|
Being simply positioned to achieve something doesn't mean it will happen. With the way Obama's records have been looking, I can't imagine him employing much force in Pakistan or the middle east. He has far to much trust from his illuminati democratic base to jeopardize a second election with an invasion. |
|
|
True and well put. The political discourse has been decided in our favor - decisively. Shall we kick them while they're down, or let them in denial drown... It's never a moral tale, is it? It's about who we are. |
|
Hm. It sounds to me like you have a problem with rational thinking. You call it "slippery" or "rationalization," but it is just solid thinking--albeit of a kind you have not bothered with much.
Also, the ad hominem is coming from the chump who insists on calling everyone a "liar".
Finally, I am not saying HRC is spotless. I swear, you right-wingers make a living out of finding the shortcomings in a political opponent--and who among us is without sin--and then act as though that shortcoming somehow morally defines the person. It is typical McCarthyist nonsense, and it is one reason why conservatism in this country is such a moral wasteland. It is one reason why conservatism in this country right now is in a state of moral disgrace. You claim some kind of moral authority, which ultimately is reducible to castigating your opponents with the ubiquity of their sin. People have caught on to it. People understand that Reeps are also morally flawed, also muddling through life with limited knowledge--notwithstanding all their chest-thumping--all YOUR chest-thumping--to the contrary.. |
|
PL wrote:
"You are to believe that HRC will vigorously represent the national interest abroad, and that Barack is the boss. Seems that everyone who disagrees with you is a "liar." Which says more about you than them.. "
In other words, your response is: “Forget the facts and the evidence, drop the inconvenient questions and just swallow the party line -- and don't ask us for explanations, because if you do, that's an indictment of your character and an exoneration of theirs.”
That’s a bald-faced demand that we evade the issue coupled with an ad hominem as punishment for bringing the issue up.
Well, I'm not surprised at your response. As the self-appointed apologist-in-chief and number one manufacturer of rationalizations and excuses for this socialist/pacifist administration, you've got a difficult job.
Nevertheless, the issue doesn‘t disappear merely because you demand that we drop it. The question I asked remains valid: why has Obama appointed someone whose foreign policy judgment is, in his word, “flawed” and who has a track record of inventing stories to exaggerate her international experience?
|
|
|
You are to believe that HRC will vigorously represent the national interest abroad, and that Barack is the boss. Seems that everyone who disagrees with you is a "liar." Which says more about you than them.. |
|
....appoints a cynically triangulating liar -- a transparent phony with a record of telling the crudest of self-promoting falsehoods to fake a non-existent difference in her experience and that of the empty-headed Obama -- to promote America’s interests in the world -- and Hugh thinks that’s a good thing?
What’s more, the only significant differences between Obama and Clinton that emerged during the campaign involved foreign policy, with Obama telling us repeatedly that Clinton’s refusal to negotiate with terror-masters and tin-pot dictators without preconditions and her vote for the Iraq war proved that her judgment was flawed. So what are we to believe now -- that Clinton’s judgment has been magically repaired, or that Obama was just lying during the primaries? |
|
I'm impressed by Obama's choice of Gates, Jones and Clinton, but why was there no designation of top leaders of the intelligence community as a key part of Obama’s national security team?
I raised this question on my blog yesterday — see:
http://thepurplecenter.blogspot.com/2008/12/blog-post.html.
I think it’s extraordinary that his supposed senior national security team did not in include a nominee for DNI or director of CIA, while UN Ambassador, AG and Homeland Security were included.
It’s certainly worthy of comment but I haven’t seen any even on critical conservative sites like yours. It’s certainly worth a question to Obama at today’s news conference but there was none.
Is it a slap at the IC? A deliberate downgrading? A portent of a sharp shift to dealing with terrorism as a law enforcement or border security issue? A mistake? What?
I encourage you to get on the case.
|
|
|
You're right, as far as you go. But America has much more to do in the world, as world leader, and with this new administration, Obama and Hillary, we will at last be back on that leadership path! |
|
|
I wish my grown kids had listened, accepted and followed my words of wisdom, as the guillible, smitten Lib/Den 'O' groupies believe and praise Obamas every untested word! I paid my dues, set the example yet my family ignored my brain power ha! The great pretender Obama gets the loyalty, credit and attention and is put on a pedestal! What great Obama deeds turned them on? Must be the koolaid?? The Obamacan'ts can't be that naive?! Ex Democrat because I can clearly see the shaky handwriting on Obamas wall! Will someone please give me some of that koolaid so I can have a false sense of Security also, Ha! |
|
|
I expected Senator Kerry to be rewarded for his support, what happened? Kerry, a strong military man promoted the inexperienced, weak foreign affairs man Obama?! He should have known better. Like Bill Richardson, they jumped on the non stop winning Obama train to share in the bounty! Kerry could still get some crumbs? To think he was the Dem., Nominee for President, yet has little to show for it! Throw the bums out, ha! Ex Democrat |
|
|
the conclusion that I am paranoid and that I hate the president? It was certainly could not be based on what I posted. You are perhaps a mind reader of some considerable talent? |
|
"Obama could bring all countries to the table and create world peace."
~Rachoe the Rabid, 2008
Rachoe, when you get that many people at the table someone is going to eat your lunch. You are a very funny person. |
|
After the Team-Obama picks, that is. His just lulling you to sleep. Of course Huge does not think having the fairness doctrine is bad either. He said he would just change the way he does his show. The Hewitt and Combs show I can just picture it. Wake Hugh your falling asleep at the switch.
|
|
|
Hewitt is wrong. The biggest challenge will be for the new Administration to restore our reputation. #2 will be the disaster that is A-Queda. |
|
Next thing you know, you'll be
telling me that The One and the
Democratic Majority Congress is not
going to quickly on Day 1 of the 100
Days......halt the Bush tax cuts......
or maybe close Gitmo & start those
civilian trials by Day 2, or just
release those poor souls.
Really.....
Let's save real praise until we see
real action and accomplishments.
We used to praise Cheney's pick as a solid
help for business and the economy in the
White House. That worked out really great.
We praised Gore as the conservative/moderate
Democratic voice in the Clinton White House -
now Bill looks like the calm one. |
|
Gates stays? The Def. Sec. of the 'Idiot'?
The media praises this now......what a
daring move! To actually acknowledge the
fact the Bush Iraq-Afghanistan-Defense Dept.
policy is uh, sh-h-h, quiet.........right!
Yikes!
I praise Obama only for not giving Kerry
the Defense job or the Sec. of State job
or UN job.
Thank you for that. Lurch does not need
to be our face to the world on that stage.
I won't offer much praise to the fake
Office of the President Elect until he
actually has the job, and is doing something
other than giving interviews.
Hugh, as wrong as you were about the Romney
campaign & candidacy, the McCain campaign
and electoral map, and the Hillary campaign,
let's save the total praise of the Obama
dream team on foreign policy, for a moment.
I'm glad Gates is there. I'm glad he
acknowledged the surge worked, giving him
time and cover to actually have the troops
leave.
I'm really glad Bush did his job - w/o a care
what the press or pundits said - re: Iraq.
|
|
it will not be what you see him do, it will be what you cannot see him do. He is a leftist, through and through, as such, he has made many promises, to the far left, who embraced him and were responsible for his electoral victory. He will repay, hidden, stealthily, under the surface, and out of sight. He does not want the appearance of "overreaching", but make no mistake, obambi and the left will overreach, but out of sight, and the MSM will facilitate the deception.
Over and under, for "reparations" discussions is 16 months. But all bets are off, if the Islamists attack America during this time. |
|
|
...I'll be happy to offer congratulations depending on the outcome of these choices. Let's see how it all plays out first. It'll take some time. |
|
|
|