RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine

RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Thadius -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/14/2008 11:54:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: Only Republicans seem to see a virtue in the ignorance of the ignorant. I can understand one's cynism with professional politicians but the alternative doesn't have to be someone who appears to wallow in her own ignorance. I don't mean to side track this thread, but, what is Obama being sold as again? And who are his more die hard supporters? I can accept Obama has little experience, as has Palin, its the ignorance factor where the difference is and Palin is leading the way in that and the evidence comes out of her own mouth. One doesn't need experience to have knowledge. So ignoring the mistakes, lies, and obvious errors that come out of Obama's mouth, some how make the voters supporting him, is not ignorance? There is plenty of evidence of my claim above. I would even suggest that is part of where this debate has gotten really off track, and is going to bite many in the ass. They are attempting to compare Obama to Palin, which does 2 things. First it brings him down to her level (she is running as the Vice President), second it further highlights his own shortcomings when compared to the top of the other ticket. Just an observation.

meatcleaver -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/14/2008 12:06:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: Only Republicans seem to see a virtue in the ignorance of the ignorant. I can understand one's cynism with professional politicians but the alternative doesn't have to be someone who appears to wallow in her own ignorance. I don't mean to side track this thread, but, what is Obama being sold as again? And who are his more die hard supporters? I can accept Obama has little experience, as has Palin, its the ignorance factor where the difference is and Palin is leading the way in that and the evidence comes out of her own mouth. One doesn't need experience to have knowledge. So ignoring the mistakes, lies, and obvious errors that come out of Obama's mouth, some how make the voters supporting him, is not ignorance? There is plenty of evidence of my claim above. I would even suggest that is part of where this debate has gotten really off track, and is going to bite many in the ass. They are attempting to compare Obama to Palin, which does 2 things. First it brings him down to her level (she is running as the Vice President), second it further highlights his own shortcomings when compared to the top of the other ticket. Just an observation. Political incompetence is not ignorance, though it doesn't bode well for anyone seeking office I admit. Palin just seems to glory in her own ignorance from what I've seen of her, that in itself isn't frightening, the frightening thing is that so many people are willing to vote for such ignorance.

Thadius -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/14/2008 12:19:18 PM)
quote: Political incompetence is not ignorance, though it doesn't bode well for anyone seeking office I admit. Palin just seems to glory in her own ignorance from what I've seen of her, that in itself isn't frightening, the frightening thing is that so many people are willing to vote for such ignorance. As I said that frightening part is on both sides of the aisle. I simply point to the threads where we have attempted to get away from the mudslinging and discuss issues... "He's not Bush" being the mantra when asked about specifics of issues or proposals... The smoke and mirrors are beginning to fade, the glamour is wearing off, and even some staunch Dems are asking themselves "What the hell did we do? At least we have Hillary to fall back on in 4 years." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html

MrRodgers -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/15/2008 5:06:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: Political incompetence is not ignorance, though it doesn't bode well for anyone seeking office I admit. Palin just seems to glory in her own ignorance from what I've seen of her, that in itself isn't frightening, the frightening thing is that so many people are willing to vote for such ignorance. As I said that frightening part is on both sides of the aisle. I simply point to the threads where we have attempted to get away from the mudslinging and discuss issues... "He's not Bush" being the mantra when asked about specifics of issues or proposals... The smoke and mirrors are beginning to fade, the glamour is wearing off, and even some staunch Dems are asking themselves "What the hell did we do? At least we have Hillary to fall back on in 4 years." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html You are quite right...the dems are quite a bit more discerning. Now the repubs they are a collective piece of work. Pick someone please...Attila the Hun, Genghas Khan. Anybody who will carry the profit making torch.

samboct -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/15/2008 9:34:00 AM)
Roosevelt would be turning over in his grave over the "Bush doctrine." From John Toland's "But Not in Shame" history of the six months post Pearl Harbor. When Roosevelt was made aware of the communications between Tokyo and the Japanese Embassy in Washington on Dec. 6, 1941, his comment to Harry Hopkins was "This means war." Hopkin- Since war is undoubtedly going to come at the convenience of the Japanese, it's too bad we can't strike the first blow. FDR- "No, we can't do that. We are a democracy and a peaceful people." Everybody bellyaches about the US falling behind in math and science literacy. I suggest that our historical literacy is also in deep trouble- since our moron president doesn't know what the smarter and wiser folks who had the job before him did. Sam

bipolarber -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/15/2008 11:33:40 AM)
Now, now, Mr. Rodgers... Dems are perfectly okay with the "profit making" thing... we just differ in that we feel doing so doesn't mean you have to scortch the Earth behind you as you take your cut. Look at what's happening in the lending industry this week. Fannie and Freddie under government control, Leaman Bros and Merril Lynch going belly up, AIG walking the plank next... all due to some shitty republican policies put in place during Bush's first term, when the GOP had their stranglehold on the House and Senate, that encouraged "profit taking" over growing an industry. But, the chickens have come home to roost. If this spiral downwards continues, the Republicans will have sprung their own "October Surprise"... against themselves.

Thadius -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/15/2008 5:44:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: Political incompetence is not ignorance, though it doesn't bode well for anyone seeking office I admit. Palin just seems to glory in her own ignorance from what I've seen of her, that in itself isn't frightening, the frightening thing is that so many people are willing to vote for such ignorance. As I said that frightening part is on both sides of the aisle. I simply point to the threads where we have attempted to get away from the mudslinging and discuss issues... "He's not Bush" being the mantra when asked about specifics of issues or proposals... The smoke and mirrors are beginning to fade, the glamour is wearing off, and even some staunch Dems are asking themselves "What the hell did we do? At least we have Hillary to fall back on in 4 years." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13357.html You are quite right...the dems are quite a bit more discerning. Now the repubs they are a collective piece of work. Pick someone please...Attila the Hun, Genghas Khan. Anybody who will carry the profit making torch. After doing a bit of research, guess what I came across. The same folks that are attacking Palin for "not understanding the Bush Doctrine" were defending another candidate when the same issue came up during the debates.... http://mediamatters.org/items/200801080001 quote: Summary: During the ABC News-Facebook Democratic debate, ABC News' Charlie Gibson said that Sen. Barack Obama's assertion that, as president, he would "press them [the Pakistani government] to do more to take on Al Qaeda in their territory," and that "if they could not or would not do so, and we had actionable intelligence, then I would strike," is "essentially the Bush doctrine: We can attack if we want to, no matter the sovereignty of the Pakistanis." But by asserting that Obama's policy on Pakistan is "essentially the Bush doctrine," Gibson was claiming that there is in fact a clear Bush doctrine on the question of whether the U.S. would strike Al Qaeda in Pakistan regardless of the sovereignty of Pakistan. Bush and administration officials have in fact made inconsistent statements on this issue. Interesting.

rulemylife -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/16/2008 3:41:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius So ignoring the mistakes, lies, and obvious errors that come out of Obama's mouth, some how make the voters supporting him, is not ignorance? There is plenty of evidence of my claim above. I would even suggest that is part of where this debate has gotten really off track, and is going to bite many in the ass. They are attempting to compare Obama to Palin, which does 2 things. First it brings him down to her level (she is running as the Vice President), second it further highlights his own shortcomings when compared to the top of the other ticket. Just an observation. So let's compare apples to apples. Do I really need to remind you of all the mistakes, errors, and flip-flops on issue positions that have come out of McCain's mouth?

rulemylife -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/16/2008 4:33:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius After doing a bit of research, guess what I came across. The same folks that are attacking Palin for "not understanding the Bush Doctrine" were defending another candidate when the same issue came up during the debates.... http://mediamatters.org/items/200801080001 quote: Summary: During the ABC News-Facebook Democratic debate, ABC News' Charlie Gibson said that Sen. Barack Obama's assertion that, as president, he would "press them [the Pakistani government] to do more to take on Al Qaeda in their territory," and that "if they could not or would not do so, and we had actionable intelligence, then I would strike," is "essentially the Bush doctrine: We can attack if we want to, no matter the sovereignty of the Pakistanis." But by asserting that Obama's policy on Pakistan is "essentially the Bush doctrine," Gibson was claiming that there is in fact a clear Bush doctrine on the question of whether the U.S. would strike Al Qaeda in Pakistan regardless of the sovereignty of Pakistan. Bush and administration officials have in fact made inconsistent statements on this issue. I think the difference here is where we can actually substantiate that a country is harboring factions that attacked us. There has been no major outcry over our invasion of Afghanistan because it was clear they offered support and sanctuary to those who attacked us. On that basis, if Pakistan is giving sanctuary to Bin-Laden or other Al-Quaeda members then we have every right to go after them. The difference being those who have directly attacked us and need to be held accountable as opposed to those that that may pose a threat, as proposed by Bush and acted on in Iraq.

Thadius -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/16/2008 4:51:21 PM)
The important part of that quote was how the left was defending Obama from Gibson's vision of what the Bush Doctrine was. Stating that there is no clear cut definition of what that doctrine consists of.

hoodie -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/16/2008 8:47:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy Obama knows how to weather a storm. Who know that the RNC would switch McCain's slogan from "experience" to "change?" Change what? According to the speakers, "change a liberal WASH DC." The only problem with that is that the conservatives have been in power. Can you show me which Conservatives have been in power? Please, because I'm dying to know. I haven't seen anything but drunken sailors.

cloudboy -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/16/2008 8:53:02 PM)
quote: Can you show me which Conservatives have been in power? Please, because I'm dying to know. I haven't seen anything but drunken sailors. Do you wish me to call them Republicans instead?

MrRodgers -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/16/2008 9:08:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hoodie quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy Obama knows how to weather a storm. Who know that the RNC would switch McCain's slogan from "experience" to "change?" Change what? According to the speakers, "change a liberal WASH DC." The only problem with that is that the conservatives have been in power. Can you show me which Conservatives have been in power? Please, because I'm dying to know. I haven't seen anything but drunken sailors. You've got it hoodie. These are neocons warmongers, profit-seekers, socially conservative (sic) sinning hypocrites. Far too many call themselves conservative simply for the vote of those too unaware or stupid to notice...they aren't. The one I love is the 'socialist' wealth redistributing democrats. When the socialists are on wall street and banker/farmers and the redistribution of wealth is from the poor to the rich and since WWII.

MrRodgers -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/16/2008 9:40:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius The important part of that quote was how the left was defending Obama from Gibson's vision of what the Bush Doctrine was. Stating that there is no clear cut definition of what that doctrine consists of. You are quite correct. The problem becomes when they make up doctrine (policy) to support their party, power and in the interest of their benefactors. I am of the belief that the war in Iraq just as Viet Nam...is a war for profit that also like Viet Nam...wasn't/isn't supposed to end. Kinkroids understand this...the Gulf of Tonkin 'incident' was a lie and unmitigated bullshit to give us pretext (public endorsement) to really go to war and the PRESIDENT of SOUTH Viet Nam (who told us "we can handle it from here") was MURDERED by the CIA so WE could continue pursuing that war. I don't know if Bush believed he had the power, the right and the agenda to go into Iraq but in his incompetant arrogance we will spend $2 to $3 TRILLION when its all said and done (not to mention 100's of 1000's dead and maimed)...probably $300 BILLION of which is profits for his buddies and republican contributers. This all in a short 8 years. Imagine 4-8 more years of this.

hoodie -> RE: Palin and the Bush Doctrine (9/16/2008 9:45:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy quote: Can you show me which Conservatives have been in power? Please, because I'm dying to know. I haven't seen anything but drunken sailors. Do you wish me to call them Republicans instead? No that's quite alright. Being a Republican, I can count on one hand those in Washington who've actually stuck to the Republican party platform.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 4 [5]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125