Previous 11 - 20 Next
Too bad the press in the USA wouldn't let Palin be added to that count. They want the hildabeast.... They will have her at any cost if she fails to have an aneurism or a myocardial infarction....
Holder is 0bomba's enforcer. He is (0bomba) simply a mafia don with a smooth tongue who has ascended to the levers of govt power. That is why I doubt seriously that he will go in 2016.
Darby, If you have any doubt of how much Sarah energized the base look at how much Romnie lost by. It is almost exactly the number of voters who Voted because Sarah was on the ticket with the mealymouthed rino from AZ.
If you retreat to conserve your forces you may yet win the war. Now I can see those who feel she is unfit to lead. Some of us who have been fighting this guerrilla campaign against the establishment of both parties might well feel that way. However I look at her as more like the Colonel who refused to surrender in the Philippines during WWII. Sure he didn't have much good to say about MacArthur. But both of them had their part to play in winning the war in the Pacific.
Flatus wrote: A stink bomb speaks. That is what a Flatus is.... Just in case anyone was at all confused.
Palin is shrill? What about the wicked witch from Arkansas?
Forward deploying military was acknowledged as necessary at the end of WWII when we realized how long it took and how expensive it was to deploy from the US where we had mostly withdrawn too after WWI. The stated purpose of both of those wars was to prove that War was too horrible to contemplate. The sad fact is that there will always be those who see taking from others as better than working and making your own stuff.
No they don't. That is why I could never be a libertarian in the mold of Ron Paul who ought to go back to practicing backquackery!
To withdraw, maybe even as much as we have from Germany, France and Korea to name three places we withdrew major amounts of troops from is a sort of dismantling of the military. RP believes this dismantling is necessary and good. I have considered this for some time from both sides and come to the conclusion that it is probably cheaper in the long run to have permanently placed forward deployed troops than to have to mobilize from bases in the USA which have been ever more depleted by the liberal desire to reduce the military so that they can use the money to buy votes in the ghettos they create.
I think, and I hope you will find this respectful, that the problem is that the Vietnam war was used as a distraction from LBJ's disastrous domestic policy. That and that the govt has been and is full of people who really believe that we can live at peace in a world that is governed by the overt application of force. Therefore we (the US gov)t should have gone in and won the war then stayed to govern until the corruptocrats that had sparked the war were subdued. That probably would have meant hanging some of the govt we ostensibly supported in the beginning. But at times such actions are necessary. That is working with who is available. What we should be far more willing than we are to do is to break off ties with govts that are corrupt. But at the same time we cannot stop trying to influence govts world wide. This is because most govts only recognize superior armed force.
Wink meister, at minimum employed but not by the govt should be the required prerequisite for voting.
Previous 11 - 20 Next