Sunday, September 08, 2013

Bush put boots on the ground in two wars...

...and conservatives by and large eagerly supported him. Obama wants a limited strike on Syria and he's a weak and confusing leader. Is there a Tea Party Spark Notes to explain all this?

115 comments:

  1. Yeah, he put boots on the ground. Quite a few
    boots IN the ground with a bayonetted rifle & and helmet stuck near them. Ghosts of Iraq/cost-benefits..and now even politics. If he does nothing and the Syrians gas several more thousand...it will be his fault. (and like Iraq, it will be 20 more years*, then a Shock &
    Awe into Syria because they used gas. Still, it is a complicated policy decision and some interesting discussions are going on.
    *Hussein gassed the Kurds in 1988, but it wasn't the Teflon president's fault..

    ReplyDelete
  2. Don't get me wrong, there are many well-articulated pros and cons about what Obama wants to do but coming from erstwhile hawkish conservatives it's breathtaking. McCain gets kudos though for a kind of weird consistency.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Also big difference here, Hussein had phantom WMDs at the time of Bush's invasion whereas Assad has by his own admittance an actual arsenal of chemical weapons and most likely used them. IMO Obama's case seems stronger. What saith Kissinger?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Basically it's another example of the stellar hypocrisy that the Right has gotten so good at.

    At this point, ANYTHING Obama supports will be rejected by the Right.

    Seriously. If he came out in support of breathing oxygen they would claim that the right to breathe is a Socialist plot.

    Speaking of Socialists, did you know the Pledge of Allegiance was written by one?

    ReplyDelete
  5. & if you're a Jehovah you're against it all. I have some sympathy for presidents dealing with foreign policy, despite all the armchair quarterbacking from Peggy Noonan and Jonah Goldberg and Rich Lowry it's an enormously complicated area perhaps why Kennedy was still popular after Bay of Pigs.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Paul Wolfowitz is all for nation building Syria. He is consistent
    and always wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  7. He's one of the original leading neocons remember? Him and David Frum of "Axis of Evil" fame, Rummy, Podhoretz and all the rest. You know the thought occured to me with Bush and Iraq and Afghanistan he's fucked up every president for years to come.

    ReplyDelete
  8. So when's it gonna happen? I'm beginning to think Obama is just gonna send him a nasty text...or maybe it's the Russian warships.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Maybe everyone will argue over to do this or that or nothing...until the Syrian war is over?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Did you see Charlie Rose last night?

    ReplyDelete
  11. A snippet from Shaw's blog-
    "On Monday, Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem stated that his country welcomed the Russian proposal, which called for Syria to place its chemical weapons under international control and for the weapons to be destroyed. No time frame or further details were given about the proposal."
    All well and good...except for the time frame and further details. Might as well study the issue, rather than get caught in the old
    fake WMD-Shock & Awe-Blackwater-boots on the ground crap again.
    ...dang Ghosts of Iraq

    ReplyDelete
  12. That is a major development and I think it gives Obama a kind of dignified out.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think Charlie Rose is a good interviewer and asked some really good questions during his discussion with Assad. I'd rather him do it than Barbara Walters who got it the last time around. It was nice to not have everything slowed down by a translator too.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Kerry is making me somewhat uncomfortable. He keeps talking of an incredibly small and limited strike. Drone? I get the impression he wants the strike more than Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Kerry has that way of pontificating-probably what cost him the pres
    election. I see that Colorado recalled to state Dem legislators because they voted for background checks at gun shows, the commies.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I'm repeating myself but gun rights advocates see no difference between getting a gun and getting a smartphone. You have the right to both, it's in the nature of things.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Is open carry permitted in the confessional yet?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Which state is it that's offering concealed carry permits to people who are legally blind?

    Yeah, because SEEING and SHOOTING have nothing to do with each other.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Actually, in self defense situations they don't. You don't have time to square up the sights on your target. Any respectable self defense/firearm instructor knows this and thus incorporates it into their training course.

    In the training course I've taken with Pistolcraft we do low-level lighting as well as blackout shooting.

    If you know what you're doing and are sufficiently trained, you can easily hit the torso at 25 yards or less in total darkness. And why? It is because the firearm extends from your own torso as your arms are outstretched in front of you. It has nothing to do with eyesight.

    Now, if you want to make the argument that a blind person should be able to see so that they know without question the threat they face then sure...you can make that argument but seeing and shooting, for self defense purposes, isn't an absolute.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Doesn't take into account the evil dwarf in front of you. Gangbangers in NYC are constantly accidentally shooting innocent victims, children and grandmas in their quest to get some rival gangbanger...yeah seeing and shooting is vastly overrated.

    ReplyDelete
  21. You can hit all sorts of things at 25 yards in total darkness: NRA
    is probably establishing a Division for the blind. One bright spot:
    firearms are sort of self-limiting. Last week, a patrol officer was in the school to talk to a class and a kindergartners grabbed at his holstered pistol, the discharge shooting the cop in the leg. Show & tell time, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Whether it's the little horror stories like you just described or the bigger ones like Newtown and Aurora the gun-rights person simply treats these as anomalies, aberrations, quirks and blips. Gun-owner accidentally shoots off left nut while driving, bullet richochets and shatters coffee cup of outdoor diner at cafe, they're all amusing little anecdotes BB.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Putin's NYT Op-Ed comments esp. re "American exceptionalism", I'm guessing Saty is inclined to agree.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Is he like their editorial correspondent? Like NYT-KGB...

    ReplyDelete
  25. Conservatives probably think so. Putin sounded so enlightening and progressive in his piece and very big on this growing body known as international law. Apparently not so keen on gay rights.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Tit for tat- Palin should write an op-ed for Pravda.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I haven't read it so I don't know what he said, but I can tell you right off the top I don't buy into American Idealism. I think it's a bullshit group propaganda that fuels a lot of why the rest of the world hates us; it's a pervasive 'our shit don't stink' mentality, it's the belief that allows us to believe that 'our healthcare is the best in the world' right in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It's a comforting national delusion, so much so that to publicly not buy into it gets you labeled an 'America hater', a traitor and probably a killer of fuzzy little innocent kittens.

    ReplyDelete
  28. We're exceptional all right: our crime rates, abortion, drug use, personal bankruptcies, the divorce rate, STDs, foreclosures, public school scores......that America is the best, note nobody ever says one of the best countries, no it has to be the Best like if you grew up in Spain or Belgium or someplace you can't be equally proud of your country.

    ReplyDelete
  29. And those who believe it treat it with religious fervor. It always kills me when I see people accuse someone of "hating America and wanting to destroy it". WTF is that about? I live here, my family's here, my home is here, little house in the woods. I hate America and want to destroy it? But for these people, pointing out legitimate places for improvement, or coming out against injustices EQUALS 'hating America and wanting to destroy it'. It's also a convenient charge to bring against anyone you don't personally agree with; it dehumanizes and delegitimizes them, and makes it emotionally and morally okay to do 'whatever it takes' to stop them.

    As we have seen in the past four years.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Actually the piece isn't that long. I didn't even mention our exceptional prison system where prison rape is an ongoing problem, problems in our justice system...is American cuisine exceptional? personally I think it rocks but I'm sure the French and the Spanish can show us a thing or two. It's not rightful pride, it's hubris.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Exceptional: US has 94.3 guns per 100 people, the well-armed
    Swiss only 45.7 per hundred. 43% Americans attend church weekly,
    but 63% Polish folk do. A bible in one hand, an AR-15 in the other, no hands free to hold up our pants....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We're a morally schizophrenic society.

      Delete
  32. Putin's piece was nice, well written, thoughtful, rational. I can't stand with him on his anti-gay policies but I think he was quite the grownup and made a lot of good points.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Here's a nice chunky topic for you to take on: NC DHHS has now MANDATED that all employees get flu shots. Exceptions will be made for medical or religious reasons but you have a shitload of hoops to jump through to get that okayed AND you will have to wear a mask CONTINUALLY at work during the entire flu season (which as you know lasts months). Noncompliance equals dismissal, period.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm wondering if soapster protested shots as a kid.

      Delete
  34. Used to be in certain Chemical Corps operations, inoculations were mandatory for staff. Even rumors that too many too often would cause an anaphylactic reaction to heavy protein doses and a person
    could expire from runaway immunoglobin-E. Dunno, I never came down
    with Tularemia, Anthrax, Plague or Dengue Fever. I tend anaphylactic when listening to Rush, though.

    ReplyDelete
  35. The outbreak of measles in NC this year from my anti-vaccinating friends... the kids who die every year from whooping cough... the thousands of people who succumb to the flu, just because they decided they didn't want to get a vaccination.

    ReplyDelete
  36. While counting the antelope on your long drives. Getting back to the Putin piece he did order that attack on Georgia in 2008 so who is he to lecture Obama. Then there's the Litvenenko Affair...

    ReplyDelete
  37. So where has Arsenio been hiding all these years?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He has a new talk show here on Ch. 11. Don't like this season's X Factor. I get it that the contestants have to give brief bio-sketches but what's up w/the judges after someone says they're not married one of them asks why not? Why does Simon who's a multimillionaire wear tight T-shirts?

      Delete
  38. Because he thinks he's all that.

    ReplyDelete
  39. The other day I downloaded The Call of Cthulhu by H.P. Lovecraft and finished reading it on my tablet yesterday.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Obama wants a limited strike on Syria and he's a weak and confusing leader.
    Obama IS weak, and he IS confusing, as well as being STUPID!

    What kind of an IDIOT tells is enemy when he will attack, how he will attack and how limited and small the attack will be?

    Only a INEPT IDIOT would do anything like that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If only Bush showed a fraction of his deliberation. Also the thought occured sometimes you give the enemy disinformation.

      Delete
  41. Yeah, he needs those military experts Rumsfeld and Cheney telling him what to do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I call it breaking from the neocons.

      Delete
    2. Oh I guess that Hillary Klinton and Hanoi John are better...... LMAO

      Delete
  42. Lovecraft..rocks. I hear that the FLOTUS is encouraging everone to drink 1 extra glass of water a day and so Fox has found an "expert" to refute the idea that we should all drink fresh water. I seriously wish the White House would make a statement supporting breathing so Fox could refute it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now if the charming Barbara Bush had said it...

      Delete
    2. Soon she's going to have us wipe our ass's with a Corn Cob, to save paper.

      Delete
    3. Actually the bidet is better.

      Delete
  43. They do become a bit amusing though, in kind of a scary way, don't they? I mean really, finding an expert to say we shouldn't drink more fresh water? That's ludicrous. But the scary part is that so many of the people who are fixed on Fox will actually believe it. That's why I think they really should make a statement supporting breathing, so that when Fox comes out against it, it might jar people into realization of what's happening. Then again, maybe it wouldn't.

    ReplyDelete
  44. An extra glass of water a day what harm can it do? might even prevent a kidney stone or two. I also think Obama should say brush your teeth twice a day and see what happens. I get the policy differences but water?

    ReplyDelete
  45. When I was browsing in Bed Bath and Beyond one day walking through the bathroom scales section one sign said water is the most important thing you put in your body and I gotta go along with that. Besides preventing kidney stones it also lubricates the joints, helps you digest your food and even lose weight. It also hydrates your brain which doesn't seem in evidence at FOX. The only real medical debate is the old 8 glasses a day rule and more doctors are questioning that one. So she said drink an extra glass of water a day, not radical at all when you consider the technical medical definition of a glass of water is only 8 ounces so FOX basically went out and found themselves an expert and all this over only 8 ounces!

    ReplyDelete
  46. As I understand it, drinking more water for good health was a recommendation, not some sort of command or law. Only an extreme
    winger would get their knickers in a twist (and FoxNoooze, of course) Bush said if we weren't with him we were against him, which I took as an observation rather than a command or law. These seem to be up-tight times.

    ReplyDelete
  47. You know there are conservative commentators out there who are a cut above the rest, Peggy Noonan and Rich Lowry for example and even they can't seem to get past the rigid and habitual partisan analysis of Obama and Syria. Peggy Noonan former Reagan speechwriter who is supposed to be above it all and she's just saying what some low-level blogger might be saying. I expect more.

    ReplyDelete
  48. From Haaretz, the Israeli newspaper-
    "Chemical disarmament pact tightens the noose around Assad’s neck

    The U.S. has not given up on supporting the Syrian rebels; it will now focus on training and arming them, together with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Yeah another Muslim Brotherhood, another budding Sharia state. Bibi is happy though. Did you know Assad used to be an ophthalmologist?

    ReplyDelete
  50. I have to wonder: during the commercial breaks do the Fox News folks look at each other, shake their heads and laugh "can you believe people out there are buying this shit we're selling?". Surely they can't believe it themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I honestly get more out of National Review Online which has a great mobile version I just bookmarked on my smartphone. I know if BB ever gets an iPhone first thing he's gonna do is download the NR App.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I hear McCain just wrote an Op-Ed for Pravda.

    ReplyDelete
  53. ..probably ghost-written while McPain fiddled with a smartphone
    game.

    ReplyDelete
  54. We're you trying to say McPalin?

    ReplyDelete
  55. Guess I'm still stuck on McDonalds.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Have we gotten to the point yet where we can all acknowledge the fact that the Tea Party is a group of fringey extremists completely out of touch with reality?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why because they don't believe in reckless gov't spending and want a return to constitutional limitations?

      Delete
  57. New twist on an old aphorism: they want to take OUR ball and go home.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Because they're willing to let a government DEFAULT on its obligations while simultaneously preaching fiscal responsibility?

    There's others, of course, but that one seems to sum up the craziness so nicely.

    ReplyDelete
  59. What's crazy is gov't constantly raising the debt ceiling. It's like at how many trillions now, that's not crazy? You know if you or I behaved the way the gov't behaves first off our credit rating would be ruined and in the olden days we'd be in debtor's prison.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Never understood debtor's prison. How could one pay off debts while chained in a dungeon? Probably why they don't have them anymore.

      Delete
    2. The credit card companies would rather get their money.

      Delete
    3. More and more jobs run a credit check on potential applicants. How can you pay your bills if you can't get a job?

      Delete
  60. It has gotten to be a routing thing:
    "Every President since Herbert Hoover has added to the national debt expressed in absolute dollars. The debt ceiling has been raised 74 times since March 1962, including 18 times under Ronald Reagan, eight times under Bill Clinton, seven times under George W. Bush, and three times under Barack Obama."
    ..nothing new under the sun.

    ReplyDelete
  61. The New Normal. Advocate something different and you're an Extremist.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Surely you admit the Tea Party have gone past the point of no return.

    ReplyDelete
  63. I actually think the Gov't has gone past the point of no return. NYT had a rather critical article on ObamaCare today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. History gives me the giggles. From Pro-Con.Org, a conservative source, we note:
      "The concept of the individual health insurance mandate is considered to have originated in 1989 at the conservative Heritage Foundation. In 1993, Republicans twice introduced health care bills that contained an individual health insurance mandate. Advocates for those bills included prominent Republicans who today oppose the mandate including Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Charles Grassley (R-IA), Robert Bennett (R-UT), and Christopher Bond (R-MO). In 2007, Democrats and Republicans introduced a bi-partisan bill containing the mandate."
      The GOP invented it, the GOP loved it...and now they hate it. Politics,
      folks want to go back to the way it was. Awful.

      Delete
    2. I so want the WH to come out with a statement supporting oxygen. I swear I do. Fox will have experts stating that oxygen isn't necessary and is probably harmful, Rush will claim that oxygen causes cancer, Beck will say that oxygen is systematically being used to poison the populace and the GOP will pronounce it all a Socialist plot to indoctrinate children into this 'breathing thing'.

      Delete
  64. You just can't admit the TPartiers are effing fruitcakes a few nuts short?

    ReplyDelete
  65. I'm not a Tea Partier but go on your Blackberry now and go to Health in the NYT, read the article and we'll discuss it tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  66. I can't do it that way. I need a link.

    I'm starting to think you're realizing your liberal streak is waythehell wider than you're willing to admit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like to think of it as my independent streak. I'm not an officially registered Republican either but that doesn't make me into a liberal.

      Delete
    2. So, still not willing to acknowledge that the TP folk are certifiable?

      Delete
  67. It occurs to me that 'waythehell' is a very interesting linguistic construction and I would like to figure out exactly what it is so I can research it. I am not good at grammar so if you know what terms I need to look up let me know.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I already planned on giving you the link but I was using my smartphone last night. Labor unions turning against ObamaCare, the liberal media starting to ask critical questions, liberals in general a little uneasy about it now that it's playing out and you and BB are the few lone wilfully blissfully ignorant holdouts. Oh I forgot Shaw.

    ReplyDelete
  69. I much prefer the European single-payer system for cogent reasons. Chances of getting that are remote at best, considering the current feelings. So the ACA is a small step. My liberal POV is that the ACA still contains the health insurance private sector and all the other free market stuff (hospitals for profit) which sucks $$$$
    right away from the services intended. I remember the costs skyrocketing at a higher rate than now, I remember companies cutting back on hours and benefits
    for the last 20 years and I remember the millions showing up in ERs penniless.
    We blissfully ignorant holdouts have our reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  70. The ACA is a small step? more like a clusterfuck.

    ReplyDelete
  71. The ACA is a big step. It's not perfect, never was, never was going to be, never pretended to be. It does, however, change the page. It's actually going over quite well; it's just that the GOP continues to scream loudly that it isn't, and so people who aren't personally involved don't know that it is. It isn't socialized medicine because it gives huge boosts to the private sector but it does bring everyone a step closer to getting everyone covered. I am still at a loss to explain why people think everyone having healthcare is bad.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Clusterfuck?
    "American Medical Association, the American College of Physicians, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Surgeons, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Society of Anesthesiologists, the American Osteopathic Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American College of Cardiology all endorsed last year’s health reform. These groups represent hundreds of thousands of physicians across a wide range of medical sub-specialties."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The UFCW also wildly supported it but even they finally saw the light.

      Delete
  73. The American Nurses Association has been 100% behind the ACA since minute one.

    Again, explain to me why people having healthcare is bad?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because caring about fellow humans is commie-pinko?

      Delete
  74. I'm thinking maybe Stephen Hawking can explain all this, I mean that extra dimension you two have been sucked into.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could be..playing with Higgs bosons will do that to ya. Why do I suspect shutting down the Fed Guv might result in an embassy attack..with no assets Americans could be killed and they would have more to blame on
      Obama. Better yet, shutting to the guv last time dropped the exchange
      2000 points. Kill the market and blame Obama. You know there are people that would buy that.

      Delete
  75. Quick trivia quiz - Who said that ObamaCare is "a train wreck"? Hint: it wasn't a Republican.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is a regular business: get your de-fund Obamacare kit here

      Delete
  76. affordable premiums ...the horror of it all! Un-American!
    Lose with Cruz...

    ReplyDelete
  77. You two reflexively filter out the negative of ObamaCare, probably read the Times link I provided and thought the Ole Gray Lady joined up with the VRWC. The answer to the quiz btw which nobody got is the Democratic Senator from Montana Mr. Max Baucus and chief architect of ObamaCare.

    ReplyDelete
  78. BB the NYT link which I think the two of you need to read again said premiums would be lower but at the cost of much more narrow health provider networks and often the better hospitals and doctors being left out of the exchanges in many of the states. I realize the Mother Jones article talked about the federally-run exchanges but the Times piece made the point that some patients would have to drive a half hour or more fo instance to find the doctor that's covered and there were other negatives discussed of ObamaCare as well. Mother Jones is an uber-liberal mag btw.

    ReplyDelete
  79. OK so maybe BB you can answer this. Seems you're not the president of the Ted Cruz Fan Club but how come when a certain woman state legislator in TX by the name of Wendy Davis, remember her? she did an 11-hour filibuster re a late-term abortion bill there and many lauded her as a rising political star. You can't get more American than the filibuster just sayin'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. well, we are talking Texas here; they specialize in hot air, I guess. BTW, if you check my link above as a reply dated earlier today, note that Pete King
      is not part of the Ted Kruz fan club, either.

      Delete
    2. I already told you my opinion of Peter King, he has a touch of the opinionated loudmouth, that political relative you can't stand.

      Delete
  80. omg! drive half an hour for a doctor? I drive half an hour for a gallon of milk. What about those women who now have to drive HUNDREDS OF MILES for an affordable pap smear? Nobody worrying about that inconvenience?

    Cmon. You can do better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I get to the Dr. Office at the Clinic in 15 minutes. THEN, I wait an hour.

      Delete
  81. OK here's better. Joe Hansen president of the UFCW said that ObamaCare will "destroy the foundation of the 40-hour work week that is the backbone of the middle class."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. American businesses will destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the middle class. Lets assign blame where it belongs.

      Delete
  82. Many employers just can't afford all the new mandates. The CBO recently forecast that about 11 million workers could have their coverage dumped. About 106,000 Jerseyans will probably lose the coverage they prefer and already have. They'll even have to pay more now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Employers just can't afford all the new mandates.
      You buy into the we are hurting line?

      Delete
  83. I'm telling you, this is the same kind of BS hype that had Romney convinced he was going to be winning the election.

    ReplyDelete
  84. And as a direct result of the ACA my coverage has significantly improved, many medications are now covered at 100% which weren't before and my premium has gone from $21 to $13. Monthly. And there are also significant new coverage options. I'm sticking with the 80/20 plan I've had.

    ReplyDelete
  85. no longer mobile-friendly.

    ReplyDelete