|
View Poll Results: Who will (not should) be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008? | |||
Joe Biden | 0 | 0% | |
Hillary Clinton | 62 | 35.84% | |
Christopher Dodd | 0 | 0% | |
John Edwards | 10 | 5.78% | |
Mike Gravel | 1 | 0.58% | |
Dennis Kucinich | 2 | 1.16% | |
Barack Obama | 97 | 56.07% | |
Bill Richardson | 1 | 0.58% | |
Voters: 173. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools |
05-08-2008, 10:17 PM | #2651 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
But that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with being far-left. I get that you detest Obama, and he very well may lose to McCain, but throwing out these attacks as if there facts is beneath you.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-08-2008, 10:21 PM | #2652 | |
This guy has posted so much, his fingers are about to fall off.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: In Absentia
|
Quote:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. The Dem Party leaders are morons for letting her get this far and shit all over Obama and the party in general for some self-absorbed ego trip.
__________________
M's pitcher Miguel Batista: "Now, I feel like I've had everything. I've talked pitching with Sandy Koufax, had Kenny G play for me. Maybe if I could have an interview with God, then I'd be served. I'd be complete." |
|
05-08-2008, 10:25 PM | #2653 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
|
Quote:
Btw, you do realize that the only one to use the terms "far-left" were you, right? I do have to ask, do you normally think in strawmen? And if this post was directed at me... I think his falling poll numbers against McCain indicates that a lot of moderates/conservatives who were contemplating voting for him based on his speeches about hope and optimism realized that he wasn't the moderate they thought he was, but was actually more left wing, and closer politically to Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer than to Joe Libermann or others in the Gang of 14.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages" -Tennessee Williams |
|
05-08-2008, 10:27 PM | #2654 | |||||
Coordinator
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicagoland
|
Quote:
It's also pro-business. U.S. companies no longer having to pay for healthcare is now seen as a potentially serious competitive advantage. Quote:
Depends how it's done. Anyway, Obama's just recommending bringing it back up to the level it was in the 90s. Didn't seem to hurt the economy then. Quote:
Depends how they're done. Trade agreements should always be under scrutiny given changing global conditions of competitiveness. Quote:
I wasn't aware that was a campaign pledge. Linky? Quote:
Nah, it's just pandering for votes. But so is offering to repeal the gas tax for the summer (McCain, Clinton). |
|||||
05-08-2008, 10:34 PM | #2655 | |||||
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
|
Quote:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/ Under "Labor" (and then "Protect Striking Workers"). Quote:
Whether it be pro-business or not, the policy is seen as left wing by the general public. Quote:
There is a reason I added "(for fairness)". The comment seems to indicate that it may not matter if it adds revenue if its fair. That was one of the more interesting things to come out of that much maligned last debate. Quote:
Quite frankly, I'm an ardent free trader, so I'm not on board with that at all... but most of those interested in redoing NAFTA I think are probably on the left side of the spectrum (not saying some on the right aren't, but the business part of the party I don't think is in favor). Quote:
Pandering can be one side of the spectrum or the other. Depends on who the candidate is pandering to.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages" -Tennessee Williams |
|||||
05-08-2008, 10:37 PM | #2656 | |
Stadium Announcer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burke, VA
|
Quote:
I don't have a link handy, but will continue to look for one, but on Tuesday night E.J. Dionne was on NPR talking about the exit poll results for Indiana and North Carolina. According to him, Obama's support went up the further left you went on the political spectrum. In other words, self-described "very liberal" voters were Obama's biggest supporters. Dionne himself called this a (paraphrase) troubling development or something like that.
__________________
I don't want the world. I just want your half. |
|
05-08-2008, 10:37 PM | #2657 | |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Colorado
|
Quote:
I also believe that it would help if people stop using terms like "far" left/right because they have no idea what they mean by that. In the grand scheme of things, no one has been elected that would be considered far left/right. And compared to many other nations, we're a nation of dead-on centrists. |
|
05-08-2008, 10:37 PM | #2658 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
I think "how left-wing" implies he must be pretty far left, but I'll withdraw that if you like. I'll also agree he's not always close to Lieberman, but on some positions the voting record is closer than McCain's. That argument mostly boils down to Iraq and Iran where he's certainly far away from Lieberman. However, Obama's positions are also closer to the majority of Americans, so is it fair to categorize him as more left wing or is Lieberman more right wing?
As to polling numbers, yes he's lost ground, but nothing I've seen has him losing ground among independents, the closest category to moderate we have. Currently he's losing Democrats, some of which may fairly be described as moderate, but some of which are hard core liberals. Again, I'll believe you if you can provide data, but as of now I haven't seen any proof that Obama is losing moderates due to being left wing. The you was a more collective you.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-08-2008, 10:43 PM | #2659 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
|
Quote:
You are mischaracterizing the argument again. Obama losing moderates due to being more left wing that they first thought. Remember when people were complaining about his lack of substance? While it may have been on his website, he wasn't talking about issues all that much and the media wasn't focusing on them? Well, I also remember people were talking about how a lot of Republicans and Moderates were saying they like Obama and that was showing how he'd be strong in the general. Of course a few people said wait until people find out about his issues. I think his polling data head to head against McCain dropping from a clear lead in February and March to almost a dead heat now indicates the results of people finding out what he actually believes. As for comparison, Clinton and McCain have always been hovering around each other, which Clinton opening up a decent lead recently (for whatever reason).
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages" -Tennessee Williams |
|
05-08-2008, 10:52 PM | #2660 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
But what have they found out about his positions? They've heard a lot about Wright and lapel pins and what have you, but I heard very little about anybody's policy positions during the IN primary runup. At this point I don't think his policy positions have much to do with his problems. I always think the general is about likability and that's where his problem lies. In the end I think he'll prove more likable than McCain and win, but either way left wing policy positions won't have much to do with it.
Cam: I found some CNN exit polling that backs up what you're saying about IN, but in NC that trend doesn't hold as Obama won moderates and very conservative, but oddly lost conservative. Regardless the results in any one state don't mean much and the little comparison I've made to other states doesn't seem to show a trend.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-08-2008, 10:53 PM | #2661 | |
Dark Cloud
Join Date: Apr 2001
|
From here
Quote:
|
|
05-08-2008, 11:02 PM | #2662 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Colorado
|
The biggest difference between 1996/2000 and 2008 will be the 3rd-Party factor.
|
05-08-2008, 11:08 PM | #2663 | |
Checkraising Tourists
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
|
Quote:
A reasonable assumption would be that Clinton would get close to 90% of the votes of those blacks who showed up to vote. She would be severely hampered by losing the presumably large number of black votes from those who wouldn't even bother to show up. Last edited by Vegas Vic : 05-08-2008 at 11:11 PM. |
|
05-09-2008, 08:24 AM | #2664 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
Quote:
Yes. If everything else about Obama sat perfectly with me, this attitude by itself would make sure that I would oppose his election with all my heart. |
|
05-09-2008, 09:21 AM | #2665 |
College Prospect
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston, MA
|
Guess you're not much of a talker, huh?
|
05-09-2008, 10:19 AM | #2666 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
|
Getting back to the Nixon meeting with both Russia and China example, I think my point is that it proved to be a good idea. It led to increased suspicion between two of our enemies, plus led to the first SALT treaty.
I have no idea where it became a bad idea to talk to enemies. Certainly not during the Cold War where it helped to have that red phone around during the numerous false alarms. "Speak softly and carry a big stick" has somehow metamorphed into "We'll do exactly what we want". That's not an improvement in my opinion. What do you think Obama plans to do in talking with enemies -- offer them Cleveland?
__________________
We have always been at war with Eastasia. |
05-09-2008, 10:29 AM | #2667 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
I think my point of view is more subtle than that. When I listen to what Obama says about foreign policy, to me it sounds like: "I will make the US just another country in the UN. We will not be leaders, we will be followers."
I do not hear that from Clinton or McCain, and I did not hear that from John Kerry. I am not of the opinion that we should "obliterate" Iran (indeed, I have argued against the use of force in Iran in other threads) - I am of the opinion that Iran (for example) will not play nice if they think we are not both able to and willing to punch them in the mouth if their behavior is unacceptable. |
05-09-2008, 10:33 AM | #2668 |
College Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Arlington, VA
|
A new Diageo/Hotline poll of Dem LVs, taken 4/30-5/3, shows Barack Obama leading Hillary Clinton 48-37%. The previous poll, completed 3/31, showed Obama leading HRC 50-38%. In general election matchups, Obama leads John McCain 47-43% and HRC leads McCain 46-43% (release).
Obama's poll numbers are picking back up as 1) the Wright controversy recedes, and 2) he solidified his hold on the Democratic nomination. His numbers will go up even more after HRC's "White Americans" comment yesterday. What a stupid thing to say. I'll reiterate the point about money, because I think it is being entirely overlooked. Obama and the Democrats have a commanding financial advantage over McCain and the GOP, and that gap is widening, not shrinking, as each fundraising report comes out. You can be the greatest candidate ever, which McCain most certainly isn't, and if you don't have the money to get your message out, you will lose. Usually badly. |
05-09-2008, 10:36 AM | #2669 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
McCain was badly underfunded in the Republican primary, too, and won easily. Just sayin'.
|
05-09-2008, 10:37 AM | #2670 |
College Prospect
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston, MA
|
Do you really think that given our history and military power, ANY country in the world thinks we're not willing and able to kill massive amounts of people whenever we please?
Given that, why would Iran or any other country mess with us if we didn't do something to piss them off to begin with? Leave people alone and they'll respond in kind, especially if our guns are bigger. |
05-09-2008, 10:42 AM | #2671 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
Quote:
Sorry, don't agree with that even a little bit. Corollary to my above post is that I think the most troubling temptation for America is the tendency to isolationism, both in terms of foreign policy and trade policy. |
|
05-09-2008, 10:47 AM | #2672 | |
College Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Arlington, VA
|
Quote:
If this is what you are hearing, then Obama needs to do a better job of explaining himself, because that is not what he is saying. This is what he has said is his policy on the use of force: "No President should ever hesitate to use force - unilaterally if necessary - to protect ourselves and our vital interests when we are attacked or imminently threatened. But when we use force in situations other than self-defense, we should make every effort to garner the clear support and participation of others - the kind of burden-sharing and support President George H.W. Bush mustered before he launched Operation Desert Storm." More from the same speech: "In order to advance our national security and our common security, we must call on the full arsenal of American power and ingenuity. To constrain rogue nations, we must use effective diplomacy and muscular alliances. To penetrate terrorist networks, we need a nimble intelligence community - with strong leadership that forces agencies to share information, and invests in the tools, technologies and human intelligence that can get the job done. To maintain our influence in the world economy, we need to get our fiscal house in order. And to weaken the hand of hostile dictators, we must free ourselves from our oil addiction. None of these expressions of power can supplant the need for a strong military. Instead, they complement our military, and help ensure that the use of force is not our sole available option." I find this very tough to argue with, especially when put up against McCain's endorsement of the Bush Doctrine of preemptive, unilateral strikes against perceived threats, as eveidenced through the Senator's voting record and public comments. |
|
05-09-2008, 11:11 AM | #2673 | |
College Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Arlington, VA
|
Quote:
If it all comes down to driving around small states like New Hampshire and South Carolina in the Straight Talk Express, then I'm with you. But it won't. You can do the early primaries on a shoestring because face-to-face meetings with the candidate are how you get votes. But in the general election, the candidate may be able to make 3 or 4 trips to Ohio, tops. And that comes at the expense of other states you need to campaign in. You get your message out with ads. And if the battleground states turn out to be MI, PA, OH, FL or NJ, those ads will have to be bought in some of the most expensive media markets in the country. Under the law, politicians do get cut rates to a certain extent, but not that much of a cut rate. Since the parties started breaking out of the public financing system, no Republican candidate has been elected to the Presidency without substantially outspending his Democratic opponent. Which is unsurprising, I suppose, because no Republican presidential candidate has every been outspent, and rarely is it close. |
|
05-09-2008, 11:19 AM | #2674 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
Well, we'll see. I really don't have a feel for what will happen in the GE.
|
05-09-2008, 11:49 AM | #2675 | ||
Stadium Announcer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burke, VA
|
Quote:
I'm cribbing shamelessly from Mark Steyn here, but there's a quote from Osama bin Laden, from shortly after the 9/11 attacks. Quote:
To answer your first question... I think there are plenty of countries (as well as non-state actors) who believe we are increasingly incapable of killing "massive amounts of people". Are we capable of Dresden these days? Are we capable of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Are we capable of leveling Tehran and salting the earth, even AFTER an attack on our soil? Since WWII we've waged oxymoronic "nice wars". Hell, even "Shock and Awe" was designed to showcase our military might without actually using it in a way to terrify our enemies into submission. So you believe that we're acting like the strong horse right now, with our "bigger guns" and whatnot? I think compared to our enemies, we're looking increasingly feeble. Your statement is also predicated on your belief that people in power are ultimately good people. Given the madmen and tyrants (petty or otherwise) that have been in power across the globe over just the past 50 years, it's a statement that's naive at best.
__________________
I don't want the world. I just want your half. |
||
05-09-2008, 11:51 AM | #2676 | |
Stadium Announcer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burke, VA
|
Quote:
But Obama's a man of his word, and not a typical politician... right? So I'm sure he'll stick with his promise to use the public financing system if his opponent agrees to do the same. Since McCain's already agreed to do so, that should negate his financial advantage, right?
__________________
I don't want the world. I just want your half. |
|
05-09-2008, 11:53 AM | #2677 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
Quote:
Quite the comedian, Cam. |
|
05-09-2008, 11:57 AM | #2678 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
I thought I read somewhere that Obama has already backed away from that promise, saying something like "it would be really stupid not to use every advantage I have."
|
05-09-2008, 12:05 PM | #2679 | |
H.S. Freshman Team
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Satellite Beach, FL
|
I am going to say this one more time and I will use caps to maybe get the point across though I doubt the people spouting this care.
OBAMA NEVER MADE A PROMISE TO USE PUBLIC FINANCING!!!!!!! This is the document in question http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-s...a_02192008.pdf This is what he said Quote:
Now if he doesnt attempt to pursue an aggreement with McCain then you can start bemoaning his breaking of his word until then please stop reapeating talking points.
__________________
Share and enjoy Last edited by -apoc- : 05-09-2008 at 12:08 PM. |
|
05-09-2008, 12:16 PM | #2680 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
You're right, that's totally different.
|
05-09-2008, 12:21 PM | #2681 | |
Stadium Announcer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burke, VA
|
Quote:
I don't find this difficult to argue with, but again I'm going to have to crib from Mark Steyn. We need "muscular alliances". Where do these muscular alliances come from? England, where the Archbishop of Canterbury says England should embrace sharia law? France, where Muslim youth riot, burn cars, attack police, etc. on issues NOT related to declaring war on an Islamic country? You are assuming our traditional European allies have drifted away from us because of our "imperial arrogance", rather than their own self-interest. In "enlightened democracies" we tend to kowtow to those on the fringe. Look at Wright, Jackson, Sharpton, etc. on the left and Hagee, Robertson, Falwell, etc. on the right. You won't find Jesse Jackson or Pat Robertson in Europe. You'll find Mullah Chaudri, Mullah Krekar, and Dyab Abou Jahjah. Are these individuals representative of all Muslims in Europe? No more than Jesse Jackson represents all black Americans, or Pat Robertson represents all Christians in the United States. Yet they still exert influence over our politics the same way fringe Muslims do in Europe. In my opinion, Obama's failure to both recognize this and present it to the American people is foolish and shortsighted. It does not make me confident that he is prepared to deal with the threats the United States will face over the next decade.
__________________
I don't want the world. I just want your half. Last edited by CamEdwards : 05-09-2008 at 12:23 PM. Reason: no triple dola after all |
|
05-09-2008, 12:23 PM | #2682 | |
College Prospect
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston, MA
|
Quote:
None of your assumptions are correct. I asked (rhetorically) who doesn't think we're capable of killing massive amounts of people. |
|
05-09-2008, 12:25 PM | #2683 |
College Prospect
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston, MA
|
|
05-09-2008, 12:29 PM | #2684 | ||
Stadium Announcer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burke, VA
|
Quote:
Talking points? Give me a freaking break. http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-...ma_pledge.html Quote:
__________________
I don't want the world. I just want your half. |
||
05-09-2008, 12:29 PM | #2685 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Mexico
|
Foo Fighter, that's Obama's quote, not Cams.
|
05-09-2008, 12:34 PM | #2686 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA
|
Quote:
Actually it can be an extremely cut rate (although stations have gotten smarter through the years at limiting the impact) ... but that isn't at all the same as saying "cheap" either.
__________________
"I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis |
|
05-09-2008, 12:35 PM | #2687 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
I think we can all agree that our current foreign policy is working so well that we shouldn't change it.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-09-2008, 12:40 PM | #2688 | ||
Stadium Announcer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burke, VA
|
Quote:
Actually, you said: Quote:
Sorry for assuming your statement of "leave people alone and they'll respond in kind, especially if our guns are bigger" was based in some sort of belief in the inherent goodness of people. Do you mind telling me why you think our enemies will leave us alone then? Is it predicated on the idea that they fear us? If so, what reason have we given them to fear our response, and what has Obama said that makes you think he'd respond aggressively to a threat or an attack against the U.S. or U.S. interests?
__________________
I don't want the world. I just want your half. |
||
05-09-2008, 12:48 PM | #2689 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
Quote:
What constitutes a threat and what constitutes US interests? Any President will respond aggressively to an attack on the US, but the whole point is that we shouldn't be attacking threats unless it's our last option. It's a renunciation of the doctrine of preventive war.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
|
05-09-2008, 01:01 PM | #2690 | |
Stadium Announcer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burke, VA
|
Quote:
I see. So basically Obama's stance is "You get the first punch, but we'll hit you back"?
__________________
I don't want the world. I just want your half. |
|
05-09-2008, 01:08 PM | #2691 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
Cam: This won't get us anywhere, so why don't we just end it here. You know full well that's not at all what Obama said, but you're going to do your best to get in as many shots as possible. If you want to seriously discuss what constitutes threats and US interests I'm all for it. If this is just a game to throw smears at each other and the candidates I'll cede to you the field.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-09-2008, 01:21 PM | #2692 | |
Stadium Announcer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burke, VA
|
Quote:
Actually, I really wasn't trying to "get in a shot". I'm honestly trying to figure out what you mean by a renunciation of the doctrine of preemptive war. "Threats" and "U.S. interests" will mean different things to different people, and ultimately it won't matter what I think constitutes a threat to a U.S. interest. It's up to the president, and I'm not in the running. So having a debate over that seems pointless, but trying to figure out what Obama's policy actually means doesn't seem pointless, if that makes sense.
__________________
I don't want the world. I just want your half. |
|
05-09-2008, 01:33 PM | #2693 | |
College Prospect
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston, MA
|
Quote:
If we didn't have a military base in every other country in the world, why would anyone give a shit about us other than economically? We used to have a miltary base in Lebanon. Whatever terrorist group it was didn't want us there and they bombed our barracks. Reagan ordered us out. No more attacks. How come Switzerland wasn't invaded during WWII when everyone else was? Self defense is essential. Fucking with the rest of the world under the guise of "interests" is not. |
|
05-09-2008, 01:36 PM | #2694 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
But you know full well your quip about Obama was a cheapshot. Look at what he said in the above quoted passage,
Quote:
The big difference is that the bar for preventive action will likely be raised and the need to get strong international support will be emphasized. IMO it reads much like Kennedy's actions during the Cuban Missile Crisis. We didn't hesitate to act, but we had strong international backing. In Korea we also acted, but we had strong international backing. I know you can point to a whole host of countries that supported us in Iraq, but we quite consciously went with a needlessly belligerent attitude towards those that had questions about our actions. Most foolishly, we wouldn't consider waiting for 30 days when a host of smaller countries asked for that, so instead of marginalizing those against us we dismissed a host of countries that could have been persuaded to help us. IMO it's that sort of mistake that Obama's talking about. As to when he might attack before being attacked first? I don't know, but I'd bet it would be in line with the actions of most of our country's Presidents of varying political stripes. The doctrine of preventive war is a recent construct and IMO it hasn't served us very well.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
|
05-09-2008, 01:53 PM | #2695 | |
Stadium Announcer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burke, VA
|
Quote:
No, it wasn't a cheap shot. It was an honestly asked question, but if you want to believe otherwise I'm not going to expend any more energy trying to satisfy you otherwise. And actually, I won't point to the countries that supported us in Iraq, because I believe that in our future actions, we're likely to have less support (for the demographic reasons I pointed out on the last page) no matter who's in charge. If the need for international support is emphasized more than it is now, I view that as a mistake, because I don't believe our traditional allies will be in a position to support us against enemies like Iran. I think Obama's position is foolish and not based on the demographic reality of our allies. I do appreciate the articulation of what you believe Obama's statements to mean though.
__________________
I don't want the world. I just want your half. |
|
05-09-2008, 02:06 PM | #2696 | |
Stadium Announcer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burke, VA
|
Quote:
The bombings of the Marine barracks in Beirut are thought to be the work of Hezbollah, with the backing of Iran. Yes, we haven't had any more trouble with Iran or Hezbollah since then. The U.S. forces in Beirut were also a part of a multi-national force. Along with the U.S. forces who were killed, more than 50 French soldiers were killed. These bombings took place a few months after the U.S. Embassy in Beirut was bombed. Are you suggesting we refuse to take part in any multi-national or international peacekeeping operations? How about our embassies? Should we shut them down in addition to our military bases? And most importantly, do you seriously believe Barack Obama subscribes to even 1% of your views? As for the Swiss and WWII, I would encourage you to read Stephen Halbrook's "Target Switzerland: Swiss Armed Neutrality in WWII". Self-defense IS important for a country. One might wonder why Barack Obama refuses to ever talk about the self-defense aspects inherent in the 2nd Amendment, given that the Swiss militia system was one of the key reasons why Germany never invaded. But I digress.
__________________
I don't want the world. I just want your half. |
|
05-09-2008, 02:20 PM | #2697 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
That would be a great campaign event, "The Swiss militia system and the self-defense aspects of the 2nd amendment." That'll get the donations pouring in!
I don't believe Iran is that great a threat. They're certainly behind a resurgent Russia and China in relation of long-term threats. Iran is more of a nuisance than an actual strategic threat. Even if they develop a nuke, which we should work to curtail, they still won't have anywhere near the power of the dominant military force in the region, Israel. I believe that we're focused to tightly on Iraq/Iran while allowing greater threats the freedom of unopposed actions. I also don't buy Steyn's idea that we're almost besieged by radical Islam. His worldview leaves only military action as a way to achieve our goals and doesn't take into account the reality that our actions have consequences. Perhaps in fifty or one-hundred years things will be different, but it's foolish to argue that right now we can't count on European allies because of the influence of radical Islam on those nation's leaders.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-09-2008, 02:28 PM | #2698 |
This guy has posted so much, his fingers are about to fall off.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: In Absentia
|
Good sign for Obama...I've seen the same article get revised twice today - first time, the article said he picked up 3 superdelegates; second said he had 5; now he's at 6. Clinton's superdelegates lead is down to 271.5-269.
By Monday, she may not even have the "and I'm leading in superdelegates" argument to make anymore.
__________________
M's pitcher Miguel Batista: "Now, I feel like I've had everything. I've talked pitching with Sandy Koufax, had Kenny G play for me. Maybe if I could have an interview with God, then I'd be served. I'd be complete." |
05-09-2008, 02:41 PM | #2699 | ||
College Prospect
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Boston, MA
|
Quote:
So then why for the love of God are we starting shit with Iran? Quote:
What do peacekeeping and embassies have to do with anything? Way to keep the conversation focused. If two people can't agree on 1% of something, they're not trying. |
||
05-09-2008, 02:49 PM | #2700 | |
Coordinator
Join Date: Oct 2000
|
Quote:
At least one of those was a defection from Clinton too. I expected some dems would try to commit and push her out as quickly as possible. I wouldn't be shocked at all to see a flood of them pour in over the next week to two weeks. Last edited by TroyF : 05-09-2008 at 03:12 PM. |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|