The SEALS are his minions and therefore it was a team effort.

Good job

I wouldn't call SEALs 'minions'. That emplies that Obama is a king.

[Zarak]

I wouldn't call SEALs 'minions'. That emplies that Obama is a king.

Of course he's not the King. He's the Messiah, King of Kings. :-P

[budgie]

I think people here are misunderestimating the original post: Obama doesn't deserve credit for teh rescue that goes to the boots (or flippers) on the ground. But Obama has aced the political challenge, especially in light of the fact that so many detractors were using a single-hostage scenario to call it his "Carter moment" and claim he was weak before the rescue took place.

Heck even Carter tried to rescue the Iran hostages - what was Eagle Claw all about?

[Bia]

Heck even Carter tried to rescue the Iran hostages - what was Eagle Claw all about?Yes + REP & RIP to those fallen soldiers.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

I reckon. Carter actually authorized a rescue operation. All Reagan did was issue some threats.

+rep carter

[thesarge]

I reckon. Carter actually authorized a rescue operation. All Reagan did was issue some threats.

+rep carter

Eagle Claw was a disaster because of Carter's micromanagement. He didn't take the advise of his military leaders.

Simply put Carter was a disaster as president.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

I'm glad he gave the OK, and happy it turned out well, but I think doing anything other than giving the OK would have constituted dereliction of duty.

[Chulo]

No... I didnt notice that at all.

Kinda obvious since that isnt what happened.

While four pirates armed with AK47s bobbing in a lifeboat hold a US Navy destroyer at bay, a French commando team storms a sailboat held by pirates and rescues French citizens. The world truly has gone mad.
According to the BBC, President Sarkozy’s office released a statement saying a French sailboat, seized Saturday off the coast of Somalia, was the target of a French commando raid Thursday. The French sail boat had four adults and one child on board. According to the release, two pirates and a hostage were killed in the operation and three others taken prisoner. This is the third time in recent memory French commandos have been used to free hostages held by pirates in the region.
Meanwhile in the USA, when asked about an American being held hostage by Somali pirates in the Gulf of Aden, President Obama refused to answer any questions. Various reports say Obama has delegated the handling of this incident to high level administration officials and military commanders.
Unlike the pirates killed by French commandos, the pirates holding the American seem emboldened. There have been various reports today that allies of the pirates holding the American have requested and receiving backup from other pirates. Several large vessels seized with the last few weeks are heading to the site of a standoff.
Then you read all the news press and its all about what Obama did. They military already already had standing orders to shoot to kill should an innocent life be in jeopardy. (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=4055119&postcount=3278)

So what did exactly did he do?

I see Obama's name flying around so i got a Q... would a move like this require a presidential approval?


Mission parameters usually up front; "if oppertunity arises, take action with the utmost regard for the hostage's safety".


Good job by the Navy.


If the President wanted it to require his approval, he could. He could also pre-approve a range of options while restricting/requiring approval for others. More likely he delegated completely the decision making to the folks on the scene.

on the pirate thread we go people wetting themselves



The results of this action by this administration are extremely far reaching and significant in so many ways. Hail to the Chief! What a relief! I was afraid like so many others that the U.S. was going in another direction. President Obama has acted in a strong way and is to be congratulated (along with the Seals, and those who planned this bold action). Thank God for the US Navy!My God, you act as though Barak Hussein Obama wielded the rifles, piloted the helicopter, split the moon with his **** and acted like a real man once in his life. He has politely not interfered, acting much as he has done in his Senate career...voting "Present" instead of making a decision. His current silence also tells a tale.

Thank God we have real men out there...The United States Navy and the navy Seals who did the work. And, let us not forget the courage of the American crew who stood their ground, fire hoses against RPG's and AK-47's...and top of all...The American Captain, who put his life on the line to save his crew and his ship...that is one helluva man right there!

[budgie]

Nothing but back to the OP - he would have been blamed if the rescue had failed! He passed the political perception test.

[bugkill]

Eagle Claw was a disaster because of Carter's micromanagement. He didn't take the advise of his military leaders.

Simply put Carter was a disaster as president.

WTF are you talking about? Carter placed all his trust in the military, specifically the special operations community. The failure had to do with the actual infiltration of special operations forces, not Carter ignoring his military commanders.

The Desert One debacle had to do with a special operations force (Delta) not having a compliment force to help them get to their objectives and it led to the creation of the 160th SOAR. Carter showed guts by authorizing the operation and taking FULL responsibility for its failure, which is exactly what Obama would have done if this rescue mission would have went **** up.

[bugkill]

Then you read all the news press and its all about what Obama did. They military already already had standing orders to shoot to kill should an innocent life be in jeopardy.

So what did exactly did he do?

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/national_world&id=6757265&rss=rss-kabc-article-6757265


This will help.

[thesarge]

WTF are you talking about? Carter placed all his trust in the military, specifically the special operations community. The failure had to do with the actual infiltration of special operations forces, not Carter ignoring his military commanders.

You're wrong. He did place his trust in the military but not after sticking his paws in the works. You need to do more research.


which is exactly what Obama would have done if this rescue mission would have went **** up.

Now you're just plain f**kin clairvoyant or an Obama fanboy.

[budgie]

Way to go Sarge - thirteen posts and you've already earned the stripes to insult other members.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Nothing but back to the OP - he would have been blamed if the rescue had failed! He passed the political perception test.

Blamed? Maybe, but then people blame him for bad weather too. It's just that as operations go, this was about as low-risk as they get. On one side we have highly trained professional killers, with a global intelligence apparatus, state of the art surveillance equipment, and billions of dollars of taxpayer assets. On the other side, we have 3 barely literate teenagers in a dinghy who don't even have a functioning government to complain about their deaths. If there was any time to make a politically safe move, I'd say that was it. So again - helluva good job and all, but for Obama's part, it was pretty much a no-brainer.

[bugkill]

You're wrong. He did place his trust in the military but not after sticking his paws in the works. You need to do more research.



Now you're just plain f**kin clairvoyant or an Obama fanboy.


LMAO, you still in denial? You are the one that needs to do real research and understand that Carter was not at fault for the mission failure in Iran, but that other circumstances happened militarily that were beyond his control. Also, I never voted for Obama, so all your crap about me being a Obama fanboy is simply that, crap.

You are acting like a hater and you sound no different than those liberal loudmouths that jumped on Bush all the time or never recognized anything that he may have gotten right. Like I said before, you don't have to like Obama, but you only need to give credit when credit is due, and in this case, he deserved credit. He stayed out of the way and trusted his military command to get the job done, and he did not play politics with this.

He kept his mouth shut about it for the most part and gave all the praise to Cpt. Philips and the US Navy once the mission was over, so what are you whining about it? You should be happy that everything went well, but instead, you and many others are sitting there crying about the credit that Obama gets for everything working out like it did.

The bottom line is that the president will get credit for successes and failures, no matter how close they are to a specific operation. In crisis, especially international ones, the president is fully responsible for whatever happens. If those Seals fail, it would have been Obama's failure as well. Look at how much the actions of soldiers in Abu Gharib had on the Bush White House, it was massive.

You just do not understand the political side of operations that involve the military. Obama could have easily told the Navy not to use the Seals or even send in the FBI to negotiate the release of Philips, but he did not do that and he deserves credit for that.

[thesarge]

Way to go Sarge - thirteen posts and you've already earned the stripes to insult other members.

At your age I was a little more tolerant and polite. I no longer hold fire when fired on.

[thesarge]

LMAO, you still in denial? more blah blah blah

Either you don't read very well or your comprehension isn't that great. I haven't blamed or given credit to Obama for anything.

I only hope this is the biggest non event that Obama has to contend with but that's just whistling past the graveyard.

Carter's failure precipitated the failure in the desert. Like I said, do some more research. Read some books written by folks around him at the time.

He was and is known as a micromanager. That's not a trait a president should have. He was the biggest failure in the white house in the last hundred years.

I lmao at your contention that I don't understand the political aspect of military operations. I been there done that.

[non]

Carter's failure precipitated the failure in the desert. Like I said, do some more research.

Gonna research the hell out of that objective scientificalism. Guessing you mean his political/economic failures were a 'mark' on the operation like a Nostrodamus squatrain. Whatever. Hating Carter is such a boy band trend.

[Slouch]

Obama is definitely a hero when it comes to the Captain Phillips rescue. It takes a lot of courage to sit in an office and say "yes" or "no". I think President Obama deserves the Medal of Honor for his service in this particular case. In fact, he was so heroic, all criticism of him is immediately moot.

That is the funniest thing I have ever read on these forums.

Quoted for posterity.

[matthew.manhorn]

Obama is the greatest communicator and commander in chief America has ever had.

[LazerLordz]

Some chaps don't get it.

Obama did the right thing in not talking too much about an ongoing op. He placed his trust in that the professionals have the ability to execute their operation.

This is the story, it's not too hard to understand, isn't it?

[Bia]

So what did exactly did he do?
Seems like everything was correct.

He didnt discuss an operation with the press... thank goodness.
The operation was a success.

Pretty simple.

[Bia]

At your age I was a little more tolerant and polite. I no longer hold fire when fired on.
You're coming off as a solid 13 year old.
Yeah.... classic credibility. *insert eyeroll*

[cx2115]

Kinda like the current administration, Obama himself, releasing top secret documents on interrogation techniques?



This is just a dumbass statement. Back it up with some evidence where someone that doesn't agree with Obama stated they wished harm on any body just to see egg on Obama's face.
I quoted "the evidence". Here's (http://www.michaelyon-online.com/the-pathetic-afghan-army-will-obama-fumble-iraq.htm) the article from Yon; he sums it up better then I could. The bit which stuck in mind is the 3rd paragraph.

[thesarge]

I quoted "the evidence". Here's (http://www.michaelyon-online.com/the-pathetic-afghan-army-will-obama-fumble-iraq.htm) the article from Yon; he sums it up better then I could. The bit which stuck in mind is the 3rd paragraph.

You mean the 4th paragraph. Yon's a good writer and has provided much in the way of information but this article of his says nothing about folks wanting harm to come to anyone just to put egg on the Obama's face.

[cx2115]

You mean the 4th paragraph. Yon's a good writer and has provided much in the way of information but this article of his says nothing about folks wanting harm to come to anyone just to put egg on the Obama's face.
Precisely. The post to which I responded was implying, almost gleefully, that not to worry, the pirates will give Obama plenty more opportunities to screw up. I'd say that's the same attitude as Yon was criticising: Hoping some poor sap lands in the proverbial in such a way as to embarrass the opposition.

[matthew.manhorn]

Some chaps don't get it.

Obama did the right thing in not talking too much about an ongoing op. He placed his trust in that the professionals have the ability to execute their operation.

This is the story, it's not too hard to understand, isn't it?

X2, maybe that's what a commander in chief can do best, or any leaders in general

[thesarge]

Precisely. The post to which I responded was implying, almost gleefully, that not to worry, the pirates will give Obama plenty more opportunities to screw up. I'd say that's the same attitude as Yon was criticising: Hoping some poor sap lands in the proverbial in such a way as to embarrass the opposition.

That's a far stretch from stating the obvious to claiming the poster gleefully wants someone to get hurt. Every president is tested and the media and political pundits always state that. Does that mean they want someone hurt? I don't think so.

On the other hand the people Yon speaks about did want people to get hurt. At the very least they wanted Bush hurt or dead. According to their own words.

[Zarak]

That is the funniest thing I have ever read on these forums.

Quoted for posterity.

Thanks. I try. :)

[Klatuu]

Obama was at the wheel, he gets credit for his part, fair and square. But why the big deal over such a small thing? Other than the political bias on the part of some people celebrating this more than the liberation of 50 million Iraqis and Afghans, it's because Obama's not expected to do the right thing in this arena. Sort of like a retard reciting his multiplication tables, he's gets credit for things other people are expected to do. The right thing happened.

You'll never see me criticizing the right course of action just because the guy I don't like politically took it.


6 months ago, the headline would have been "Bush murders underprivileged brown people".

And BTW, WTG Navy Pukes:

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i251/Klatuu_1/yhst-50863389838911_2050_18843386.gif

[Expert Marksman 126]

Obama is the greatest communicator and commander in chief America has ever had.

Negative. Ronald Reagan is the greatest communicator. He didn't have a tele-prompter in front of him 24/7/365.

Obama has done nothing that makes him stand out as CIC. It would have been political suicide for him not to authorize the SEALs to fire.

[gaz]

Negative. Ronald Regan is the greatest communicator. He didn't have a tele-prompter in front of him 24/7/365.

Obama has done nothing that makes him stand out as CIC. It would have been political suicide for him not to authorize the SEALs to fire.

But Obama can probably spell Reagan correctly.

[Gleipnir]

RONALD REAGAN AND THE CONCEPTUAL AUTO DISASTER. Numerous studies have been conducted upon patients in terminal paresis (GPI), placing Reagan in a series of simulated auto crashes, e.g. multiple pileups, head-on collisions, motorcade attacks (fantasies of Presidential assassinations remained a continuing preoccupation, subject showing a marked polymorphic fixation on windshields and rear trunk assemblies). Powerful erotic fantasies of an anal-sadistic surrounded the image of the Presidential contender.

Subjects were required to construct the optimum auto disaster victim by placing a replica of Reagan’s head on the unretouched photographs of crash fatalities.

In 82% of cases massive rear-end collisions were selected with a preference for expressed fecal matter and rectal hemorrhages. Further tests were conducted to define the optimum model-year. These indicate that a three year model lapse with child victims provide the maximum audience excitation (confirmed by manufacturers’ studies of the optimum auto disaster). It is hoped to construct a rectal modulous of Reagan and the auto disaster of maximized audience arousal.

Motion picture studies of Ronald Reagan reveal characteristic patterns of facial tones and musculature associated with homoerotic behavior. The continuing tension of buccal sphincters and the recessive tongue role tally with earlier studies of facial rigidity (cf., Adolf Hitler, Nixon). Slow-motion cine films of campaign speeches exercised a marked erotic effect upon an audience of spastic children. Even with mature adults the verbal material was found to have a minimal effect, as demonstrated by substitution of an edited tape giving diametrically opposed opinions...

INCIDENCE OF ORGASMS IN FANTASIES OF ****** INTERCOURSE WITH RONALD REAGAN. Patients were provided with assembly kit photographs of ****** partners during intercourse. In each case Reagan’s face was super imposed upon the original partner. ******l intercourse with "Reagan" proved uniformly disappointing, producing orgasm in 2% of subjects.

Axillary, buccal, navel, aural, and orbital modes produced proximal erections. The preferred mode of entry overwhelmingly proved to be the rectal. After a preliminary course in anatomy it was found that the caecum and transverse colon also provided excellent sites for excitation. In an extreme 12% of cases, the simulated anus of post-costolomy surgery generated spontaneous orgasm in 98% of penetrations. Multiple-track cine-films were constructed of "Reagan" in intercourse during (a) campaign speeches, (b) rear-end auto collisions with one and three year model changes, (c) with rear exhaust assemblies...

****** FANTASIES IN CONNECTION WITH RONALD REAGAN. The genitalia of the Presidential contender exercised a continuing fascination. A series of imaginary genitalia were constructed using (a) the mouth parts of Jacqueline Kennedy, (b) a Cadillac, (c) the assembly kid prepuce of President Johnson...In 89% of cases, the constructed genitalia generated a high incidence of self-induced orgasm. Tests indicate the masturbatory nature of the Presidential contender’s posture. Dolls consisting of plastic models of Reagan’s alternate genitalia were found to have a disturbing effect on deprived children.

REAGAN'S HAIRSTYLE. Studies were conducted on the marked fascination exercised by the Presidential contender’s hairstyle. 65% of male subjects made positive connections between the hairstyle and their own pubic hair. A series of optimum hairstyles were constructed.

THE CONCEPTUAL ROLE OF REAGAN. Fragments of Reagan’s cinetized postures were used in the construction of model psychodramas in which the Reagan-figure played the role of husband, doctor, insurance salesman, marriage counselor, etc.

The failure of these roles to express any meaning reveals the nonfunctional character of Reagan. Reagan’s success therefore indicates society’s periodic need to re-conceptualize its political leaders. Reagan thus appears as a series of posture concepts, basic equations which reformulate the roles of aggression and anality. Reagan’s personality. The profound anality of the Presidential contender may be expected to dominate the United States in the coming years. By contrast the late JFK remained the prototype of the oral subject, usually conceived in pre-pubertal terms. In further studies sadistic psychopaths were given the task of devising *** fantasies involving Reagan. Results confirm the probability of Presidential figures being perceived primarily in genital terms; the face of LB Johnson is clearly genital in significant appearance--the nasal prepuce, scrotal jaw, etc. Faces were seen as either circumcised (JFK, Khrushchev) or uncircumcised (LBJ, Adenauer). In assembly-kit tests Reagan’s face was uniformly perceived as a penile erection. Patients were encouraged to devise the optimum ***-death of Ronald Reagan.

[PUG]

Was it just me that thought this thread was going to be about some wikkid awsum online game?

[Expert Marksman 126]

RONALD REAGAN AND THE CONCEPTUAL AUTO DISASTER. Numerous studies have been conducted upon patients in terminal paresis (GPI), placing Reagan in a series of simulated auto crashes, e.g. multiple pileups, head-on collisions, motorcade attacks (fantasies of Presidential assassinations remained a continuing preoccupation, subject showing a marked polymorphic fixation on windshields and rear trunk assemblies). Powerful erotic fantasies of an anal-sadistic surrounded the image of the Presidential contender.

Subjects were required to construct the optimum auto disaster victim by placing a replica of Reagan’s head on the unretouched photographs of crash fatalities.

In 82% of cases massive rear-end collisions were selected with a preference for expressed fecal matter and rectal hemorrhages. Further tests were conducted to define the optimum model-year. These indicate that a three year model lapse with child victims provide the maximum audience excitation (confirmed by manufacturers’ studies of the optimum auto disaster). It is hoped to construct a rectal modulous of Reagan and the auto disaster of maximized audience arousal.

Motion picture studies of Ronald Reagan reveal characteristic patterns of facial tones and musculature associated with homoerotic behavior. The continuing tension of buccal sphincters and the recessive tongue role tally with earlier studies of facial rigidity (cf., Adolf Hitler, Nixon). Slow-motion cine films of campaign speeches exercised a marked erotic effect upon an audience of spastic children. Even with mature adults the verbal material was found to have a minimal effect, as demonstrated by substitution of an edited tape giving diametrically opposed opinions...

INCIDENCE OF ORGASMS IN FANTASIES OF ****** INTERCOURSE WITH RONALD REAGAN. Patients were provided with assembly kit photographs of ****** partners during intercourse. In each case Reagan’s face was super imposed upon the original partner. ******l intercourse with "Reagan" proved uniformly disappointing, producing orgasm in 2% of subjects.

Axillary, buccal, navel, aural, and orbital modes produced proximal erections. The preferred mode of entry overwhelmingly proved to be the rectal. After a preliminary course in anatomy it was found that the caecum and transverse colon also provided excellent sites for excitation. In an extreme 12% of cases, the simulated anus of post-costolomy surgery generated spontaneous orgasm in 98% of penetrations. Multiple-track cine-films were constructed of "Reagan" in intercourse during (a) campaign speeches, (b) rear-end auto collisions with one and three year model changes, (c) with rear exhaust assemblies...

****** FANTASIES IN CONNECTION WITH RONALD REAGAN. The genitalia of the Presidential contender exercised a continuing fascination. A series of imaginary genitalia were constructed using (a) the mouth parts of Jacqueline Kennedy, (b) a Cadillac, (c) the assembly kid prepuce of President Johnson...In 89% of cases, the constructed genitalia generated a high incidence of self-induced orgasm. Tests indicate the masturbatory nature of the Presidential contender’s posture. Dolls consisting of plastic models of Reagan’s alternate genitalia were found to have a disturbing effect on deprived children.

REAGAN'S HAIRSTYLE. Studies were conducted on the marked fascination exercised by the Presidential contender’s hairstyle. 65% of male subjects made positive connections between the hairstyle and their own pubic hair. A series of optimum hairstyles were constructed.

THE CONCEPTUAL ROLE OF REAGAN. Fragments of Reagan’s cinetized postures were used in the construction of model psychodramas in which the Reagan-figure played the role of husband, doctor, insurance salesman, marriage counselor, etc.

The failure of these roles to express any meaning reveals the nonfunctional character of Reagan. Reagan’s success therefore indicates society’s periodic need to re-conceptualize its political leaders. Reagan thus appears as a series of posture concepts, basic equations which reformulate the roles of aggression and anality. Reagan’s personality. The profound anality of the Presidential contender may be expected to dominate the United States in the coming years. By contrast the late JFK remained the prototype of the oral subject, usually conceived in pre-pubertal terms. In further studies sadistic psychopaths were given the task of devising *** fantasies involving Reagan. Results confirm the probability of Presidential figures being perceived primarily in genital terms; the face of LB Johnson is clearly genital in significant appearance--the nasal prepuce, scrotal jaw, etc. Faces were seen as either circumcised (JFK, Khrushchev) or uncircumcised (LBJ, Adenauer). In assembly-kit tests Reagan’s face was uniformly perceived as a penile erection. Patients were encouraged to devise the optimum ***-death of Ronald Reagan.

OK then...

[Gleipnir]

That's the real reason you like Reagan.

[Expert Marksman 126]

That's the real reason you like Reagan.

HAHAHAHA....you seem to forget that I was never alive to see him in office. I like him based solely on his actions as President.

Very amusing though. You came up with that awful quick...

[Gleipnir]

I never, ever forget your age. Your posts are always a painful reminder.

[shocker1]

HAHAHAHA....you seem to forget that I was never alive to see him in office. I like him based solely on his actions as President.

Very amusing though. You came up with that awful quick...
Cocky is the word you are looking for.

[Expert Marksman 126]

I never, ever forget your age. Your posts are always a painful reminder.

Yes, you are the model of maturity. Copying an entire article just to call me gay. I want to be just like you when I grow up.

[Zarak]

I hope I wasn't like that when I was seventeen. :|

[Gleipnir]

Hold on a second- I never called you gay- this has nothing to do with homo******ity at all. The appeal of Ronald Reagan goes far beyond that and this is why you have subliminally constructed the belief that he is the best communicator. You didn't give any good reasons, so I thought I would help you out, that's all.
No thanks necessary.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

Get it back on topic or the infraction stick swings.

[Expert Marksman 126]

Hold on a second- I never called you gay- this has nothing to do with homo******ity at all. The appeal of Ronald Reagan goes far beyond that and this is why you have subliminally constructed the belief that he is the best communicator. You didn't give any good reasons, so I thought I would help you out, that's all.
No thanks necessary.

post removed

[California Joe]

Here is one of my top reasons

"Most people go through life wondering if they've made a difference- the Marines don't have that problem"

So you base your opinion on:

A line that was written by a speechwriter, paying homage to something you aren't, in a speech delivered by a guy that was President, before you were born.

That about cover it?

[Expert Marksman 126]

I said it was one of my reasons because I feel that it is an excellent quote, and no matter who wrote it, he said it. It pays respect to every Marine, including a few that I know personally.

As you said, it was before I was born. I was not around for his presidency, and I have better things to do than look up presidental quotes, so yes I base my opinion on a rather limited sample.

[Jobu]

Obama really had no other choice.

-paying ransom was not an option.
-allowing the captain to be killed was not an option.
-allowing the pirates and captain to reach land was not an option.

I give credit to Obama for not screwing it all up when the choice of how to handle it had already been made for him.

[Bia]

Negative. Ronald Reagan is the greatest communicator. He didn't have a tele-prompter in front of him 24/7/365. Yeah... he was an ACTOR.... kinda had a leg up when it came to a camera.


Here is one of my top reasons

"Most people go through life wondering if they've made a difference- the Marines don't have that problem"So you speak for all Marines that ever lived?




Teenagers are cute.

[Jobu]

Teenagers are cute.

Pedophile.

[Bia]

Pedophile.You fukcing retard... pedophile implies pre-pubescent.... teens are post-pubescent dumbass.

[Gleipnir]

I don't know what state Bia lives in, but in Michigan the legal age of ****** consent is 16, thus making her interests lawful.

http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm

[Bia]

I don't know what state Bia lives in, but in Michigan the legal age of ****** consent is 16, thus making her interests lawful.

http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htmOMG....

the actual definition of the word pedophile means Pre pubescent... nothing more and nothing less.


Sheeeeeeeshhhhhh
/insert eyeroll

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Meh, Obama speaks well and is quite articulate but IMO he isn't the best communicator we've had in office. One thing is for damn sure. He "wants to be clear". He want's to be really, really clear. Not that any of us thought that he may not have wanted to be clear. Generally speaking, when the President speaks, I assume he wants to be clear. But just to be clear, no matter the subject or audience, he says "let me be clear" or "I want to be clear" or "to be clear".

I find this so effective, leadership-y and just so gosh-darned endearing that I've started using it in my daily life. When the guy at Subway asks what veggies I want, I adopt a halting, off-putting manner and say "Let me be clear. I want lettuce. I want tomatoes. And I want bananna peppers." When the wife asks if the dog was fed, I go all stiff and awkward and say "I want to be clear. The dog was not fed. The previous occupant of the kitchen left me with a number of tasks to complete. The dishes. The trash was full. The dry-erase board on the fridge contained an inapproprate depiction of male genitalia. So, and let me be clear on this point. The dog was not fed."

[Jobu]

You fukcing retard... pedophile implies pre-pubescent.... teens are post-pubescent dumbass.



Wow. Way to take a joke.

[Jobu]

I don't know what state Bia lives in, but in Michigan the legal age of ****** consent is 16, thus making her interests lawful.

http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm

lol

You got that website bookmarked or something?

[SBL]

.........Hahahaha .

[Gleipnir]

Google works fast and efficiently.
Try it sometime.

[California Joe]

Ask her if she's PMSing next, Jobu.

Hehehe@ 2Sheds.

[bugkill]

Meh, Obama speaks well and is quite articulate but IMO he isn't the best communicator we've had in office. One thing is for damn sure. He "wants to be clear". He want's to be really, really clear. Not that any of us thought that he may not have wanted to be clear. Generally speaking, when the President speaks, I assume he wants to be clear. But just to be clear, no matter the subject or audience, he says "let me be clear" or "I want to be clear" or "to be clear".

I find this so effective, leadership-y and just so gosh-darned endearing that I've started using it in my daily life. When the guy at Subway asks what veggies I want, I adopt a halting, off-putting manner and say "Let me be clear. I want lettuce. I want tomatoes. And I want bananna peppers." When the wife asks if the dog was fed, I go all stiff and awkward and say "I want to be clear. The dog was not fed. The previous occupant of the kitchen left me with a number of tasks to complete. The dishes. The trash was full. The dry-erase board on the fridge contained an inapproprate depiction of male genitalia. So, and let me be clear on this point. The dog was not fed."

LMAO, why are we having a discussion about how great Obama is as a communicator when the man has barely been in office? Yes, he does speak well in explaining his stances on certain issues, but to annoint him any kind of name at this point is simply ridiculous. Folks, he has only been in office for 90 days and to give this guy any type of grade at this point is very premature.

Obama has pretty much done a very good job of acting presidential (despite some gaffes) and he dealt with the hostage rescue very well. I do not agree with all his positions, but none of his policies has even gone into effect, so I really can't say much about him. We will see how well he is doing in about a year or two, not 90-100 days.

[Jobu]

Ask her if she's PMSing next, Jobu.

The funniest part is that someone got mad over a technicality of whether the joke was specific enough about pre or post-pubescent.

Person A: "You're a murderer!"
Person B: "F you! It was second degree not first degree, dumbass."

[Gleipnir]

Ask her if she's PMSing next, Jobu.

Very masterful deployment of double meaning in regards to 'PMSing'.