E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe conservative blogosphere capitalized on Congressman Bob Etheridge (D-NC)'s caught-on-YouTube assault on a student to make the case for the Republican challenger to his seat, while both sides of the spectrum offered their takes on the New York Times' front-pager today about Afghanistan's rich mineral reserves, with many focusing more on the timing of the report than the news itself.
In his post on the assault, conservative blog Red State's Moe Lane simply gave the name of Etheridge's challenger: "The Republican challenger that you just decided to give money to is named Renee Ellmers," he wrote.
And Hot Air's Ed Morrissey had more on Ellmers: "His opponent is Renee Ellmers, who works in the health-care industry and is a staunch opponent of ObamaCare, opposes the bailouts and Obamanomics, is pro-life, wants to try terrorists in military courts, and demands immigration enforcement. It doesn’t appear that Ellmers is a big fan of assaulting students on the street, either. Perhaps this R+2 district might be ready to exchange their current Congressman for someone who understands the proper relationship between elected officials and their constituents — and the laws regarding assault and battery."
On Pentagon's new report that Afghanistan could become "the Saudi Arabia of lithium," Morrissey noted the timing of the announcement, giving voice to a theory making the rounds, especially among liberal voices, that rich minerals may provide the Obama administration a new justification for allocating troops and resources to the wartorn country: "We’ve spent over eight years in Afghanistan attempting to subdue the radicals and fight those across the border in Pakistan’s frontier provinces, and many people have questioned why we’re spending so much blood and treasure in a country known for its ability to bankrupt empires. We have plenty of good strategic reasons to attempt to salvage Afghanistan and keep it from becoming a failed state, but this find will definitely have those inclined towards conspiracy theories cranking up new plots and dark cabals as the real reason we’re attempting to salvage Afghanistan. A trillion dollars in new mineral deposits don’t come along very often, after all, and some of these minerals will be critical to energy and military applications."
Morrissey added, however, that the finding "is a blessing for the Afghan people. They will need a massive improvement in infrastructure in order to get the materials out for export, but that investment will come a lot faster with this find."
At the liberal MyDD, Jerome Armstrong did not buy the sincerity of this announcement: "I know its not nice to step out of the partisan shill range that would take this at face; but come on-- are there actually sheep that buy this planted crap?" he writes. "Are there actually people who feel better about this particular bipartisan invasion/occupation/war because the US military will be shielding for corporations to exploit the land of Afghanistan?"
On timing, he continued: "this piece of propaganda has been known for years. It wasn't until the Pentagon and President Obama needed some 'good news' to sell that they marketed up this dish for mass consumption."
"In an ideal world this could be great news for Afghanistan," wrote Chris in Paris at liberal blog AMERICAblog. "It could transform the country into a major player in the global economy, creating jobs throughout the country as well as cash to rebuild the troubled country following decades of conflict."
Chris continues, "In an imperfect world, this new discovery (which somehow is making waves now as the US public is turning against the war effort) has many obstacles. We don't need to look hard to locate environmental problems related to mining... If the US can't get BP and other oil companies to properly address the environmental risks, how can we expect mining companies to do the right thing in far away lands? Think about the Nigerian experience with Big Oil. And then there's the cash. Lots of cash. In a less structured economy such as Afghanistan, the risk for bribes and massive corruption are substantial."
Leave a Comment:
Having a valid economy, away from the poppy fields would do alot to combat terrorism in afghanistan. Hopefully with the creation of jobs, education, and good wage...many of those who have turned to the Taliban, will choose life & peace instead.
The downfall is: I see many more of our troops acting as bodyguards to business interests than hunting down those who were responsible for 9/11 (much like the oil interests in Iraq under bush).
Well, we could use companies like BlackWater for this type of security work.... But we know how well that turns out.
Exactly. There's really no one we can trust anymore.
Only little limpwristed conservative crybabies would call what Bob Etheridge did to that fake student reporter assault. What about the driveby shooting journalism of the fake child reporter? Bob Etheridge had no reason to answer any of that little punk's questions and I'm sure in the future Bob will be smart and just ignore such street trash. Still it was too funny watching how easy Bob manhandled the little boy, just goes to show that Democrats are far tougher than conservative wimps qand don't need to whine about needing guns to carry around in public.
Now we're finding out that in November of 2007 our government knew of the vast mineral reserves in Afghanistan yet Clueless George Bush and Tricky Dicky Cheney did nothing to exploit this new resource. Talk about missing out on an economic opportunity, but oh yeah they were only interested in stealing Iraqi oil. We're even finding out that the Soviets knew of this mineral treasure back in the 80's when they invaded Afghanistan.
Really sad that after spending so much blood and treasure stabilizing Afghanistan it's China who is out there bribing Afghan officials for mining rights. Way to go repugnant ones for doing everything you can to prop up China's economy at our country's expense, if you love Red Commie China so much go move there. In between our Red Connie Menace and China's Red Commie Menace our country is in real trouble.
Bob Etheridge is a Stud! Repugnant One Fake Reporter is a Wimp!
Here we have Etheridge doing this. Last week, a Dem assaulted somebody at a Tea Party. and, you want to call the Tea Party violent? How typical of you to be so hypocritical, though. I don't care WHO it was. My parents always told me if you throw the first punch, you're guilty.
The congressman could have walked by without answering or told them to contact his office for a statement. Instead, he assaulted these kids who asked a simple question. He should be prosecuted for assault and for illegal detention by grabbing the wrist of one and not letting go.
Ethridge must be one of those violent rightwing teabaggers you've been warning me about Eric. Keep up the fair and balanced blogging.
While Ethridge should have had a better handle on the situation, I totally understand, I am often face to face with these punks who do nothing constructive all day long and wait to bait someone who has had a bad day. Probably some poor little rich kid trying to make a name for himself in the republican party and ensure he keeps getting his allowance from his rich daddy - at least that's the jerks I'm exposed to quite often. If Mr. Ethridge can learn to do it, I've found the one thing that ticks these smart a--ed kids off the most is if you just smile and state the facts that they don't understand, making them look as stupid as they really are - I just love embarrassing those rich punk kids! Since he has apoligized to these punks, I wonder, when do the punks apoligze to him?
Why would you think "it was too funny watching how easy Bob manhandled the little boy"? Only cowards beat up on those smaller/weaker/not as powerful as them, so it fits- apparently for you and ol' Bob. Yeah, its just hilarious when "little boys" (your words, not mine) get roughed up. If you want to defend Etheridge & make people rethink their stance on this incident maybe you should choose a different tactic because the majority of us don't think its funny to see someone be "manhandled" for asking a question- no matter how provocative the question. Just a thought.
Renee Ellmers Fudd is a Complete Dud! Let's find out who sent the little fake reporter to assault Bob Etheridge on the street, bet it was her campaign. This is nothing but a manufactured act meant to destroy a good Democrat's record. Some degenerate conservative from the health care industry who wants to overturn Obamacare so the corrupt health care industry can return to ripping us all off without any worry of government regulation.
Just Say No to Renee Ellmers Fudd!
I think Etheridge and his "ilk" are going to be gone in the fall and 2012!! We need a GOOD HOUSE CLEANING in Washington and I think it will happen!!! Can't get anyone in that's any worse than what we have up there now. Heard on TV this morning that this is the FIRST time since 1974 that the White House hasn't had a budget! Dems. and Repubs. both are worried about Obama's spending and that he is asking for 50 BILLION more! They want him to take the 50 Billion (he thinks he has to have) out of the 464 Billion that HAS NOT been spent from the stimulous money. Sounds logical. But it may not sound logical to a man that doesn't know how to budget !!
Two replies.
First, the President does have a budget. It was submitted in February to Congress. It is Congress that has not yet approved a budget resolution. Regardless of what your news program may have said, there have been several years in which Congress has failed to have a budget resolution by mid-June. In fact, in some years, Congress is simply unable to pass a budget resolution. When that happens, the appropriations committee basically makes up the budget as it goes along.
Second, the money in the stimulus bill is already appropriated for spending in this and the next fiscal year on specific projects. Some of that 464 billion that is not spent is actually tax cuts. Now if you can tell me which specific appropriation you wish to cancel or which tax cut you want to repeal, then we can talk about spending it on something else. Otherwise, that money is not legally available for a different program.
Sounds to me like you listen to Fox RcTx.
RcTX3 - Well, sounds like you probably have a big bone to pick with Meg Whitman too, right? After all, she actually pushed an employee - so cool your jets, neither side seems to have a great handle on how to treat people and situations like this, now do they? and both Whitman and Ethridge were wrong to do it, however, the employee had less choice in the matter than the kid who was pretending to be something he was not.
Maybe the simplest explanation for the thuggish behavior of Rep Bob Etheridge is the best one...
Perhaps in his mind's eye he saw an opponent's commercial with video saying that he supports the Obama agenda.
Look at what Mark Critz achieved in PA-12 by running as a pro-gun, pro-life, anti cap-and-trade, and anti-Obamacare Democrat...running away from the Obama agenda and keeping the President out of his district served him nicely, didn't it?
And, PA-12 has a 2-1 Democratic voter registration edge, for heavenssakes!
I can fully understand Bob Etheridge's response to that question.
The Congress & the Senate must think they are important..i see all of them as worthless "BUMS" who are on the public dole .I think we really need term limits 2 in a lifetime retroactive!!!! NO retirements !These jackass's get 16K plus a month for nothing ...and the republicians haven't done a dam thing in 2 years !!! All the while collecting 16 thousand dollars plus a month....while we the "people" struggle to pay bills and feed our children....These "BUMS" are out drinking and getting caught in gay leather strip bars etc !!!! And thats just the family vaules folks !!!!
I don't care what party Etheridge belongs to he committed battery and should be arrested, tried, convicted (if found really guilty) and fined or spend some time in jail or probation.
And, where's Ms Pelosi's ethics committee?
Pelosi has an ethics committee? Where's the evidence for that?
Last night 60 Minutes had a report on cyber wars. Don't recall the speech date but in it Pres Obama mentioned an attack on the power grid which turned out to be in Brazil, plus he mentioned attacks on our country without specifics. In 2007, foreign hackers managed to infiltrate our DOD, DOE, and several other agencies and stayed hidden for several days retrieving a great deal of our policies, strategies, knowledge--the equivalent of The Library of Congress's data. It wasn't the first time.
Maybe not, but we're so tied up with the wars and the economy and now the Gulf that we have no resources to throw at this problem. In short, we're wide open.
Etheridge's conduct was inexcusable no matter who the person he attacked was or what the verbal provocation was. He may lose the electionbbecause of this incident, that would serve him right. I just hope he doesn't damage the Dems chances of holding on to Congress further than his own loss.
It’s one thing to be pessimistic, frustrated, and cynical. But it’s another to display those things in an interview.
___________________
Whoever wondered earlier...
Yup! This was Chuck Todd's handiwork... just heard him repeat it verbatim to Chrissy Matthews who's in the throes of a p!ssy fit!
Chrissy should shut his mouth for a change and give his ears a rest! Or at least let someone get a word in edgewise!
Poor, poor Chuckie T...in the line of fire yet again.
Man, Chuck...do you ever read what they say about you here?
I'm guessing in most cases...
You simply consider the source.
Why would you wade into this without hip-boots, eh Mr Todd?
Thanks, Chuck, for reporting the truth though there are some here that can't take it when it's about Liberals.
Some of us want fair and objective journalism, some of us want journalists who will glorify one party or another.
The sad thing is the people who degrade and insult those trying to give a fair take and honest opinion of what's happening. Seems to me that Chuck Todd has done his fair share of beating up Conservatives when they did stupid things, now that he's returning the favor, the Libs who previously supported him are calling him a traitor.... Double Standard eh?
Not really. I don't call him a traitor. I just call him incompetent. WAY beyond the Peter Principle. And distinctly lacking in eye candy for the ladies. Sigh.
Anna Molly-
I know already you're gonna get mad...but I'm so glad you posted your comment.
And, having said that, does Chuck Todd really represent a living, breathing, example of the Peter Principle...
Any more than Barack Obama does?
Todd has paid his dues...working his way up the ranks to become the White House correspondent of a major news organization.
Are you really, honestly suggesting that President Obama, who was a "community organizer" (I've lived in working-class communities all my life...and, I still don't know what that is); a constitutional law lecturer (briefly); an Illinois state legislator (again, briefly); and a U.S. Senator (you know where I'm going with this, Anna Molly)...has more practical experience at HIS current occupation, than Chuck Todd presently does?
Not buying that, Anna...but I'll concede your point about Chuck Todd being "eye candy" for the ladies.
Your qualifications to make that assessment won't be challenged by me.
Oh, Mixed Bag ... you already know I'm not gonna get mad. There is truth in what you say. But one of them was President of the Harvard Law Review, and one of them ... wasn't. Now, if we can just get Rahm Emanuel away from the one who was, and let him start applying his own gifts.
But you're certainly right about one thing. Eye candy is always in the eye of the beholder, and like Potter Stewart knew pornography, I know eye candy when I see it. ;)
This guy wanted their names for a reason, and that was to get some retribution. He and the libs can deny it it until the cows come home, but he was going to use his position to crush those little boys like bugs.
http://unrepentanttepartier.blogspot.com/2010/06/oh-you-could-see-venom-in-bob-ethridges.html
Well, those little boys need to be crushed like bugs, one thing I've learned the hard way, if you can't take the heat, don't step into the furnace, if those kids did not expect the reaction they were given they would not have bated Ethridge in the first place. Should Ethridge have handled it better, absolutely he should have and he is guilty of loosing his cool, however, those kids do need to be called out and they need to apoligize for acting like idiots, this is a case of both sides doing wrong, neither is right and hopefully those kids will realize you don't bait and goad somone if you can't take their response. I'm sure those poor little rich kids got all the reward they were looking for when they went home and reported to daddy what they did, howver, they get no respect from me and they don't get off so lightly either. they are not pure in their part of this either, so please don't waste your time defending those snot nosed brats, they should be out working like everyone else (yep, there are jobs out there, probably just not in the field their daddy paid for all that education for them to rob the public blind in - opps I mean work in).
They asked him if he supported the Obama agenda, and you consider that stepping into the furnace and goading? Is the Oabma agenda really that toxic that one can't simply reply with a yes or no? And, if they're snot nosed brats, then does that make every other reporter on the planet who asks questions of politicians snot nosed brats? You seem to have reacted just like the Congressman did, with outrage that they would have the audacity to question authority. Is that what the end game is for liberals, a world in which people can't question authority? Seems like it.
Right...Just like all of the oil we are getting from Iraq...I mean, that China is getting from Iraq.
I hope that the minerals will help the people of this broken country come into a new era of prosperity and better governance but I doubt it will. I hope I'm wrong.
On another note, I say stick to plan A. We have our own problems to solve.