tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post7371147543205564513..comments2024-03-26T09:25:02.198-04:00Comments on Hey Jenny Slater.: Dr. Phil for secretary of state?Astronaut Mike Dexterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01498197770701096363noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-87357856170187988022008-06-23T10:08:00.000-04:002008-06-23T10:08:00.000-04:00I think George McGovern is still around. LMAOI did...I think George McGovern is still around. LMAO<BR/><BR/>I didn't expect to convince you, you're a desperate, irrational liberal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-25865851351981682122008-06-22T20:23:00.000-04:002008-06-22T20:23:00.000-04:00So Hillary thinks Obama isn't "ready to take the c...So Hillary thinks Obama isn't "ready to take the call." So what? I happen to disagree.<BR/><BR/>And I'm not particularly concerned in who's playing the race card, either. The main things I'm concerned about, as I've said before on this blog, are who's going to restore some semblance of respect for our civil liberties and who's going to keep us out of wars we don't need to be fighting. So far, nobody's convinced me that John McCain is interested in doing either of those things.Astronaut Mike Dexterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01498197770701096363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-23785423735536633542008-06-22T10:32:00.000-04:002008-06-22T10:32:00.000-04:00Obama, an new kind of politician?http://www.nytime...Obama, an new kind of politician?<BR/><BR/>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/opinion/20brooks.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin<BR/><BR/>http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jHgYTY1xnS8kIhR01TNWRJ0DTSJwD91DC9N00<BR/><BR/>Obama is running on change and yet he proceeds with politics as usual.<BR/><BR/>He said he wants to "use the hammer of opting out of NAFTA" to make our neighbors renegotiate. Reneging on our treaties? So, this will make other countries like us more? Why stop there? Why not renege on our mutual defense treaties like blue wants? How can you trust this guy? I can't - based on his constant amorphous positions. Someone called trying to understand this guy's positions as "trying to nail jello to the wall."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-74389906096883534352008-06-22T08:11:00.000-04:002008-06-22T08:11:00.000-04:00Apparently the surge is succeeding:http://www.nyti...Apparently the surge is succeeding:<BR/><BR/>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/world/middleeast/20surge.html?fta=y<BR/><BR/>Hope the source is to your liking.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-31425661661318421462008-06-22T08:08:00.000-04:002008-06-22T08:08:00.000-04:00Jeez. The point you refuse to recognize is that it...Jeez. The point you refuse to recognize is that it is Hillary's opinion that Obama ain't ready to take the call at 3 AM. In her opinion, he's not qualified, he doesn't have the necessary experience. I'll draw pictures next time.<BR/><BR/>Also, I questioned in an earlier thread if blacks were ready for a black president. To my point:<BR/><BR/>http://blackpoliticsontheweb.com/2008/06/21/sclc-head-michelle-obama-treated-more-roughly-than-her-husband-because-of-her-slave-heritage/<BR/><BR/>This is what we're going to get with Obama. Someone takes exception to M's comment that only now is she proud to be an American and it's now a racial incident. O says that M is off limits, even though she's campaigning like her husband. It's going to be race card city if he's elected.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-68461803387697190432008-06-22T07:58:00.000-04:002008-06-22T07:58:00.000-04:00Did you even read that Borowitz column that you li...Did you even <I>read</I> that Borowitz column that you linked to? His whole point was to criticize Hillary Clinton, not Obama.<BR/><BR/>Again, you've got a whole lot of rhetoric and invective but precious little in the way of actual facts to back them up.Astronaut Mike Dexterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01498197770701096363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-25713748768036843202008-06-22T07:46:00.000-04:002008-06-22T07:46:00.000-04:00What's more significant, deferring to Rush Limbaug...What's more significant, deferring to Rush Limbaugh's opinion or the dem candidate who garnered the popular majority in O's party? Here's the point from a source that only you could love and consider valid, a liberal comedian from the Huffington Post:<BR/><BR/>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/hillary-obama-not-ready-_b_90542.html<BR/><BR/>What is incredible about supporting my opinions with facts? You and dctrojan continue to revise history only to be set straight by the historical facts with which I support my counter arguments. For example, is it not "naive" for Obama to pursue a failed strategy to the war on terror, i.e., Clinton's law enforcement approach that led to the Cole bombing, the embassy bombings and 9/11? (When we catch Osama, do we have to read him his Miranda rights?) We haven't enjoyed another attack here since we took the military approach to the problem. <BR/><BR/>Raising taxes on business and promising more jobs at the same time? Talking to despots without preconditions? He believes that reforming the banking system will create more jobs! He doesn't understand that corporate loopholes and corporate welfare are bipartisan and intentional to create jobs. Naive. Naive. Naive. Naive. Naive. <BR/><BR/>Obama is not a uniter. Hell, he reneged when McCain reached across the aisle on campaign finance reform. <BR/><BR/>He is an idealogue. Look at his liberal voting record at the state and while in DC. Dare I raise his 20 years with Rev. Wright?<BR/><BR/>He's a naive idealogue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-40610006200512880882008-06-21T12:43:00.000-04:002008-06-21T12:43:00.000-04:00Anonymous, I'll give you credit for having some gr...Anonymous, I'll give you credit for having some grasp of history and politics, but that just makes it harder for me to understand why you feel the need to undermine your credibility by referring to value judgments like "Obama is naive" and "an idealogue without the experience to keep us safe" as "facts" -- not to mention making up Hillary Clinton quotes out of thin air.<BR/><BR/>And even if that quote were legitimate -- which, <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22hillary+clinton%22+%22barack+obama%22+%22he%27s+unqualified+to+be+president%22&start=0&sa=N" REL="nofollow">as far as I can ascertain,</A> it isn't -- my only reaction would be to find it fascinating that after 15 years of treating her as the devil incarnate, the right wing is suddenly deferring to her on matters of who'd make a good president and who wouldn't.Astronaut Mike Dexterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01498197770701096363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-30366826412825804562008-06-21T09:58:00.000-04:002008-06-21T09:58:00.000-04:00The Marine withdrawal began in 1969 as the South V...The Marine withdrawal began in 1969 as the South Vietnamese began to assume a larger role in the fighting. The last ground forces left Vietnam by June 1971.<BR/><BR/>A skeleton force of mostly CAP advisors and embassy MPs remained. CAP advisors were gone by March 1972 and the last MPs left in 1975 at the fall of Saigon.<BR/><BR/>Air strikes in the North continued in order to influence the Paris peace talks to our favor.<BR/><BR/>Nixon inherited a mismanaged war and a public that was sick of a war that the libs started but didn't want to win. He had little choice but to try and get out with dignity. We got out without the dignity. It got worse when the dems broke our promise to support the South financially after we withdrew.<BR/><BR/>The 1972 presidential election was a referendum on the war and the anti-war crowd got their collective butts kicked. Now, this is a different time and a different war and a different press that is in the tank for Obama and viscerally anti-war. If it were Bill's war it would be very different. These dynamics will mitigate O's vulnerability. But it doesn't change the facts that O is very liberal, a partisan, not a uniter, naive and an idealogue without the experience to win this war and keep us safe. To wit: he wants to treat terrorism as a criminal event to be handled by law enforcement, just like Bill handled the '93 WTC bombing and we know where that got us. As Hillary said, "he's unqualified to be president."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-54305919453197891742008-06-21T08:46:00.000-04:002008-06-21T08:46:00.000-04:00Then the timeline of your earlier post is all out ...Then the timeline of your earlier post is all out of whack. Nixon kicked McGovern's ass in 1972, <I>then</I> Nixon announced the suspension of offensive action against North Vietnam at the very beginning of 1973, and he withdrew U.S. troops later that year.<BR/><BR/>It's worth mentioning, too, that while the Democratic nominee for president in 1972 was clobbered, the Republicans only gained 12 seats in the house (not nearly enough to retake the majority) and actually <I>lost</I> two seats in the Senate.Astronaut Mike Dexterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01498197770701096363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-28775809883530778552008-06-20T20:33:00.000-04:002008-06-20T20:33:00.000-04:00"The United States presidential election of 1972 w..."The United States presidential election of 1972 was waged on the issues of radicalism and the Vietnam War. The Democratic nomination was eventually won by George McGovern, who ran an anti-war crusade against incumbent President Richard M. Nixon, but was handicapped by his outsider status. Nixon, proclaiming that peace was at hand in Vietnam because of his policies, ridiculed McGovern as the radical candidate. The election took place on November 7, 1972. Nixon won the election in a landslide, with a 23.2 percentage points margin of victory in the popular vote, the 4th largest such margin in Presidential election history."<BR/>Wikipedia<BR/><BR/>Obama=McGovern Lite<BR/><BR/>Yep, Nixon had it all save Watergate. He was one strange duck but he kicked McGovern's butt.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-2611594794238317482008-06-20T19:47:00.000-04:002008-06-20T19:47:00.000-04:00Which election was that? The Democrats gained seat...Which election was that? The Democrats gained seats in 1974 thanks to Watergate, beat Ford in the '76 presidential election, and maintained substantial majorities in both houses of Congress even after the off-year elections in '78.Astronaut Mike Dexterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01498197770701096363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-30288348045016714522008-06-20T17:34:00.000-04:002008-06-20T17:34:00.000-04:00What you missed was 2 million killed in the wake o...What you missed was 2 million killed in the wake of our cutting and running from Nam, you missed the dems failing to fund our commitment to financially support the South Vienamese continued fight against the North after we left, you missed the dems subsequently getting their butts kicked in the subsequent national elections. You missed alot. Including the original point, you moron.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-38694228312498048122008-06-20T15:39:00.000-04:002008-06-20T15:39:00.000-04:00"The stupidest war is one that you don't finish to..."The stupidest war is one that you don't finish to win. Vietnam comes to mind. Iraq could be another Vietnam if we cut and run. That's stupid."<BR/><BR/>I guess I missed that day in history class where we went over how "losing in 'Nam led to the US turning Communist". <BR/>It's people getting wounded, shot and killed, not a football game for fuck's sake. But if you want to follow Bush's glorious past as a cheerleader, knock yourself out.Willhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10075308307848122779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-26803820420452199032008-06-20T12:22:00.000-04:002008-06-20T12:22:00.000-04:00A couple of responses:re: bigblue.You need to bone...A couple of responses:<BR/><BR/>re: bigblue.<BR/><BR/>You need to bone-up on what are called mutual defense treaties. We have them with numerous allies, including Israel. Walking from an MDT would have disastrous consequences with NATO, SEATO, Korea, Japan, etc. Next to cutting and running, I can't think of a worse signal to send the world. To a lesser degree Obama's desire to "renegotiate" NAFTA sends a similar message: we dont' keep our agreements. I don't think what works for the NFL will work for the US.<BR/><BR/>Butler's a good example of a vet who had enough of war for a lifetime. I sense that McCain would support Butler's position.<BR/><BR/>The problem for Obama is that he has no perspective, no sense of when and how to use his proposed enhanced military power. McCain does. McCain understood what Powell meant when he said if we break it we'll own it...Bush didn't. Wars are always judged by history on their outcome.<BR/><BR/>Yes, according to my wife, it is whoever has the biggest dick. When they compliment you on your kissing, foreplay, etc., it's just another way of telling you that your dick's undersized.<BR/><BR/>re: Doug.<BR/><BR/>I have a problem with how lightly you take a rookie mistake by JFK that brought us to the brink of nuclear war. There's a flaw in your risk assessment process. Now, I understand that as a liberal you are very forgiving (unless it's a repub to be forgiven) but please don't be so nonchalant about our existence.<BR/><BR/>Also, you talk of Obama's plans to strengthen our military. When confronted with the cost of his new social freebies, where do you think he'll spend our money? Hell, when the guy gave a speech on public service he didn't mention military service once.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-44770577145805584552008-06-20T10:55:00.000-04:002008-06-20T10:55:00.000-04:00Methinks you're an extra small trojanYep. It is al...<I>Methinks you're an extra small trojan</I><BR/><BR/>Yep. It is all about who has the biggest dick.<BR/><BR/>I never said fuck the Jews. I said let Israel take care of Israel. They have the nukes for it and we are not going to stop pumping billions of dollars into their economy anytime soon. Plus, they are God's chosen people. If He is for them who can be against them?<BR/><BR/>Aren't they showing off practice bombing runs to end the Iranian nuclear threat?<BR/><BR/>Yeah. That should bump the price of oil up nicely.<BR/><BR/>Maybe we should give them a raise.<BR/><BR/>If you want to know what war is just google Major General Smedley D. Butler.<BR/><BR/>He will tell you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-76446773865991422252008-06-20T06:16:00.000-04:002008-06-20T06:16:00.000-04:00Doug, great post. I like all the questions you rai...Doug, great post. I like all the questions you raise, I like considering all the possible answers, and I like thinking outside my normal box. Some of the commenters had really well-reasoned points, too, and I've enjoyed reading them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-13841131864845230232008-06-20T06:00:00.000-04:002008-06-20T06:00:00.000-04:00Enjoy your soccer. For me, it's poker night. I'll ...Enjoy your soccer. For me, it's poker night. I'll enjoy my single malt, Cohiba and poker with a few close friends.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-29146746612409331082008-06-19T18:04:00.000-04:002008-06-19T18:04:00.000-04:00This was probably just a typo, but:"McCAIN: Absolu...This was probably just a typo, but:<BR/><BR/>"McCAIN: Absolutely. A nuclear-armed Iran would be an incredibly stabilizing force in the Middle East."<BR/><BR/>Did you mean "incredibly de-stabilizing"? Or do you think McCain thinks Iran getting the bomb is a good thing?<BR/><BR/>just wondering.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-38794668191712895762008-06-19T16:33:00.000-04:002008-06-19T16:33:00.000-04:00anon @ 3.10 - "I know you are, but what am I?" Soc...anon @ 3.10 - "I know you are, but what am I?" Socrates would weep, sir, if only he knew that he had been eclipsed in the comments section. Fortunately my day wasn't hinging on your validation. <BR/><BR/>I do like your idea of working through the "F's" though, so I wrote you a little haiku just to show that there are no hard feelings: <BR/><BR/>fulminator froths<BR/>foolishly and frantically<BR/>fails fantastically<BR/><BR/>Since we're just asserting that we're both winning now: I can devote the balance of the afternoon to this - well, I usually leave the office between 6 and 6.30 pm EDT, so until then at least. Hopefully we can get another couple of rhetorical farts in between now and then. <BR/><BR/>I won't be online this evening because I'll be too busy watching the liberal appeaser's sport of choice, soccer - the one environment in which it's still acceptable for the Germans to relive the glory days of European conquest, absent the mass murder of course.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-65063354461542653182008-06-19T16:10:00.000-04:002008-06-19T16:10:00.000-04:00Damn, I thought you were better. Thought you had m...Damn, I thought you were better. Thought you had more than rhetorical poop. Give us something more substantive than facile this, facile that. (Most of your response was, well, facile.) Is facile your word of the day? Since you've got to the "F's" try "flaccid" next. LMAO<BR/><BR/>Oh, yes, you made a mistake, lots of 'em.<BR/><BR/>Also, I know war. I hate war. I hate losing worse.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-7962264212947812982008-06-19T16:08:00.000-04:002008-06-19T16:08:00.000-04:00Oh, you kids, go on outside and play now.Oh, you kids, go on outside and play now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-19992443168203684832008-06-19T15:53:00.000-04:002008-06-19T15:53:00.000-04:00Anon @ 1.22 What position of strength will Obama b...Anon @ 1.22 <BR/><BR/><I>What position of strength will Obama be speaking from?</I><BR/><BR/>Notwithstanding the damage done to operational readiness by the Bush Admininstration's war-fighting strategy, I would have assumed the position of strength is what we as taxpayers (and debtors to the Chinese) are paying roughly $625 billion a year for. Was it something else? <BR/><BR/><I>Love the retorts from the quisling leftists - most out of context.</I><BR/><BR/>You are positing that Iran = USSR in the early 1960s, and Kennedy:Kruschev::Obama:Ahmadinejad, and I am the one talking out context. Well, that is revealing in one regard.<BR/><BR/>My actual mistake was in assuming that we were having some kind of back-and-forth discussion, as opposed to the low-grade bait-and-switch rhetoric common to low-end conservative rabble rousing. If all else fails, change the subject to something off-topic and attempt to inflame with personal insults. <BR/><BR/>But I don't see any reason why you should get all the fun.<BR/><BR/>To which end: Quisling? There's only one person in this exchange who's sold out to authoritarians who undertake pre-emptive wars, and it's not me, sunshine. Maybe if you work extra-hard at spreading the party line to the traitorous lefties, they'll give you a pair of those shiny boots. <BR/><BR/><I>Methinks you're an extra small trojan</I><BR/><BR/>Funny how insecurity about the old package is the first thing you think of in the midst of all this. But then I suppose all the missile veneration would provide a facile Freudian explanation of your nonsense, and since facile is your stock in trade...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-5922002310118630232008-06-19T15:44:00.000-04:002008-06-19T15:44:00.000-04:00Will, Will, wake up, Will! All administrations hav...Will, Will, wake up, Will! All administrations have dealt with undesirables. That's been pointed out. Hell, the police deal with undesirables called informants in order to get "Mr. Big." (Is this another invalid analogy?)<BR/><BR/>Any war can be rationalized to be "stupid." Truman was treated just like Bush over his funding of Greece and Turkey to stop the spread of communism. He propogandized the hell out of the threat of communism and went over the heads of the republican congress to get $400 million to send to the "fredom" fighters in Greece and Turkey. Then he really stepped into it in Korea.<BR/><BR/>The stupidest war is one that you don't finish to win. Vietnam comes to mind. Iraq could be another Vietnam if we cut and run. That's stupid. Losing is not an option now.<BR/><BR/>Trivia: Japan attacked us over oil.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11250715.post-7918040582515705172008-06-19T15:06:00.000-04:002008-06-19T15:06:00.000-04:00Anon 1:47 wrote:War veterans, POWs even more so, h...Anon 1:47 wrote:<BR/><BR/><I>War veterans, POWs even more so, hate the thought of war.</I><BR/><BR/>That must be why Bush is so enamored of sending other people's kids off to die in a stupid war.<BR/><BR/>I agree that McCain, at the very least, has perspective - he has been there and done that, and has children on active duty.<BR/><BR/>And for what it's worth - I am a liberal and a former Hillary campaign volunteer. I am also a combat veteran from Panama and Desert Storm. And I am perfectly willing to question and challenge McCain's ideas on the use of force.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com