1 - 10 Next
In response to:

The President and 'Violent Extremism'

Enrique25 Wrote: 11 hours ago (9:19 AM)
Those are excellent questions. In order to answer those questions, you have to acknowledge that the civilian deaths are occurring. But as far as I know, the Pentagon has never admitted those civilian casualties. Thank God for the work of organizations like the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. I sincerely hope that civilian casualties play a part in the debate in Congress over Obama's request for war authorization. I hope both Democrats and Republicans make an issue of it, it is extremely important.
In response to:

The President and 'Violent Extremism'

Enrique25 Wrote: Feb 26, 2015 3:15 PM
sorry for another off-topic post (off-topic meaning relating to the actual American war against ISIS), but a headline today: "Senior ISIS commanders killed in air strikes in Iraq, fate of leader Baghdadi unknown" Sincere question for Prager and his listeners, if Baghdadi is killed, would you consider that good news or bad news? It's easy for me: good news. What about you? Be honest now!
In response to:

The President and 'Violent Extremism'

Enrique25 Wrote: Feb 26, 2015 10:13 AM
I think a key thing to point out is the disconnect between your first question and your second. The second question doesn't naturally follow from the first. The connection is manufactured. A reasonable person who is interested in the answer about Obama's commitment to destroying ISIS would naturally look at the military actions which he has been ordering for over six months. But commentators such as Prager have been so steadfast in their refusal to acknowledge the reality of ongoing military actions, and so relentless in diverting attention to the rhetoric, that for a lot of people it has become to seem normal to ignore the actions and only look at the rhetoric. Of course a lot of this is entirely willing on the part of the audience. The audience themselves is partisan and wants to believe it. That lie is the product which the commentators are selling and which the audience is demanding.
In response to:

The President and 'Violent Extremism'

Enrique25 Wrote: Feb 25, 2015 5:36 PM
DOD press release today "Operation Inherent Resolve Airstrikes Continue in Syria, Iraq". I apologize if people consider posting about American military operations against the terrorists to be disruptive to the discussion. But I noticed in the approximately one zillion articles and columns at Townhall.com, exactly zero of them has anything about the USA's actual war against ISIS. I thought maybe in the discussion about Obama's WORDS, maybe his ACTIONS might merit some small mention? If Prager won't mention our ongoing American war EVER, maybe I can? Maybe Townhall.com could put a disclaimer in the comments section: "don't talk about the war while a Democrat is president."
In response to:

The President and 'Violent Extremism'

Enrique25 Wrote: Feb 25, 2015 12:14 PM
Dennis's response to the Iraq debacle is to insist that we won, and that Obama threw the victory away (by implementing Bush's withdrawal agreement). He once bellowed at his listeners to "write it down on a piece of paper!", that we won the Iraq War. He sounded quite desperate, as if he realized that the length of time he would be able to repeat that lie was limited, thus the need for people to write it down, so they could refer to it in years to come.
In response to:

The President and 'Violent Extremism'

Enrique25 Wrote: Feb 25, 2015 11:09 AM
One way he has been personally affected is that he has a new sponsor on his radio program which helps businesses FIND EMPLOYEES. Funny that six years into the presidency of this "man of the left", that there is enough demand for employees that Dennis is getting revenue from such a service. By the way, I don't recall such a sponsor advertising on his program before Obama, does anyone else?
In response to:

The President and 'Violent Extremism'

Enrique25 Wrote: Feb 25, 2015 10:03 AM
It's quite bizarre when you think about the extent to which Dennis focuses on words while totally ignoring actions. In the case of the war against ISIS, reading this column and listening to Dennis's radio program you would not know that America is actually fighting ISIS, with weapons. We are killing people, actual people. Thousands of them. This is really happening, in the real world. But to a really crazy extent, this reality doesn't enter into Dennis's right-wing rhetoric, either written or on the radio. In the case of Obama generally it's also true. Consider that Dennis frequently harks back to Obama's statement from his FIRST campaign, about "transforming America. "Ok, but now after he was elected president, served a full term, got re-elected and is half-way through his second term, you'd think Dennis would have something to say about how Obama HAS transformed America. But no, he keeps going back to that campaign statement. Anyone think that despite the feeling with which Dennis talks about this, there's no there there?
In response to:

The President and 'Violent Extremism'

Enrique25 Wrote: Feb 25, 2015 8:10 AM
I'd like to point a couple of things out 1. your own comment does not address Dennis's column. 2. there are many comments from the right which are unrelated to the column, but you address your "friends on the Left". I wonder, is it relevance you are truly concerned about?
In response to:

The President and 'Violent Extremism'

Enrique25 Wrote: Feb 25, 2015 8:00 AM
that would be a reasonable way to approach the discussion, if the column was honest. When it is framed dishonestly, when it is spin, then taking it on its own terms is somewhat pointless. It makes more sense to challenge the framing. I would add that it's important for the people doing the challenging to be honest themselves, and I think everyone in this discussion are honest. We are challenging in good faith, which is more than can be said for Prager, despite his own grandiose claims about his honesty.
In response to:

The President and 'Violent Extremism'

Enrique25 Wrote: Feb 25, 2015 7:58 AM
that would be a reasonable way to approach the discussion, if the column was honest. When it is framed dishonestly, when it is spin, then taking it on its own terms is somewhat pointless. It makes more sense to challenge the framing.
1 - 10 Next