A friend pointed out a few weeks ago that he never heard anyone say, "Things would have been better if Kerry were elected." Not one single time had either of us heard that.
Honestly. In military terms, this is the sort of thing you read about in the paper that occurred while you were sleeping. Then the president explains why they did what occurred. In/out strike, if that is what they really are talking about. But it is not. Rather, the whole thing is embarrassing like watching the world hold up your baby president as he takes his first stuttering steps towards papa, or anxiously hovers over their child wobbly riding their first two-wheeler. Embarrassing as watching that, because that is what I am watching. Then the discussion would be what terrible power-grabbing war-hungry president the guy is using war to pump up his street cred VS pressing national security.
And to insist that he did not draw a red line when his entire presidency is powered on rhetoric is a departure from reality that is complete and quite mad.
With this move Obama is trying to achieve two goals ...
Make himself look counter to what is believed of him among his peers, just prior to a big get together with them. The second is what makes it worthwhile for him... Obama puts his mortal enemy, the republicans, on the spot by making them take responsibility for what he is going to do.
April, at least McCain wouldn't have been a moron's President, or? How many wars would we be embroiled in if a man who never met a war he didn't like, would be President?
Just a thought, if Republicans and conservatives hate that we have a liberal and Democrat for President, why the hell didn't you folks get better candidates? Just curious, not trying to bash anyone.
American blood in exchange for Arab money to fight in an Arab civil war for the Saudi/Al-Qaeda side. Kerry's profoundly for that. His boss is profoundly profoundly for that. Is it sinking in yet that you and I, ya know, standard issue Americans are OWNED? Or will it only sink in when American troops are turned on "dangerous elements" here at home? At what point does the obscenity become just too much?
Nope Ricpic, I just say it as I see it. It is entirely possible to be able to see situations as they are and still hold a certain political philosophy.
@Inga: Someone made the astute point that McCain bellicose tendencies would have been checked by the press (not to mention Palin, who would have made an excellent VP).
But even today, the Press and Hollywood Media is afraid of Obama--basically because they are are too invested in him and don't want to see him stumble.
Obama/Kerry/Clinton/random upper echelon Democratic politician: They're all basically the same. All cut from the same cultural cloth, cooked in the same academic oven, cooled on the same bureaurack. Whether one is minimally superior, somehow, to the others is reliant entirely upon independent factors. Either Clinton is smarter than Obama or Kerry but brains bring hubris and obliviousness or cavalierness about other personal faults so it's a plus and a minus at the same time. Kerry has a ton of (somebody else's) money so he's not beholden locally but he has no built-in loyal constituency. Obama is black and his built-in loyal constituency is both a boon and a bother, depending on independent circumstances. Yes, they're all relatives.
I just saw Obama posing with the Swedish PM. As he walked away after the photo op, Obama was strutting... the smile had an extra sparkle too.
I don't know quite what to make of it.
He thinks he pulled it off. He thinks he's got the world fooled.
Inga said...
Just a thought, if Republicans and conservatives hate that we have a liberal and Democrat for President, why the hell didn't you folks get better candidates? Just curious, not trying to bash anyone.
We did, that's why you had to use massive vote fraud, illegal surveillance, and even more illegal IRS intimidation to win.
PS Junior is going along to reach out across the aisle to one of his friends in the Democrat Party.
How many times before now has he advocated independent military action with a Republican?
chick, I watched a documentary on Netflix titled, Poliwood. It was made by Barry Levinson who I like as a director but he's to the left of Pelosi. It follows Hollywood folk around the 2008 Dem and Rep. conventions. It is unbelievable!
"... why the hell didn't you folks get better candidates? Just curious, not trying to bash anyone."
We did. The question is why were you too stupid to vote for them. Maybe those "binders of women" really pissed you off. Nobody should put women in binders...before the second date.
As I've said before, the abundance and magnitude of lies within the the federal government and DOD was one of the reasons I retired early. I reached the point whee I needed to vomit at meetings.
The abundance has never been greater than today. Never. Kerry is the consummate liar, polished and practiced since 1971. If his lips move, it is a lie. Period [sorry Chip]
No "boots on the ground"...a lie, just as it would have been if promised before Desert Storm...we had forward observers on the ground long before any attack occurred. We do now as well. If you think not, you are misguided, if you have served in combat and still think not, you are deluded.
It is what it is. No where is there a poll showing even a close race between popular opinion about going to war in Syria (when you bomb a bunch of motherfuckers, that is called an act of war, godamnit!) or not going to war. The popular support for this action is non-existent.
Yet the gas bags in DC suck each others anal crevasses and dither about the taste of shit....whilst preparing to send young men and women to their deaths for nothing. No thing at all.
Lem said... I just saw Obama posing with the Swedish PM. As he walked away after the photo op, Obama was strutting... the smile had an extra sparkle too. I don't know quite what to make of it.
I've always thought that a large part of Obama's schtick is seeing just how much he can get away with. Get's a really big kick out of that, I think.
Remember, this is the crowd that put their uniform and reputation--totally besmirching both--behind a whitewash report on the Ft Hood shooting where they didn't mention--COULDN'T BRING THEMSELVES--to use the word "Islam" or "Muslim" ONCE! in the corpus of the report! (except buried once in a minor footnote) They are so shot through with multi-culti PC that it would make the old Soviet zampolitz green with envy. The senior leadership of the entire structure of our armed forces are stacked with political hacks that are a disgrace to their uniform. Their trustworthiness on a numerical scale about ANYTHING having to do with the ME and Islam is in the negative numbers. TRUST this crowd??? Remember, this is the crowd of PC whores of whom one among them, the Superintendent of the Naval Academy said not too long ago that: "The number one mission of the Naval Academy is diversity."
It's sickening enough to make the proverbial Jackal wretch..
I see the useless edutcher is now stinking up two web sites with his recycled FOXNews inanities. This snivelling piece of shit has no pride at all. Perhaps not unexpected given that his only claim to fame is being the first man to donate his brain to science before dying. Get a fucking job you unemployed moron.
On March 27, 2003, Wolfowitz told the House Appropriations Committee[40] that oil revenue earned by Iraq alone would pay for Iraq's reconstruction after the Iraq war; he testified his "rough recollection" was[40]: "The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course.
Today the news is about how brutal the moderate rebels are.
Reality is ruining my cynicism: cynicism just simply can't keep up with the levels of self-congratulatory bullshit coming from this Administration while they strive to commit one atrocity after another.
Haz, I know I should put scare quotes around the word "moderate" but that's just excess typing that I don't care to do all the time.
Actually, I believe there are moderates involved in this conflict in Syria, and I mean that without scare quotes. I also believe that they are an irrelevant group in Syria, as they were in Egypt. (I don't think there were any in Libya.) Such people are a minority of the minority of people that have been willing to take up arms against Assad. And they certainly won't be organized enough to stand up against well-organized extremists. How a well-organized minority can seize a revolution has been known since at least 1917, and the Communists perfected the techniques needed throughout the 20th Century.
On March 27, 2003, Wolfowitz told the House Appropriations Committee[40] that oil revenue earned by Iraq alone would pay for Iraq's reconstruction after the Iraq war;...
And you plus many others believed him? Why? I didn't. Maybe it was because I was by then a "Fed" who knew better?
I didn't and I voted for Bush-43, after voting for Clinton, after disgust with Bush 41 for his weak-kneed temporary chicken shit Colin Powell inspired mis-adventure in Kuwait....not to mention the Bush-41 unemployment, which was 13.2% in Michigan at the time. Clinton (hell anybody) seemed a viable alternative. My mistake. Clinton was even a bigger Chicken-shit than Bush-41 and an equal liar claiming a budget surplus by citing the Social Security collections as part of the budget revenue per se.
All this whoop-dee-do righteousness over use of gas as a weapon is flat fucking funny...it was ignored by Reagan and Bush-41, and Clinton ignored nearly a million genocidal deaths in Rwanda, with Susan Rices advise on the matter in 1994.
Now we have a giant anti-war asshole from the 70's demanding we attack Assad, and a pansy assed dilettante President saying the same thing after criticizing the wars of his predecessors.
We have a Congress who can't pass a budget in 5 years now whooping and hollering about WND's now and busily sucking each other off for favors to sell their votes. Not one gives a rat's tinker's damn about what the populace, the electorate, thinks. Not one.
Actually, I believe there are moderates involved in this conflict in Syria, and I mean that without scare quotes. I also believe that they are an irrelevant group ...
True enough. However, no "moderate" group will prevail once the revolution prevails.
I've cited the history of Indo-China and Vietnam as an example of how the radicals always crush the moderates once the fighting has stopped and the moderates no longer serve a purpose for the radicals. Western Europeans and Americans, in their hubris, enable this, but it is too much trouble to explain all that here...read Vo Nguyen Giap.
Nothing is different today, the radical elements will crush the moderates as soon as they no longer serve any radical purpose. It is just us big dim witted Oceanians who believe the fantasy...the fantasy that never is fulfilled and never can be.
Icepick, I agree that there are moderates somewhere in the Syrian conflict. If America chooses to support any group, that would be the one (assuming they are in some manner organized).
It appears that the group Kerry proposes America fights for are not moderates, but rather are brutal members of al-Qaeda. That is a horrible choice.
Haz, Ari, one of the reasons I don't think we should get involved is that no matter how much we support moderates in this conflict, they're guaranteed to lose. The formula has been perfected since 1917, and I don't see any reason to demonstrate its effectiveness again.
63 comments:
What, Choom is selling our foreign policy to the highest bidder?
"The answer is profoundly yes".
period!
No red line! No red line! I never said that!
It's the fault of congress!
*pathe...tik*
Come on media- get busy covering for your man... the guy who cannot take responsibly for his actions or his very own words.
This is what happens when morons vote for morons. Oh well, at least the morons are nice.
period!
Oh, Chip is going to take away points for that! Unless he gives them back for ironical usage.
What, Choom is selling our foreign policy to the highest bidder?
Everything else about his presidency has been about selling out to the highest bidder, why not this?
Resolution allows boots on ground...
No shit Sherlock.
If you are going to attack another country and they decide to fight back, somehow, you better be prepared to at least admit that possibility.
I'm just saying.
Fine. Make the check out to the DNC. And why not? All the other government Departments are seen doing dirty work for them.
Okay, so now for a really tough question:
Is Kerry a step down from Hillary, SecState-wise?
+ points for ironic use of "period." But now it is axiomatic. We can drop the comma. He is a good person period.
Or just throw it around anywhere.
He is period a good person.
He is a period good person.
He period is a good person.
Period he is a good person.
He is a good person. Full stop. *grabs umbrella, leaves*
He is a good period person.
A friend pointed out a few weeks ago that he never heard anyone say, "Things would have been better if Kerry were elected." Not one single time had either of us heard that.
I doubt the current situation will change that.
I just saw Obama posing with the Swedish PM. As he walked away after the photo op, Obama was strutting... the smile had an extra sparkle too.
I don't know quite what to make of it.
I cannot believe we're even talking about this.
Honestly. In military terms, this is the sort of thing you read about in the paper that occurred while you were sleeping. Then the president explains why they did what occurred. In/out strike, if that is what they really are talking about. But it is not. Rather, the whole thing is embarrassing like watching the world hold up your baby president as he takes his first stuttering steps towards papa, or anxiously hovers over their child wobbly riding their first two-wheeler. Embarrassing as watching that, because that is what I am watching. Then the discussion would be what terrible power-grabbing war-hungry president the guy is using war to pump up his street cred VS pressing national security.
And to insist that he did not draw a red line when his entire presidency is powered on rhetoric is a departure from reality that is complete and quite mad.
With this move Obama is trying to achieve two goals ...
Make himself look counter to what is believed of him among his peers, just prior to a big get together with them.
The second is what makes it worthwhile for him... Obama puts his mortal enemy, the republicans, on the spot by making them take responsibility for what he is going to do.
It's fucked up.
In military terms, this is the sort of thing you read about in the paper that occurred while you were sleeping.
That's right... this is not what it appears to be. Obama is being Obama.
If I said "a red line" I didn't build it... I didn't build that red line... I didn't pluck it out of thin air.
Hell no. Our troops are not anyone's sacrificial lambs or a mercenary army for rich Arabs. They need to create their own goddamned Armies.
April, at least McCain wouldn't have been a moron's President, or? How many wars would we be embroiled in if a man who never met a war he didn't like, would be President?
Brilliant!
Just a thought, if Republicans and conservatives hate that we have a liberal and Democrat for President, why the hell didn't you folks get better candidates? Just curious, not trying to bash anyone.
American blood in exchange for Arab money to fight in an Arab civil war for the Saudi/Al-Qaeda side. Kerry's profoundly for that. His boss is profoundly profoundly for that. Is it sinking in yet that you and I, ya know, standard issue Americans are OWNED? Or will it only sink in when American troops are turned on "dangerous elements" here at home? At what point does the obscenity become just too much?
Inga admits the truth in her first comment and then quick quick covers her tracks in the next four. Like Kerry, an oops moment.
Nope Ricpic, I just say it as I see it. It is entirely possible to be able to see situations as they are and still hold a certain political philosophy.
@Inga: Someone made the astute point that McCain bellicose tendencies would have been checked by the press (not to mention Palin, who would have made an excellent VP).
But even today, the Press and Hollywood Media is afraid of Obama--basically because they are are too invested in him and don't want to see him stumble.
Obama/Kerry/Clinton/random upper echelon Democratic politician: They're all basically the same. All cut from the same cultural cloth, cooked in the same academic oven, cooled on the same bureaurack. Whether one is minimally superior, somehow, to the others is reliant entirely upon independent factors. Either Clinton is smarter than Obama or Kerry but brains bring hubris and obliviousness or cavalierness about other personal faults so it's a plus and a minus at the same time. Kerry has a ton of (somebody else's) money so he's not beholden locally but he has no built-in loyal constituency. Obama is black and his built-in loyal constituency is both a boon and a bother, depending on independent circumstances.
Yes, they're all relatives.
Yesterday the administration said no to regime change.
Now Kerry is saying yes to regime change.
----
Exactly El Pollo - If McCain were president, the media would be all over him.
Good thing I'm going to Costco on Monday. Stock up....buckle up it is going to be a bumpy ride.
Double down on food supplies, toilet paper and scotch. It never hurts to have extra even if Armageddon doesn't happen.
:-)
Obama's inability to take responsibility for his own actions and words, coupled with his narcissistic charm - tells me he might be a sociopath.
How about the frikkin Arabs pony up to take care of all of the refugees, for a change?
Kerry: Arabs Will Finance Our War
This can't be an appeal to American citizens, much less American soldiers.
This is the elites speaking to each other.
You're just figuring this out?
Lem said...
I just saw Obama posing with the Swedish PM. As he walked away after the photo op, Obama was strutting... the smile had an extra sparkle too.
I don't know quite what to make of it.
He thinks he pulled it off. He thinks he's got the world fooled.
Inga said...
Just a thought, if Republicans and conservatives hate that we have a liberal and Democrat for President, why the hell didn't you folks get better candidates? Just curious, not trying to bash anyone.
We did, that's why you had to use massive vote fraud, illegal surveillance, and even more illegal IRS intimidation to win.
PS Junior is going along to reach out across the aisle to one of his friends in the Democrat Party.
How many times before now has he advocated independent military action with a Republican?
Ignore the widow Nurse.
The US is now the hired help? How humiliating. How pathetic.
chick, I watched a documentary on Netflix titled, Poliwood. It was made by Barry Levinson who I like as a director but he's to the left of Pelosi. It follows Hollywood folk around the 2008 Dem and Rep. conventions. It is unbelievable!
"... why the hell didn't you folks get better candidates? Just curious, not trying to bash anyone."
We did. The question is why were you too stupid to vote for them. Maybe those "binders of women" really pissed you off. Nobody should put women in binders...before the second date.
Will history call this the we had to pass it to see what was in it war?
Wasn't all the oil from Iraq going to pay for that war?
Amartel @ 4:49 and C Stanley @ 5:19 for the win!
As I've said before, the abundance and magnitude of lies within the the federal government and DOD was one of the reasons I retired early. I reached the point whee I needed to vomit at meetings.
The abundance has never been greater than today. Never. Kerry is the consummate liar, polished and practiced since 1971. If his lips move, it is a lie. Period [sorry Chip]
No "boots on the ground"...a lie, just as it would have been if promised before Desert Storm...we had forward observers on the ground long before any attack occurred. We do now as well. If you think not, you are misguided, if you have served in combat and still think not, you are deluded.
It is what it is. No where is there a poll showing even a close race between popular opinion about going to war in Syria (when you bomb a bunch of motherfuckers, that is called an act of war, godamnit!) or not going to war. The popular support for this action is non-existent.
Yet the gas bags in DC suck each others anal crevasses and dither about the taste of shit....whilst preparing to send young men and women to their deaths for nothing. No thing at all.
Lem said...
I just saw Obama posing with the Swedish PM. As he walked away after the photo op, Obama was strutting... the smile had an extra sparkle too.
I don't know quite what to make of it.
I've always thought that a large part of Obama's schtick is seeing just how much he can get away with. Get's a really big kick out of that, I think.
@bagoh20/
"...before the second date."
ROTFLMAOPIMP!!!!
Amen to Aridog!
Remember, this is the crowd that put their uniform and reputation--totally besmirching both--behind a whitewash report on the Ft Hood shooting where they didn't mention--COULDN'T BRING THEMSELVES--to use the word "Islam" or "Muslim" ONCE! in the corpus of the report! (except buried once in a minor footnote)
They are so shot through with multi-culti PC that it would make the old Soviet zampolitz green with envy. The senior leadership of the entire structure of our armed forces are stacked with political hacks that are a disgrace to their uniform. Their trustworthiness on a numerical scale about ANYTHING having to do with the ME and Islam is in the negative numbers. TRUST this crowd??? Remember, this is the crowd of PC whores of whom one among them, the Superintendent of the Naval Academy said not too long ago that: "The number one mission of the Naval Academy is diversity."
It's sickening enough to make the proverbial Jackal wretch..
Sorry Baggy, not into S&M. :(
I just got a huge grocery delivery, I'm stocked up, until the hoardes knock down my door.
Titus said...
Wasn't all the oil from Iraq going to pay for that war?
It is, the Great Chinese War of Economic Attrition.
Titus said...
Wasn't all the oil from Iraq going to pay for that war?
No, the profits belong to the Iraqi people. The details are being hammered out.
AnUnreasonableTroll said...
Wasn't all the oil from Iraq going to pay for that war?
It is, the Great Chinese War of Economic Attrition.
Which the Reds are currently losing.
FWIW, whip count in the House (Titus should like that)
46 for, 169 against.
Where the Hell are the other 220?
Wasn't all the oil from Iraq going to pay for that war?
Wouldn't an attack on Syria push up oil prices?
Lem said...
Wasn't all the oil from Iraq going to pay for that war?
Wouldn't an attack on Syria push up oil prices?
Anybody know if Dr Evil is in oil futures?
Wasn't all the oil from Iraq going to pay for that war?
Wasn't the whole "we're invading Iraq for its oil" thing just an anti-war conspiracy theory?
edutcher said...
AnUnreasonableTroll said...
I see the useless edutcher is now stinking up two web sites with his recycled FOXNews inanities. This snivelling piece of shit has no pride at all. Perhaps not unexpected given that his only claim to fame is being the first man to donate his brain to science before dying. Get a fucking job you unemployed moron.
On March 27, 2003, Wolfowitz told the House Appropriations Committee[40] that oil revenue earned by Iraq alone would pay for Iraq's reconstruction after the Iraq war; he testified his "rough recollection" was[40]: "The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course.
Today the news is about how brutal the moderate rebels are.
Reality is ruining my cynicism: cynicism just simply can't keep up with the levels of self-congratulatory bullshit coming from this Administration while they strive to commit one atrocity after another.
Which "moderate" rebels?
These?
Or these?
This administration is a ship of fools.
FWIW, whip count in the House (Titus should like that)
46 for, 169 against.
Where the Hell are the other 220?
Waiting to see who has the highest bid, presumably.
Haz, I know I should put scare quotes around the word "moderate" but that's just excess typing that I don't care to do all the time.
Actually, I believe there are moderates involved in this conflict in Syria, and I mean that without scare quotes. I also believe that they are an irrelevant group in Syria, as they were in Egypt. (I don't think there were any in Libya.) Such people are a minority of the minority of people that have been willing to take up arms against Assad. And they certainly won't be organized enough to stand up against well-organized extremists. How a well-organized minority can seize a revolution has been known since at least 1917, and the Communists perfected the techniques needed throughout the 20th Century.
Titus said...
On March 27, 2003, Wolfowitz told the House Appropriations Committee[40] that oil revenue earned by Iraq alone would pay for Iraq's reconstruction after the Iraq war;...
And you plus many others believed him? Why? I didn't. Maybe it was because I was by then a "Fed" who knew better?
I didn't and I voted for Bush-43, after voting for Clinton, after disgust with Bush 41 for his weak-kneed temporary chicken shit Colin Powell inspired mis-adventure in Kuwait....not to mention the Bush-41 unemployment, which was 13.2% in Michigan at the time. Clinton (hell anybody) seemed a viable alternative. My mistake. Clinton was even a bigger Chicken-shit than Bush-41 and an equal liar claiming a budget surplus by citing the Social Security collections as part of the budget revenue per se.
All this whoop-dee-do righteousness over use of gas as a weapon is flat fucking funny...it was ignored by Reagan and Bush-41, and Clinton ignored nearly a million genocidal deaths in Rwanda, with Susan Rices advise on the matter in 1994.
Now we have a giant anti-war asshole from the 70's demanding we attack Assad, and a pansy assed dilettante President saying the same thing after criticizing the wars of his predecessors.
We have a
Congress who can't pass a budget in 5 years now whooping and hollering about WND's now and busily sucking each other off for favors to sell their votes. Not one gives a rat's tinker's damn about what the populace, the electorate, thinks. Not one.
We are just fucked.
Icepick said...
Actually, I believe there are moderates involved in this conflict in Syria, and I mean that without scare quotes. I also believe that they are an irrelevant group ...
True enough. However, no "moderate" group will prevail once the revolution prevails.
I've cited the history of Indo-China and Vietnam as an example of how the radicals always crush the moderates once the fighting has stopped and the moderates no longer serve a purpose for the radicals. Western Europeans and Americans, in their hubris, enable this, but it is too much trouble to explain all that here...read Vo Nguyen Giap.
Nothing is different today, the radical elements will crush the moderates as soon as they no longer serve any radical purpose. It is just us big dim witted Oceanians who believe the fantasy...the fantasy that never is fulfilled and never can be.
Icepick, I agree that there are moderates somewhere in the Syrian conflict. If America chooses to support any group, that would be the one (assuming they are in some manner organized).
It appears that the group Kerry proposes America fights for are not moderates, but rather are brutal members of al-Qaeda. That is a horrible choice.
Haz, Ari, one of the reasons I don't think we should get involved is that no matter how much we support moderates in this conflict, they're guaranteed to lose. The formula has been perfected since 1917, and I don't see any reason to demonstrate its effectiveness again.
Post a Comment