After the years of reading the conservative blog The Astute Blogger it finally dawned on me that the title was meant to be ironic. Their all caps report – OBAMA AND SAUDIS IN BIGGEST ARMS DEAL OF ALL TIME
TO FIGHT IRAN – THEY SAY.
BUT THEY WILL GET THERE TOO LATE FOR THAT PURPOSE.
COULD THEY BE USED AGAINST ISRAEL?
IF SAUDI ARABS WERENT FINANCING JIHAD AND “RADICAL” MADRASSAS, THEN I WOULDN’T CARE AS MUCH.
BUT THE HOUSE OF SAUD IS DOUBLE-DEALING US — JUST LIKE THE PAKISTANIS AND KARZAI AND TURKEY AND… HMMM… D’YA SEE A PATTERN HERE!?
YES: TAQIYYA. WITH A LITTLE HUDNA THROWN IN FOR GOOD MEASURE.
THAT’S WHY I’M BETTING THAT THIS WEAPON SALE WILL COME BACK TO BITE US.
That would be the weapons deal to be brought before Congress for approval referred to in this report, Congress to be told of 60-billion US-Saudi arms deal
The administration sees the sale as part of a broader policy aimed at shoring up Arab allies against Iran, the report said.
The 60 billion dollars in fighter jets and helicopters is the top-line amount requested by the Saudis, even though the kingdom is likely to commit initially to buying only about half that amount, the paper said.
[ ]…Earlier media reports said that to assuage Israel’s concerns, the Obama administration has decided not to offer Saudi Arabia so-called standoff systems, which are advanced long-range weapons that can be attached to F-15s for use in offensive operations against land- and sea-based targets.
The three major weapons ( weapons systems) to be sold to the Saudis are the F-15 is made by McDonnell Douglas, the Apache helicopter is made by Boeing, and the Black Hawk helicopter which is made by Sikorsky Aircraft of New York. The Saudis already have some of the same equipment. Like the sale or not it will be a boon to workers in the defense industry – keeping and creating jobs. Maybe TAB is just jealous since Bush’s arms sale to the Saudis in 2008 which was only worth $20B. That deal included JDAMS “The Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) is a guidance kit that converts unguided gravity bombs, or “dumb bombs” into all-weather “smart” munitions.” So what is TAB’s point: They have a conveniently short term memory, have no real grasp of US foreign policy and objectives, cannot make a cogent argument, but gosh and jumping g-willingers they get to associate Obama with his Muslim brethren.
As the world turns some may remember Bill Kristol’s Weakly Standard has had a long time crush on Sarah Palin. Will they part ways over the wacky Sharron Angle(R-NV) of Delaware Christine O’Donnell. TWS have posted this piece on O’Donnell – Citing “Mental Anguish,” Christine O’Donnell Sought $6.9 Million in Gender Discrimination Lawsuit Against Conservative Group…and falsely implied she was taking master’s degree classes at Princeton.
O’Donnell alleged in a July 1, 2005 complaint filed in district court that she had been demoted because ISI’s conservative philosophy dictated that women must be subordinate to men. She claimed she was fired when she contacted the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regarding her demotion. ISI told the Delaware News Journal that she had been “terminated for operating a for-profit business.”
O’Donnell’s finances, honesty, and stability have been called into question in light of her false and strange claims.
As this thrilling episode unfolds we find Conservatives4Palin ( isn’t that ‘4’ so cute) are bragging that Palin’s endorsement of O’Donnell has put her ahead in the Republican primary – Christine O’Donnell and Kelly Ayotte Lead in their Respective Primaries in Delaware and New Hampshire
In fact, it’s difficult to argue that O’Donnell would be in such a strong position without Governor Palin’s endorsement. O’Donnell leads Castle by an 83-13 margin among those more likely to vote for her because of Palin’s endorsement. Castle is winning among everyone else but O’Donnell’s ability to win over those more likely to vote for her because of Governor Palin’s endorsement by such an overwhelming margin is what has her in the lead.
Is there is a far right nut bag who is too crazy for Palin to endorse. Apparently not. I would have thought the same of The Weekly Snooze before today, but even they see O’Donnell is a sure looser in a state where there are actually a few moderate mom and pop Republicans for who the Palin/Beck/Angle/ O’Donnell crowd is too fringe. For a serious take on O’Donnell – Dangerous Sociopaths Have Taken Over the Republican Party. I preferred this funny – though not safe for work post by TBogg – The Law Offices of Grief, Shame, Humiliation, Embarrassment, Anger, Chagrin, Disappointment & Worry
For those who may not remember Dinesh D’Souza is a conservative gadabout who spent a good part of 2001-2008 trying to blame President Clinton, birth control pills, comic books and pop culture in general for the 9-11 terrorist attacks. No seriously, he did – Dinesh D’Souza: Mediocre Tequila, Worse Pundit. Newt Gingrich picked up one of D’Souza’s recent columns for the phrase “if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior ” to explain President Obama’s policies. Kind of like explaining atomic theory by citing Zeus and the power of the gods. D’Souza and Gingrich, not unlike 99.9% of conservative pontificaters like to reach for a bag full of adjectives and invectives and let them fly. They do not feel they should be bothered putting their propositions on a foundation of facts. Purely emotional arguments which appeal to their base are what matters. Forbes gets credit for publishing D’Souza’s original bizarre reference to ‘Kenyan anti-colonialism’ – Forbes Jumps the Shark
Now sure. Steve Forbes is an ultraconservative true believer. But this is still a mainstream business magazine,1 not a John Birch Society newsletter. And D’Souza is the guy who wrote an entire book blaming 9/11 on the “cultural left,” a book that expressed such obvious sympathy for the revulsion of conservative Muslims toward the American left’s “deluge of gross depravity and immorality” that even most of the folks at National Review couldn’t stomach it.
Even The National Review could see D’Souza’s premise was America was to blame for 9-11. His argument sounding very much like statements made by conservative clergymen Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. Kevin points to this smack down of D’Souza – Obama, Anticolonial Hegemonist?
…It must be his deeply-held anticolonialist beliefs that have led him to escalate the U.S. role in Afghanistan, launch numerous drone strikes on Pakistan, and authorize the assassination of U.S. citizens in the name of antiterrorism. Yes, zealous anticolonialism is the obvious answer. Even for D’Souza, whose last book was a strange exercise in blaming Western moral decadence for Islamic terrorism, this is simply stupid.
[ ]…D’Souza’s initial assumption that Obama is “the most antibusiness president in a generation, perhaps in American history” is not much more than assertion. Viewed from most places in the country, Obama does not appear anti-business at all, but rather he seems pitifully captive to business interests in the worst way. One can find this reassuring or disturbing, but that is the reality. (emphasis mine)
D’Souza must have his head buried so deep up his ass the only information that gets in is the sound of his own echo – Second Helpings
When President Obama unveiled an array of new tax-cut and spending proposals last week, one word was noticeably missing from his speeches: “stimulus.” Republicans, meanwhile, energetically set about decrying the plan as “more of the same failed ‘stimulus’ ” and as simply a “second stimulus”—as if the word itself were a damning indictment. The idea of using countercyclical fiscal policy to help get a weak economy moving is hardly radical. But in Washington stimulus has become the policy that dare not speak its name.
This wouldn’t be surprising if we were talking about a failed program. But, by any reasonable measure, the $800-billion stimulus package that Congress passed in the winter of 2009 was a clear, if limited, success. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it reduced unemployment by somewhere between 0.8 and 1.7 per cent in recent months. Economists at various Wall Street houses suggest that it boosted G.D.P. by more than two per cent. And a recent study by Mark Zandi and Alan Blinder, economists from, respectively, Moody’s and Princeton, argues that, in the absence of the stimulus, unemployment would have risen above eleven per cent and that G.D.P. would have been almost half a trillion dollars lower. The weight of the evidence suggests that fiscal policy softened the impact of the recession, boosting demand, creating jobs, and helping the economy start growing again.
There are two possible legitimate criticisms of Obama’s Recovery Act. Both of those arguments are from the liberal perspective. There was not enough done to create more jobs immediately and some of that Recovery money went to undeserving scumbags on Wall St who did not deserve to have their asses saved. To say that Obama is anti-business requires powers of denial, that if harnessed into energy, could power the country’s electric grid. Obama’s newest incentives include billions of tax incentives and tax breaks ( stats from Bloomberg and Yahoo/AP news) for small business and for investments made by small business.