moonbattery logo

Nov 13 2011

Smug as a Bug — Then Ground Into the Rug

Check out the unadulterated smugness on Snot Pelley’s face during the Republican debate last night, when he thought he had stuck it good to Newt Gingrich by declaring that killing terrorists overseas is not consistent with the “rule of law.”

scott-pelley smug

This expression of supreme self-appreciation was nowhere to be seen a minute later, after Newt had blown a gaping hole through it with an introductory civics lesson. Here’s the video:

Maybe Pelley should stick to reading left-wing lies off a teleprompter, rather than pick fights with his intellectual superiors.

On a tip from wingmann.

32 Responses to “Smug as a Bug — Then Ground Into the Rug”

  1. Alan says:

    Tough one. What exactly did this person do? Whatever it was, he was still a US citizen and was not convicted in court. What is this “review” and “panel that looked at it” Gingrich mentioned? I disagree Newt, US citizens do have rights, until convicted under law by a US court.

  2. Kevin R. says:

    Alan, do you then think Obama is a murderer?

  3. Graboid says:

    Newt rocks. I sincerely hope the bump he is getting in the polls is real.

  4. Air2air says:

    Hah.. watch the Ronulans heads explode. Do you guys think Newt can pull it off? Or will it be Romney?

  5. Nancy says:

    I honestly was not giving Newt any chance at all, but he is consistently better thinking on his feet than the rest. Of course, once Newt gets to the top of the polls David Axelrod will pull some sex scandal out of the files and leak it to the press.

  6. Fiberal says:

    Blount…thanks for posting this.

    When I saw the unmitigated snot-face on that liberal, I almost put a bullet through my computer.

    Glad I didn’t, bc Newt totally eviscerated the creep. And in a way none of the other candidates would have had the guts, intelligence or will to do.

    And Newt is absolutely correct. An act of treason is an act of war and the country has every right to defend itself.

    Newt also had exactly the right posture on this: mainly, that we even have to have this discussion is a measure of how low we have sunk into a bedlam of confused, unfocused pandering pantywaists.

    This pre-adolescent female confusion after 9-11 has been propagated by liberals thereby allowing the encroachment and justification of enemy muslims to live and plot against us in our cities.

    And it has caused us to contemplate roving spheres of worldwide judicial immunity for our enemies against all realms of common sense.

    All this has led to the point where America is expected by probably half of its own citizens to show the same kind of reverence and tolerance Israel has been obligated to show for her enemies in order not to foment world-wide attack.

    You can see how well that’s worked out for Israel.

  7. gorgo says:

    Kevin R. says:
    November 13, 2011 at 1:21 pm

    Alan, do you then think Obama is a murderer?

    * * *

    Man, you shut Alan right up! *doffs hat*

  8. Alan says:

    Not trolling, just asking:
    1) Who was the US citizen in question, and what exactly did he/she do?
    2) Were they charged and convicted in a US court of law (not a “panel” or “review”)? Of what?
    3) Is there a ton of difference between Bush and Obama on this issue?

    Obama ordering the killing of bin Ladin was one of his better decisions so far, because bin Ladin was not a US citizen and never set foot on American soil. John Walker Lindh WAS a US citizen who retained his Constitutional rights, right up until he was convicted in a US court. Just saying.

  9. Aaron says:

    “against all enemies foreign and domestic.” that is the oath that the military takes. just because someone is a citizen doesn’t mean we have to treat them with baby gloves if they commit an act of war against the U.S. i’m surprised that after Obama’s killing spree, that he still has any of his whacko leftist base, who beleves as Alan does. don’t kill anyone until they kill you first. that logic as you can see has it’s faults.

  10. Lao' s Lonely Syphilitic Brain Cell says:

    What about Anwar al-Awlaki, Alan? He was a US citizen that Obama had assassinated! Oh, you conveniently forgot about him? Quelle Surprise!

  11. Joek Loth says:

    Alan, try and keep up with the rest of us, or atleast take notes.

    Newt(salamander) should’ve ended his schooling of snott smelly with “Aaa Duuuh” !!!

    And smelly pelley , I’m pretty sure they were BOOING your dumbass for asking such a simpleton question.

  12. chuck in st paul says:

    if you act as an enemy combatant against the United States you are not covered under American civil law nor under the Geneva Conventions. The US government is free to kill you on sight. There is no ‘court’ involved. Your citizenship has no meaning in this context. None. Please rerun that clip. Newt explained it clearly.

  13. Lao' s Lonely Syphilitic Brain Cell says:

    Here’s a link from that reichwing news organization CNN!

  14. Lao' s Lonely Syphilitic Brain Cell says:

    Obama, international war criminal, or dessert topping!

  15. Lao' s Lonely Syphilitic Brain Cell says:

    Alan’s brilliance is only surpassed by his long term memory of recent leftwing talking points!

  16. Gunner Jones says:

    BHO made the right call, that being said, I look forward to his new job in 2013

  17. Fiberal says:

    Just for the record, here is Newt’s take home:

    “Civil defense, criminal defense, is a function of being within the American law. Waging war on the United States is outside criminal law. It is an act of war and should be dealt with as an act of war. And the correct thing in an act of war is to kill people who are trying to kill you.”

    And I would add, citizen or not, whether you are committing a crime on someone else’s property endangering the owner’s life, or when you commit an act of war against the U.S. that endangers lives, you are acting against the use of deadly force, a right codified in law.

    It is a tribute to liberal insurrection and propaganda that some people, (like smug, arrogant and plainly stupid news anchors) still have to be told this obvious fact.

  18. Michael says:

    Alan, nice that you defend rights for someone who was probably running around Yemen knowing that the U.S. had a missile with his name on it and probably in his wildest dreams never expected that someone was going to knock on his door, arrest him, and read him his Constitutional Rights. Citizen or not, he became an enemy combatant on foreign soil and died that way. Good riddance.

  19. wingmann says:

    Me thinks someone needs to watch the video again……

  20. wingmann says:

    Hey pelly,how does it feel to be sodomized on national tv?……ASSHAT.

  21. Chuck Woolery says:

    Not only did Scott Smelley make the Liberal “look how smart I am” face, but you could also hear him say “no” after Newt said his first point. So smug. So wrong.

  22. Fred C. Dobbs says:

    If you happen to have a US passport, try reading the page that tells you how and under what circumstances you can give up your citizenship. One of them is knowingly taking up arms in a foreign military to fight against the lawful government of the United States. Since the left loves to try and say we should follow the Geneva Convention regarding members of Al Queda (which are not signatories of said convention, nor technically a standing military force of a specific nation) it stands to reason that they consider Al Queda to be a foreign military force. Ergo, if you’re a member of Al Queda (which isn’t in dispute in this instance) you’ve effectively renounced your US citizenship and are NOT protected under the US constitution.

    The case of John Walker Lind was different since he was captured on the battlefield. They would’ve been perfectly justified in killing him, but it’s my understanding he surrendered and they decided to try him since it was basically an open and shut case. By taking up arms for a foreign power against the United States it could be argued he renounced his citizenship as well.

    To be clear, the purpose of the Constitution is to protect US Citizens and resident aliens, NOT foreigners fighting against us on a foreign battlefield. If that were the case we would’ve brought back all those war criminals in Germany and Japan that we captured at the end of World War II and tried them in US civilian criminal courts. That’s why doing idiotic things like reading terrorists captured on the battlefield their Miranda rights is so stupid. They HAVE no Miranda rights, they aren’t citizens of the United States.

  23. Kevin R. says:

    Mr. Dobbs, my hat’s off to you. Well said.

  24. Momster says:

    I am going home to dig up my passport and read it through. Thanks for the heads up. Great argument against commies/progs/libs when they start babbling their insane and subversive prattle.

  25. Marci says:

    Excellent point…I don’t think that most of the moonbats who bleat that terrorists should have our rights understand the scope of what they are asking for.

  26. lagnar says:

    I caught the Newt smack down of the POS Pelly on TV. Just WOW! Did the repub candidates just now realize who the real ENEMY is? Not each other?

    Why can’t the republicans grow some balls all the time? For the first time in recent memory one of our guys stood up to the libtard obamarrhoids and showed them where the bear shits in the woods.

    This is war boys and girls, not high school debate club.

    Fiberal and Mr. Dobbs; excellent posts.

  27. Alan says:

    Thank you Mr Dobbs for clarifying that. I support the US Constitution above all, and was simply making the point that until somebody officially renounces their US citizenship, they still have rights, even if they’re plotting to kill other Americans. I for one am very uncomfortable with our government ordering the killing / assassination of US citizens, anywhere, for any reason.

    Pity nobody here can answer my original questions. Who was this person, what exactly did they do, what was the evidence against them, and what “panel” decided he was fair game?


  28. Joek Loth says:

    alan , you sir are an idiot. Your on a computer, right? And your still asking these questions.
    It not called an INFORMATION SUPER HIGHWAY for the hell of it.

  29. Nathaniel M says:

    Lao’ s Lonely Syphilitic Brain Cell says:
    November 13, 2011 at 3:53 pm

    Obama, international war criminal, or dessert topping!

    I say it’s a floor wax!

  30. Nathaniel M says:

    Alan since you asked nicely… I do believe da thing dey were referring to was the drone killing of American-born and raised Anwar al-Awlaki, linked in Lao’ s Lonely Syphilitic Brain Cell’s in his post above.

    Newt delivered clarity on a shining sword man. Mitt even stated “Well said, well said!”

    Ron Paul looked like he just had a “Was that a fart or wet sh*t combo?!!” moment.

    Sharp & clean enough to shave with & no irritating bumps or razor burn! Would the OccuStains ever have such an epiphany/moment of clarity?

  31. greenearthman says:

    Newt is intellectually superior to someone other than Romney? C’mon.

  32. greenearthman says:

    My mother wasn’t born in Michigan, but she grew up there. I wasn’t born in Michigan, but I went to school there. Much of what you write is true of a huge swath of our country, from Erie PA to the Illinois/Wisconsin border and maybe beyond. Unfortunately, I was doing better things the day the HR Pufnstuf(or however you spell it)set caught on fire during a live show.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy