Recent Posts
I misrepresented nothing. You asked how the two can be compared - I said they both invoked "national security", and both skated the edge of existing conventional wisdom to get there, ostensibly under the aegis of the Patriot Act. Aunt Martha also wasn't the target of phone record searches - in the case of Rosen, it was an alleged journalist who was using his position to influence American foreign policy. Like I said, you liked it just fine just a few short years ago, but not so much once the "other guys" were doing itMy word? So I fabricated the email from Rosen to his source? Is that it? Perfect. This is what I mean about being bored with the witch-hunts. Responses on Benghazi, and on this, are just two examples - when faced with verifiable facts as opposed to unfounded if/then scenarios, ya'll dodge and weave like an All-Pro tailback, dismissing anything that disturbs the Faux Noize "hi-info " talking points. You demand a response, and when given one, you demand a response, and when given.....on to infinity. I get it - it's a private circle-jerk among consenting adults, and you don't wish to be disturbed. (Yesterday | post #162705)
I know it is fun to imagine that US forces can be deployed like some kind of super action figures, esp. for those chicken hawks who risk nothing in the effort, but two words come to mind - Blackhawk Down. (Yesterday | post #162703)
I >know< you ain't got Alzheimer's. I >know< you have seen me write in detail on every point raised, because you have replied most every time. So what your game is NOW, with this "don't answer" smoke, I cannot fathom..... (Yesterday | post #162682)
Skip to the loo, my darlin', farther and farther away..... (Yesterday | post #162678)
Perhaps at some point you'll trouble yourself to tell how I "misrepresent ed facets of the Bush Patriot Act" when all I did was mention the name in recalling how we discussed it here pre-2008They both invoked "national security". Yeah, like I said, it ain't so righteous any more when the "other guys" use it, is it? As a high information voter, you do know the Rosen investigation was to determine the source of a CIA leak, right? Involving North Korea and nuclear bombs and all that skeery stuff that Obama's "not tough enough" about? And that Rosen, with the info from his contact, actually thought he was going to, NOT report, but push US foreign policy in a direction of his choosing? Email from Rosen to his source: "Let’s break some news, and expose muddle-headed policy when we see it – or force the administration’s hand to go in the right direction, if possible." I don't care for this skating on the edge of the 1st Amendment any more then you, but we sure as hell don't need no William Randolph Hearst wannabes pushing America's hand with a nuclear rogue state. This alleged "reporter " left the secure bounds of the 1st Amendment when he set himself up as initiator of American foreign policy. If you would be so kind, please at least respond on that point. Oh, and yes, it is noted how you all have thus far dropped crumbs away from the points in my response to your purported non-ideological indignation over the deaths of four Americans. I ain't no Hansel, I do recall the way back, if and when you care to go. (Yesterday | post #162677)
Uh, you're kidding, rightbob, bob, now you've never been one to play "Parse and Dodge". Why start nowAnd it was a majority of the voting population who decided he had earned a second term. But somehow your railing majority morphed into "low-informat ion voters". Strange how that worksWow, this sounds eerily like a year ago. Is Rove back in the forecasting game? ;) (Yesterday | post #162674)
This hi-lites what is insidious about America's over-use of the term "war". We seem to think we can call everything a war, and talk all patriotic about it, but our populace should be somehow insulated from the effects, to the point we don't even have to contribute materially to it, and no one but a combat troop should ever die. We are, I believe, unique in the world, in that misapprehension. I hadn't heard that the "War On Terror" was officially over. That being the case, embassy staff, esp. in hot regions, are just as much in the fight as their counterparts were in the Cold War. America needs to toughen up, or stay home. We can't have it both ways anymore, and it's frankly embarrassing and shameful that we try. (Yesterday | post #162673)
Oh yeah, that just started happening, didn't it, hi-information voter? Well, at least you admit that Obama is more forthcoming about it. From the mouths of babes... A-way back when we were discussing the Patriot Act and the Bush admin's reckless end-runs around FISA warrants to illegally wire-tap American citizens, the general response went along the lines of, "If you're doing nothing wrong you've got nothing to fear," and "If it saves just one American life it's worth it". My specific reply at the time was, "It'll be interesting to see you squall when an opposition party wields the same power". And here we are, and there ya'll are, right on cue, and I'm feelin' just about like a prophet. (Yesterday | post #162671)
Not at all. Ain't nuthin' sneaky about a dodge. (Yesterday | post #162668)
Willie beat me to it, but still - never have denied the existence of "low information voters", and in fact have acknowledged them in posts here that, as I recall, were judgiconed, let's say, not popular. I understand your frustration, but you're flailing now, which taken together, appear a perfect metaphor for the current bevy of witch trials. But I do find it ironic that you yourself have represented yourself as not knowing or caring much about current events or politics until very recently.... yet now you flatter yourself as among some august pantheon of "high-informa tion voters". Dat's how dat usually works. I also find it ironic (you're big on the irony) that for months and months, you railed and railed that Obama shouldn't be doing nuthin but economy/jobs, and jobs/economy. Yet here Congress ain't doin' nuthin but hearings after hearings. And you want nuthin' but more hearings. And all the while the economy slowly rights itself from the debacle that began in 2007. And THAT'S what Americans care MOST about (since you mentioned polls). And the results are a slight but steady rise in Obama approval, and a concurrent slow but steady lowering of Republicans in general. Like I said, it feels like 1998 all over again. "When will they ever learn? When will they e-e-ever learn?" (Yesterday | post #162662)
Of course I didn't expect anything more than the classic dodge in response, but it's all good. I been doing this awhile, you recall. The boards ain't about me convincing you, or you convincing me - it's about representing a position. How do you think you did here? (Yesterday | post #162656)
Lol. Didn't blame Palin "after Az". This from a guy that never let facts get in the way to smear...well, anybody. (Yesterday | post #162652)
Yeah, the smoke's barely cleared over the dead bodies in a natural disaster and Obama is invoked. Nah, it ain't ongoing political gotcha games. Ya'll really ca-a-are. >coff coff< (Wednesday | post #162633)
Don't sell yourself short, kid. Whatever it was, you described it as one with experience. (Wednesday | post #162629)
How many letters have you written to demand that, you don't care how, but dollars must be allocated for security? How many letters demanding security first, investigation later? How many references have you seen in here being concerned that sequestration hurts an already weakened security force? 'Cos I've seen ZERO. That's why I don't believe the angst is anything more than Republican-deep. How about this math? Take your "FOUR AMERICAN MEN", and multiple that by ten thousand Americans lost or maimed for life. Then tell me why, IF it's about American lives and not politics, there is no such clamor for investigation(S) into the flaky rationale and conduct of the Iraq invasion? Tell me why there is NO clamor for investigation into MILLIONS of dollars completely unaccounted for? Why were American men sent to fight without a plan? Without body armor? Without vehicle armor? Without enough force? Without securing alleged WMD sites? Tell me why Americans were sent to fight without the full MATERIAL backing of the American people? Don't tell me about an Iraq thug. I don't want to hear about WMDs that didn't exist. I don't want to hear about a non-existent and ludicrous connection to Al Qaeda. I don't want to hear that it's "old news". There's still tens of thousands of American service personnel to whom it'll never be "old news". 'Cos, like you said, it's about American lives, right? It's about the sacred compact between the warrior and his nation. Then let's talk about, when they had the chance, Democrats chose NOT to put the nation thru endless investigations. Why did "in the tank liberals" like Willie and I tell people like ETC and others that such investigations were political drivel, and produced nothing but speech fodder. Do you recall how you railed at ETC and those like him, rationalizing yourself into pretzels about how all the lives expended were worth it? Do you have an inkling at all how much you guys sound JUST like them now except with FAR more speculation and FAR less substance? All the substantial questions have been answered about Benghazi. It's been officially a witch-hunt for months now. Luckily polls show that the majority of Americans are satisfied. But I really do hope you all don't lose any steam. Keep going please. It'll be 1998 all over again. (Wednesday | post #162623)
Q & A with HipGnosis
Headline:
The future begins
Hometown:
every moment
Neighborhood:
Pangea
Local Favorites:
ho'made pie
I Belong To:
the Lollipop Guild
When I'm Not on Topix:
message runner for the French Underground
Read My Forum Posts Because:
there's a prize in every box
I'm Listening To:
Hymns At The Whiskey-A-Go-Go
Read This Book:
The Grapes Of Wrath; The Age of Reason; Go Dog Go
Favorite Things:
old dogs, kids, and watermelon wine
On My Mind:
All the bridge-builders and firemen out there a-pluggin away
I Believe In:
The Gilded Rule 1. Treat as you would be treated. 2. Reciprocate as you are treated. 3. Return directly to #1.
Copyright ©2013 Topix LLC
