Moose Hunter Bags Community Organizer… Obama Retreats on Nuke Plan
Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, April 11, 2010, 10:28 AM
On Wednesday, Sarah Palin said Barack Obama’s new nuclear policy was like, “A kid on the playground saying punch me in the face and I’m not going to retaliate.” This upset the the president who later lashed out at the former Alaska Governor on her nuclear experience on Thursday.
Which led to this–
Sarah Palin clobbered Barack Obama Friday in her speech at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference. The former Alaska Governer responded to the “community organizer’s” attack on her nuclear experience.
She questioned what in Obama’s community organizing background led him to believe he was an expert on nuclear policy.
Today, the Obama Administration retreated from their previous nuclear plan.
Hillary Clinton told CBS that “all bets are off” when it comes to biological weapons.
The Obama administration’s nuclear posture review may have removed some of the intentional ambiguity from U.S. nuclear policy, but it does not leave the country any less safe, President Obama’s top national security advisers said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
In fact, they said, it gives a clear warning to other state actors that the U.S. will not ignore any growing threats.
“This is putting everybody on notice,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer in an interview conducted Friday at the Pentagon. “We don’t want more countries to go down the path that North Korea and Iran are.”
The revised nuclear policy says that the United States will not use nuclear weapons to respond to a chemical or biological attack from a non-nuclear country. The policy, however, leaves significant contingencies, said Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.
Countries which are non-signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (such as North Korea) or have been found to be non-compliant (such as Iran) are not exempt from nuclear retaliation under the Obama policy.
“We were concerned about the biological weapons,” Gates said, “and that’s why the president was very clear … if we see states developing biological weapons that we begin to think endanger us or create serious concerns, that he reserves the right to revise this policy.”Clinton added, “If we can prove that a biological attack originated in a country that attacked us, then all bets are off.”
Apparently, the former governor knows more about nuclear deterrence than the community organizer after all.
This round goes to Palin.
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Republican Military Hero & First Female to Command Fighter Squadron Will Announce Run For Congress Today
Published February 8, 2012 at 8:42 pm - 41 Comments
Militant Conservative commented:
Pretty bad when an ignorant know nothing former Governor (the lefts talking points not my thoughts) blisters your ass with common sense. I personnaly think Shara will make a good choice for any post We the people elect her to. November will come and the leftards WILL get a hell of a wake up call. LOL.
greenfairie commented:
Go, Sarah!
kansas commented:
Looking like her not being the target for stupid lawsuits has unleashed her. Who’s stupid now, Charles and Katie?
Sandy commented:
Liz Cheney, Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin are giving Obama nightmares. So he knows more about Nuclear Policy than Sarah hah! One word from our Sarah and Obama retreats.
The man has no clue or he would have never made that statement in the first place. They would need 67 Senators to confirm Obama’s new Nuke policy. That ain’t gonna happen.
ADVERTISEMENT
fgdfg commented:
Obama’s nuclear policy, those balls are America..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSQgrsU3Nuo
Joanne commented:
OT
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1265134/Marine-Commando-Mark-Leader-hit-Taliban-bomber-suspect-cutting-lip-But-did-REALLY-deserve-life-ruined.html
“Yes, this Marine with 18 years’ service hit a Taliban bomber suspect, cutting his lip. But did he REALLY deserve to have his life ruined?”
mike191 commented:
Paging David Brooks
Sandy is correct:the real fun will be the advise and consent of 67 senators to confirm this treaty.
Scott Wiggins commented:
Sandy, I think the healthcare takeover which was facilitated by unconstitutional parliamentary tricks and bribes proved that this Congress and this President don’t care about how many votes are required to pass legislation or adopt treaties in this case.
Graciela commented:
I love Sarah, but I do with she would learn to pronounce “nuclear” correctly. Her mispronunciation just feeds into the left wing’s claims that she is stupid.
brooklyn commented:
Well, I thank Mrs. Palin for her efforts, but it was the entire Country basically which rightly questioned this insanity from the Obama Administration. Palin was not the lone voice on this matter, and was repeating the accurate criticism of the Team Obama Folly.
But Hillary and Gates are simply offering a typical facade, in the face of criticism. The Democrats always pushed this mindless debasing of the USA’s defenses, and the Clinton Administration is a primary example of this weak appeasement denial. Carter’s folly was just as embarrassing.
This is merely more lip service, just like all the other bad Democratic Party policies, used to blur the reality of what they truly are doing and want.
The Democrats continue to make the USA so vulnerable around the World, as well as our Allies.
They mean what Obama says, and will do the very worst.
The Elector of Saxony commented:
“We don’t want more countries to go down the path that North Korea and Iran are.”
Or we will give them the same stern tongue lashing that North Korea and Iran received!
LeBron Steinman commented:
“Not a Fark Troll AltNo Gravatar
April 11th, 2010 | 11:05 am | #9 ”
Okayyy…do you offer a decoder ring for that random assembly of adolescent,schizophrenic free form nonsense?
Are you lost, honey?
Do the attendants know you have access to the internet in the day room?
Auntie Em commented:
Fark Troll #9: You certainly aren’t in any position to be judging a buffoon. Sometimes it is better just to make a point and leave instead of shooting off at the mouth and losing your cred.
cbcvb commented:
“Graciela
April 11th, 2010 | 11:07 am | #9
I love Sarah, but I do with she would learn to pronounce “nuclear” correctly. Her mispronunciation just feeds into the left wing’s claims that she is stupid.”
——————–
As soon as Obama learns to Pronounce “corps”
he sounds and is an idiot within all 57 states.
Palinfan commented:
GO SARAH!
chuck in st paul commented:
HEAD FAKE
“that he reserves the right to revise this policy” does not mean he actually is revising the policy only that some day, some where, some how he COULD revise the policy.
check’s in the mail
I didn’t have relations with that girl
we’ll revise the policy
sure.
Elektra commented:
Yes! Thank you, Sarah! But they only had to change the narrative. Make no mistake. It is just as Chuck said, and just as in the case of the death panels. The policy will hold until We the People do something about it.
Robb76 commented:
Gonna take more then 67 senators to ratify. Each state has two senators. According to himself there are 57 states. 57 times 2 is 114 senators.
Do the math.
bill-tb commented:
Former Governor is whole lot smarter than Obozo in the bargain.
Anybody have a copy of the actual treaty?
Read the treaty has more meaning these days, doesn’t it.
aprilnovember811 commented:
Sarah reminds me of that old Timex watch slogan, “She takes a lickin, but keeps on ticken!” Go Sarah!
gsr commented:
Put a man with a life-long history of Marxist and Moooslim influences and what do you get?
His policies are weakening the USA and thus empowering our adversaries. Any surprise?
jerryl commented:
obama never learns that he shouldnt go gainst sarah she owns him everytime love how she said he got his nuke exp lol
aprilnovember811 commented:
“I love Sarah, but I do with she would learn to pronounce “nuclear” correctly. Her mispronunciation just feeds into the left wing’s claims that she is stupid.”
Don’t worry about it, I’ll take that over any Harvard graduate these days. What comes out of there is frightening.
Remember Abraham Lincoln only had a few months of a formal education, and the father of our country had very little formal education.
It’s the substance of what she said, not how she pronounced it. “You say tomato, I’ll say tomahto.” La, La, La. No matter how she said it, it’s music to my ears. Nothing like the fingernails on the chalkboard x1000 when Obama speaks. All words, no substance. I think someone in the military said he speaks at mach 1 and says nothing.
Valerie commented:
Jim,
Ed Morrissey liked this speech at the SRLC so much, he found a full copy of it and posted it.
Herman Cain – Stay connected, stay informed, stay inspired
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/11/video-herman-cain-speech-to-the-srlc/
Uh, oh, this one’s got a math-and-physics background.
Valerie commented:
Graciela
April 11th, 2010 | 11:07 am | #9
I love Sarah, but I do with she would learn to pronounce “nuclear” correctly. Her mispronunciation just feeds into the left wing’s claims that she is stupid.
*********
I’ve got news for you, dear. Obama says it that way, too. I was surprised that nobody mentioned it, after they made such a big deal when Bush said the word that way.
NuckingFutz commented:
Being from Texas I have heard GWB speak before his presidency in places the libleft didnt care to monitor and have heard him correctly pronounce “nuclear”.
I honsestly believe that he (and Sarah) INTENTIONALLY mis-pronounce it JUST to drive the libturds nuts.
Appears to be working too………
Spartan79 commented:
“I love Sarah, but I do with she would learn to pronounce “nuclear” correctly. Her mispronunciation just feeds into the left wing’s claims that she is stupid.”
If you’ll check the dictionary, the way Sarah (and W) pronounce “nuclear”, is acceptable, if not preferred. In fact, given the way Palin continues to get inside the left’s head every time she opens her mouth or posts on Facebook, I don’t doubt for a minute that her pronunciation isentirely intentional.
On the other hand “corpseman” is in no one’s dictionary as an acceptable pronunciation, and I’m still waiting to hear how 15,000 can die from a tornado in a town of 1,500; or how health care reform is going to reduce business’ cost of health insurance by 3,000%. Our president is a moron, and sooner or later the MSM is going to have to admit it.
donh commented:
Sarah Palin is right on the bulls eye. I used to be that guy in high school waiting for the bus , daring people to punch me in the stomach to prove I can take it. Everyone remembers having an idiot like that at their school. Why is Obama still acting like a juvenile delinquent at his age? I stopped daring people before I turned 16.
John Gargano commented:
There is only one correct way to pronounce “nuclear”. Its NU-CLEE-ER. There are no regional variations, there are only mispronunciations by inarticulate people.
We absolutely cannot rationalize mispronunciations of critical terms and be taken seriously in political debates. There is no rational thought behind pronouncing the word like some yahoo who doesn’t know a proton from an electron.
Why do some people want to lower the bar? That’s what liberals do. I thought as Conservatives we strived to maintain the integrity of the English language which is an important part of our heritage. While I strongly support Gov. Palin, I must respectfully request that she not pioneer new ground in casual colloquial creations. And she should not perpetuate the errors of President Bush. This will only result in ridicule which will be detrimental to accomplishing the important goals we have coming up in November.
Lets get together behind this one.
CliffNZ commented:
I’m from New Zealand. (Or Noo Zeelund to some people) I heard Sarah Palin’s speech and didn’t even notice any mis-pronounciation of nuclear. I also heard Sally Quinn’s comment which seemed to me to encapsulate the sneering, condescension of the elite left perfectly. Please don’t let people like her get Sarah Palin supporters worried about this non issue.
betw commented:
CliffNZ – Sally Quinn is a know-nothing of the first order. She quite literally was an entertainment “society page”, gossip columnist most of her career. Most Americans, outside of Wash DC have never heard or read anything from her. She’s irrelevant.
While I like quite a lot about Palin, it’s far too early to start thinking about who the GOP candidate can or should be. We have a HUGE mid-term election to concern us, coming up in just seven months. And I do believe, the majority of the American people are going to deliver a strong rebuke of Obama and his left-wing academic utopianism. One term wonder.
bruceT commented:
Put a school boy, who basically never worked in his life, into the White House and what would you expect?
His pappy was an African-Muslim and a Marxist. His step-father was a Muslim. His teenaged mentor was a black radical Marxist. His preacher is a Marxist. His good friend (Ayers) is a Marxist.
Gee, I wonder why he wants to weaken the USA and pander to our adversaries?
Like said above. Our race hustlin lawyer in chief is a one term wonder.
Spartan79 commented:
Sorry, Gargano. From Mirriam Webster On-Line Dictionary:
Though disapproved of by many, pronunciations ending in \-kyə-lər\ have been found in widespread use among educated speakers including scientists, lawyers, professors, congressmen, United States cabinet members, and at least two United States presidents and one vice president. While most common in the United States, these pronunciations have also been heard from British and Canadian speakers.
I commonly use the less preferred pronunciation around lib acquaintances. I love the irritated grimace it produces on their part. I say let Palin say “nuclear” any way she wants. She doesn’t need the approval of the New York Times, and wouldn’t get it anyway, even if she used impeccable pronunciation with every word she spoke.
Graciela commented:
I agree that Obama is really the stupid one. It’s just that no media will ever bring up his gaffes, meanwhile they will endlessly play up anything that could be construed as incorrect by Sarah. That’s all. It would be an easy thing for her to change.
Kurt Montandon commented:
Do you people even remotely care about reality?
It’s not a change or a 180 based on Palin’s rather ignorant criticism.
The treaty that was agreed upon specifically allows for retaliation in the event of nuclear, biological, or chemical attacks, as well as first use of nuclear weapons against non-signers and specific uncooperative nations. This is exactly the opposite of what Palin claimed.
Do facts really mean absolutely NOTHING to you Palin-Americans?
John Gargano commented:
Spartan79, thanks for the quotation which clearly states that version, is “disapproved of by many” and yet is still used by a lot of educated people. Please explain to me why, when we need to win elections in November, would we go about using a pronunciation that is “disapproved of by many”. What benefit will we derive from this practice?
Do you say, “where’s it at”? Do you “ayxe” people questions? Are you fond of saying “for all intensive purposes”? A lot of people say these things and that doesn’t make them correct, nor do people take you seriously in the course of a debate when you speak that way.
While you may put forth some justification for improper pronunciation, which is that a lot of people do the same thing, I am saying go with the condition that requires no justification, just pronounce it correctly.
If you think doing something wrong long enough makes it right, you should join the Democratic Party.
Starbanker commented:
Apparently being the VP candidate who lost carries more influence than the one that won. I guess Biden was too busy pointing out how the President was like God, after all, Obama’s actions have been referred to as unprecedented more often than God’s miracles.
bruceT commented:
Kurt baby……you voted for a Kenyan-Indonesian Moooslim boy. What part of stoopid don’t you understand, son?
He pronounces “Navy Corpsman” like “corpse-man”. He misquotes the Decl. of Independence in the State of the Union address, citing the quote from the Constitution and he was a “college professor”? Do you have any paperwork to verify that Kurt baby?
He throws a baseball like, well, a little girl. How can an American boy grow up in the United States in the 1960s and 70s and not know how to throw a baseball?
Now he announces to the world that the USA will not defend itself even if attacked with WMD. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha……..2 1/2 years and this idiot will be a footnote in history. Then this country can return to economic growth and a proud, strong national defense against Barry’s people – mooooooslims!
bruceT commented:
Rasmussen Reports
Obama’s approval rating sinking further
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 30% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -13.
Ouch, that’s gotta sting. Is it November yet?
Kurt Montandon commented:
bruceTNo
I’ll give you a 3/10.
You used “mooslim” too much.
And I notice a continued refusal here to admit that the language of the treaty allows for retaliatory use, and first use against specific nations.
Solaratov commented:
Kurt Montandon
April 11th, 2010 | 6:00 pm | #48
bruceTNo
And I notice a continued refusal here to admit that the language of the treaty allows for retaliatory use, and first use against specific nations.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So, you’re saying that you’ve read the treaty, kurt?
Or, are you just repeating whatever “team obama” *says* is in the treaty?
Funny, but the same sort of thing happened with the “health care” bill that no congresspersons read before thy voted for it. And now, the truth is coming out.
Somehow, I get the feeling that you’re just parroting a stack of talking points passed on to you by your masters.
BWAAK! BWAAK!KURT WANNA CRACKER! BWAAK!
Obot troll.
Patrick Chester commented:
I wish people wouldn’t let the progressives control the narrative by worrying over someone pronouncing “nuclear’ with a regional accent.
Chris Barnhart commented:
To be fair to the President (though, I don’t know why I should, he hasn’t been fair to the American people), this didn’t happen today, but was – in fact – part of the original policy. NPR reported on it late last week, and even Jon Stewart pointed it out on the Daily Show.
Stewart also points out that the reduction in arms by 1/3 was originally the idea of Ronald Reagan.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-april-8-2010/the-big-bang-treaty
If we’re going to continue to attack Obama’s policies (which – all together – I refer to as the Anti-Patriot Act), we need to do so dutifully and honestly.
It makes us all look bad when the entire conservative media, the Republican Party and Fox News gets it wrong, and a late night comedy show gets it right.
Now, as for the wording of the policy. Doesn’t this wishy-washiness (yes, I KNOW it’s not a word) make the policy itself just lip service and meaningless? It seems to me, what Obama is saying is “We won’t attack you…unless we change our minds of course. Which we might. You never know.”
What Obama SHOULD be saying is this: We’re the USA, and if you attack our sovereignty with any force whatsoever, we will retaliate with any and all means necessary, at our discretion.
It’s this point that Palin should be attacking. But she, Sean Hannity, Michele Bachman and even Newt Gingrich ALL got this one wrong.
We’re waging a war in the USA. Not just a political and ideological one. We’re waging a Constitutional battle to preserve our freedoms. And we’re waging actual war abroad. Let’s make sure we do our research, so that 4 days of political rhetoric can’t be outdone by a 5 minute segment on Comedy Central.
Dale commented:
Palin didn’t actually produce an analysis of the Obama administration’s policy, she just said a few things about this and that and something stuck on the wall, kind of like that horoscope that sometimes seems so accurate.
You people are grasping at straws, Palin is like Chauncey Gardner in _Being There_. This is just a clarification by the chiefs of staff. You really think Obama is writing any of this and not Robert Gates?
Ben K commented:
According to Webster’s, the way Sarah and W (and Rove) pronounce “nuclear” is OK albeit nonstandard.
John Gargano commented:
Regarding NU-CLEE-ER vs NUK-YA-LER. Are we all going to pretend the new emperor has clothes just like we did with Bush? No more! I’m tired of politicians who are lazy with their language and don’t feel like they need to worry about being articulate when addressing the people.
How about lets stop the denial. There are no correct “regional pronunciations” of the word “nuclear”. That its mispronunciation is widespread is no excuse to perpetuate it. And lets be clear, “nonstandard” really means wrong.
Are we going to follow the absurd liberal practice of jury nullification because “she’s one of our own”? This is nuts. This is exactly how we end up down the dark road AFTER the election.
Sarah Palin is an immense target for ridicule and we don’t need her giving credibility to the effort. And for those of ya’ll who just don’t get it – please consider there are many who do get it. And Sarah Palin, as the daughter of a science teacher, who by now undoubtedly has numerous advisers, should know better and she should respect the people who went to school and paid attention because they get it.
Consider this from a purely practical point of view. No one complains when the word is pronounced the way its written – the “standard” way. Many people notice and complain when it isn’t. At this time in our history we (conservatives) really need to accomplish our objectives at the polls. Why on earth, when elections are so close, when we really need the numbers, do people want to do anything that will needlessly reduce the numbers? People may try to rationalize this to high heaven, but mispronouncing the word nuclear, or using the “disapproved version” or “nonstandard” version will only reduce the numbers we really need right now because it makes her seem uneducated. Please tell me who will benefit from this?
She should stop it, fix it, and go on so that this issue can just go by the wayside
pm commented:
John, #56, you’ve expressed your opinion quite forcefully.
Perhaps now you’ll consider your choice of “strived” as the past tense of “strive.” (#33)
To some, its use might be jarring — you might even sound uneducated; though, clearly, you’re not at all.
John Gargano commented:
Mea culpa on “strived”.
My apology for the forcefulness.
I simply find the pushback on this issue to be exasperating.
Yes, I have been hitting the keyboard with a great deal of vigor. I find it extremely frustrating because this election cycle is so critical. If we don’t take at least the House with a fairly good margin, we’re toast. That, plus I don’t like to see conservatives speak like they come from the part of town where the tooth to gum ratio is low. I like to see us set an example, which for the most part of the debate we certainly do.
If I send flowers and candy in an effort to persuade people about this issue do you think I might be more effective? In this case I guess it’s a good thing that so many are anonymous. I can imagine the shipping alone would put me back quite a bit.
HoosierHawk commented:
Gates saying that the President reserves the right to revise the policy as circumstances dictate is his way of pointing out “look guys, Obama hasn’t kept his word on a single promise he has made so far, don’t get all bent out of shape over this one. Him saying that we won’t nuke under this scenrio or those conditions is scaring the hell of the bad actors – they are convinced that Obama is lying about something – which means that somebody is about to get nuked for some reason.
Ellie Light commented:
Don’t you all sleep better at night knowing Obamao will launch itchy powder at any enemy that uses nuclear, bio, or chemical weapons against us?
Don’t you wish you had the moxie of a community organizer?
whoframedrudy commented:
“The treaty … specifically allows for retaliation in the event of nuclear, biological, or chemical attacks … against non-signers and specific uncooperative nations.”
So if you sign some b.s. treaty and then attack us with biological weapons, you get off? If a nation actually attacks the U.S., why should we care whether they were a ‘non-signer’ or not? You get nuked for an actual attack, not for ‘non-cooperation.’