Hard News: Go Us
638 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 20 21 22 23 24 … 26 Newer→ Last
-
whats your point Paul. Prefer to attack the way I write something than answer the basic question regarding evidence of an inability to make decisions in a Presidential candidate
No, that's not it; I've reasonably closely read you comments and it's not the way you write, it's the substance and the predictability. You don't seem to respond to what's said by others other than to use any comment as a jumping off point for new/refreshed speaking points. I'd rather just read the propaganda than pretend this is a genuine discussion of alternative perspectives.
-
“What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?”
“One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.
“The other kills her own food.”
-
dont listen to me read what gerard baker of the times says
-
Simon - the earth is obviously flat. Whatever. I shall endeavour not to waste either of our time any more by engaging.
Paul - I jumped on this thread when Russell seemed obsessed by some details of Palins pregancy and seemed to be second guessing her choices as a four times mother. That seemed to put me at odds with most of the commenters from the start.
Predictibility is a harder one to rebut. It has struck me repeatedly throughout the thread that there is a confusion expressed about WHY McCain chose Palin. And there have been any number of wild conspiracy theories and memes running as to why. They have fundamentally missed the point. So I felt the need to keep repeating myself. I think for those who have trawled through 500 odd comments I have probably made those points more than enough times. So I will accept that as a fair slapdown on that basis.
on substance I have yet to read anyone engaging with the philosophical substance of what both brooks and baker refer to. Which is that McCain & Palin are a different kind of republican. I would be interested to engage with you or anyone on whether you think they are genuinely different or simply same as same as. I view the "rebuttals" as being limited to even simpler Dem Propaganda points.
For Don who I have ignored twice the hubby is obviously anti big govt rather than anti american. There are plenty of conservatives/rednecks who want the government out of their lives. The Dems tried speading the lie Palin herself was a member. On being an employee of BP, do you think that resigning when there is a conflict of interest is an act of integrity. The fact he went back once there was no longer a conflict boosts the act rather than taking away from it imho. He incurred an economic cost so his wife was not conflicted.
Any other points you want me to address?
-
And Simon/Craig, just to prove magnanimity, Palin has held onto the remaining $60m of the original $200m plus that Congress has given Alaska for the infamous Bridge. She obviously made a virtue of necessity but her views changed between being mayor and being governor. the fact that in the intervening 2 years she had a close view of the way oil revenues were being treated in her dealings with the oil companies. I am comfortable seeing it as a time of epiphany between being a small town mayor and moving onto a larger stage. What she said is an exageration, but not an outright lie.
-
ah god I have better things to do on a friday evening but those criticisms really hurt.
The Reagan as saviour is real but in no sense am I claiming 100% responsibility.
Afghanistan was however a huge draw on a weakened economy and played a massive part in the end
Read(not just watch) Charlie Wilsons war and understand how much of a part the US funds played in making Afghanistan unmanageable. There was not one single action that Reagan took, but he supplied the principles by which everyone could judge how actions would be acceptable. He certainly hastened the end.
try to imagine the outcome of Obama vs the Politburo and a replay of the missiles to Cuba is far more likely. Putin vs Obama is a seriously scary thought for European energy security.
-
WH,
I think the Democratic convention was a great success. Obama will win fair minded people over eventually (just as Bill Clinton left office with 70% approval ratings) and having respected individuals make the case for him will help the undecided and the wavering feel more at ease.
It's unscientific of course but electoral-vote.com shows a post-convention bounce in the swing states. It never pays to make predictions, but I'm starting to think Obama will win this. He should have the better ideas and the stronger delivery in the debates, and will be nice to start talking about policy, even if it is only in soundbites.
There's a great Paul Krugman column in the NY Times today (I can't link but the full text is on Real Clear Politics).
-
<quote>ah of course Palin has to be perfect.<?quote>
No - Competent. Honest about her own record. Accountable.
-
For Don who I have ignored twice the hubby is obviously anti big govt rather than anti american. There are plenty of conservatives/rednecks who want the government out of their lives.
Oh, Christ, I'm a big fan of the minimal state -- and let's put aside Palin's enthusiastic support for the Federal Marriage Amendment, and what that says about the depth or sincerity of any belief she has in the separation of powers between federal/state governments or getting the federal government out of people's lives.
But come on... we're talking about succession. Tama Iti territory.
-
I myself am very careful not to use Huffington as a source in discussion as I know it's partisan
Heck, I link to them all the time. I have no problem doing so because their political leaning/bias (left) is undisguised, unlike Fox News who continue to insist they have none, but are clearly shills for the right.
As a sidebar, I find it bizzarre that the Republicans can continue to (and successfully) refer to the bogeyman of the 'Liberal Media' when in fact Fox (top rating cable news) is clearly Rightwing and ABC News (free to air) is run by a Republican stooge.
Oh you mean you think I should be following the lead of the owner of this blog and Andrew Sullivan and repeating irrelevant shit that has just been made up elsewhere by fanatical anti republicans.
Okay, you're refering to the Palin-is-not-the-mother story on Kos. I jumped on that from the beginning but I always said in my comments "__If__ this is true..." or similar disclaimers. The KOS story was debunked very quickly when pictures of Palin clearly pregnant emerged. But KOS came to the story as a result of rumours from Alaska (allegedly via a Republican source) that it was Bristol who had taken an inordinate amount of time off school (5 months) with 'mono' and that it was Bristol who was pregnant. Which turned out to be correct.
Obviously we all wish KOS had done more fact checking before leaping to publish, because if they did the only bombshell they might have dropped would have been "PALIN'S UNWED TEEN DAUGHTER PREGGERS!!" That headline came later, but does anyone doubt Bristol's preganancy would NOT have been announced if weren't for the KOS story? My guess is the only thing announced after the convention would be the Wedding to Levi (and that they were 'expecting'), and a request for privacy.
Sidebar again - compare the way the Palin-is-not-the-mother story was so quickly and widely debunked with the way the Obama-is-a-Muslim-who-was-trained-in-a-Medrassa story was debunked. Both stories were originally published on the blogosphere but only one is toast, the other refuses to die.
try to imagine the outcome of Obama vs the Politburo and a replay of the missiles to Cuba is far more likely.
Er ... didn't Kennedy win that one? Without firing a shot? Or losing a life?
-
So, Sage, I'm sure you've dismissed the above as a vicious smear from the liberal media. Palin's done a Winston here ("No, I've never" means "No, I've never"), and doesn't the woman who is supposedly going to shake up Washington, fight corruption etc. to walk the talk and stop stonewalling the ethics investigation.
Or is Palin really an empty pants suit? The pork buster who hired lobbyists; the pair of clean hands that aren't as distant from her sleaze-ridden party as she'd like to pretend. The lightweight who is way out of her leagues.
And the big fat liar.
-
I am comfortable seeing it as a time of epiphany between being a small town mayor and moving onto a larger stage. What she said is an exageration, but not an outright lie.
That's bullshit hackery, Sage. Hell, I'm more inclined NOT to support someone who can never admit to being wrong or having changed their mind over an issue.
But there's a difference between changing your mind, and pretending you never thought differently in the first place. That's not an "exageration" but a big, fat, stinking habitual lie Palin is pushing about her position on the 'Bridge to Nowhere'.
And this is what it comes down to, right - party hackery. If Palin was a liberal Democrat on the Obama ticket her thin resume, lack of vetting and ethics issues would be all the way on the table. And deservedly so. What's different?
-
ah god I have better things to do on a friday evening but those criticisms really hurt.
Sage, I have no desire to upset you and I apologise if my comments offended. There's substance to your argument and I've thought about the points you make, it's just not clear you've thought about what others have said.
It has struck me repeatedly throughout the thread that there is a confusion expressed about WHY McCain chose Palin. And there have been any number of wild conspiracy theories and memes running as to why. They have fundamentally missed the point.
Wild conspiracies about why he choose her? Not really. Serious questions about the rigour of selection and her merit, yes, but not conspiracies.
There's a degree of confusion about elements of her story some of which, like her honesty, are vitally important. That might not be the point you're making but it's the point I'm most interested in. I don't care at all about her daughter's pregnancy, nor hers for that matter, but I'm very interested in her attitude to drilling, what real executive and related experience she has and what kind of appointments she'd make to the Supreme Court if she ever had the chance.
-
...what real executive and related experience she has and what kind of appointments she'd make to the Supreme Court if she ever had the chance.
And even if she doesn't -- and before we even start on SCOTUS picks -- I don't think it's a whacky "conspiracy theory" that the theo-cons are going to expect their new "rock star" will have some serious influence over a whole tier of Cabinet, sub-Cabinet, judicial and ambassadorial positions that are Presidential appointments. And not all of them require Senate confirmation. (And if, as seems possible if not certain, the Democrats pick up enough seats to win a filibuster-proof majority, then they might actually get their spines out of hock and slap down the worse aspects of a Palin Administration. :) )
To give McCain his due, he talked a pretty good bipartisan game -- and on some level, I think he believes it. The problem is that the people who've been wetting their knickers with glee over Palin don't; and McCain has shown in the most vivid way that he's perfectly willing to pander his arse off to them. A judge who thinks the Bible trumps the Constitution here, a clutch of Cabinet secretaries who won't let evidence get in the way of the theo-con party line there... A small price to pay to keep the 'Baracuda' in line, and the base sweet - right?
-
What happened when Sarah Palin took control of the Alaska Board of Censorship?
-
What happened when Sarah Palin took control of the Alaska Board of Censorship?
Where on earth did you find that? Hilarious.
-
john - understand that nuclear war was averted over cuban misslies because the number 2 on a soviet submarine refused to endorse the launch order of the captain. That is how close it got. simon the historian will be able to confirm
-
Yet again, The Daily Show nails it. This time, the out and out hypocrisy and doublethink of prominent Republicans on most aspects of the debate surrounding Palin's nomination. It's really enough to silence any arguments in support of her. But they could run it 24-7 on Fox news and it probably wouldn't make a bit of difference.
The last two nights of the Daily Show have actually been really depressing.
-
They did an extra show on Friday, which might have something to do with it.
Ah, yes. They went Tue to Fri that week in the US, instead of Mon to Tue, and that threw C4 out of synch. I expect they'll catch up next time there's a hiatus.
-
@SagenNZ
It was more complicated than that. The US started depth charging Soviet submarines and one on of those the capatin decided he was under attack and decided that he had to hit back. He made the assumption, since he'd lost communication, that war had broken out. His 2iC, Vasiliy Arkhipov calmed the situation.
The bigger threat to the whole thing was Curtis LeMay who was, being generous, verging on obsessed, almost mad. As head of SAC he was determined to go to war and there was a very real chance he was going to ignore Kennedy and strike anyway. He was pissed off with peace, if you will.
He's a very, very good argument for not letting aging cold war warriors anywhere near the button.
As to Palin being liberal with the truth...here's another one.
The EBay story was a half truth...yes she put it on Ebay, but they didn't sell it and when it was sold it lost Alaska half a million dollars. But its become GOP folklore and has been happily picked up by more than a few. Amongst them poor old John MCain, who now has it turning a profit.
Is just me, or is he now looking and speaking far older than his years would suggest?
-
Yet again, The Daily Show nails it. This time, the out and out hypocrisy and doublethink of prominent Republicans on most aspects of the debate surrounding Palin's nomination.
Arrrrr Jake - ye be tryin' ta plunder me treasure buried on Page 22??
On a lighter note, The Daily Show totally nailed the hypocrisy of the Republican spinmachine:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086&title=sarah-palin-gender-card</quote>
-
; )
-
Read(not just watch) Charlie Wilsons war and understand how much of a part the US funds played in making Afghanistan unmanageable. There was not one single action that Reagan took, but he supplied the principles by which everyone could judge how actions would be acceptable. He certainly hastened the end.
A couple of things, Charlie Wilson was a Democrat, and the initiative to arm the mujahideen was a Carter initiative, not Reagan (who did expand it).
Zbigniew Brzezinski says (its in French but a part of the translation is here):
We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would...... The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, "We now have the opportunity of giving to the Soviet Union its Vietnam War."
-
The bigger threat to the whole thing was Curtis LeMay who was, being generous, verging on obsessed, almost mad.
Scary. I get shocked looks when I explain that Dr Strangelove was originally planned as a serious drama. Kubrick, as ever, did meticulous research and the main characters were based on real people.
Then I have to explain who these people are.
Buck Turgidson was equal parts Le May and Patton (ironic, considering George C. Scott's later performance in that role), Jack D. Ripper was mostly Le May, Merkin Muffley was based on Adlai Stevenson and Dr Strangelove himself was an amalgam of Herman Kahn, Werner von Braun and Edward Teller.
In his later years, interviewers liked to goad Teller into tantrums by mentioning Strangelove. Bringing up Carl Sagan would get him frothing too, but for different reasons.
-
Scary. I get shocked looks when I explain that Dr Strangelove was originally planned as a serious drama.
There was a fascinating documentary a few years back called Taunting The Bear about Le May's obsessive behaviour in the fifties and sixties when he consciously and consistently tried to provoke WWIII, not just once or twice but as an ongoing policy. The guy wanted a nuclear holocaust and was perhaps as close as any side came to to it. In 1949, as head of SAC he proposed an attack on Russia with 133 warheads in one month, without warning.
Jack D. Ripper was mostly Le May
The body fluids stuff was based, as I recall, on actual Le May words.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.