Article

2008-05-17 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Bobby 2008-05-17 06:53|| || Front Page|| [11131 views ] Top

#1 "Obama called it "disingenuous" to assert that he was not the clear target of the president's comments"

Get over yourself - the world does not revolve around YOU. Particularly President Bush's world.

Fool.

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2008-05-17 08:46|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/] 2008-05-17 08:46|| Front Page Top

#2 Obama citing Nixon? The worst president until George Bush?

You missed Carter in that timeline?

Posted by Procopius2k 2008-05-17 08:50|| 2008-05-17 08:50|| Front Page Top

#3 Big mistake by Hussein. He's revealed how thin his skin is about this issue, and with very little provocation. He'd better watch out for the debate he wants so much. McCain has been training for it by spending all his time on the bus with reporters who are happy to beat him up. Hussein is surrounded by sycophants. He'll lose it when he gets frustrated that he can't get McCain to lose it. Then McCain will slip in a zinger and he'll explode. Game, set, match.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-05-17 08:54|| 2008-05-17 08:54|| Front Page Top

#4 remind Barack that there's no teleprompter at debates.

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 09:08|| 2008-05-17 09:08|| Front Page Top

#5 The accusation fits like a favorite loafer, eh, Barry?

Posted by eLarson 2008-05-17 11:18|| 2008-05-17 11:18|| Front Page Top

#6 McCain has been training for it by spending all his time on the bus with reporters who are happy to beat him up.
?
The back of the bus is McCains base.
You mean beat up on BO?

Posted by George Smiley 2008-05-17 11:23|| 2008-05-17 11:23|| Front Page Top

#7 That this twink can even say such ridiculous things without inviting instant, uh, ridicule - is another reminder of what a debased and silly "public square" we have when it comes to foreign policy.

"Strengthened" Iran? Hmmm. Prior to 2003, they were throwing their weight around with impunity - not just in Lebanon and Gaza, but directly against us (Khobar Towers, etc.). Now?

Let's see.

US forces and intel agencies on two borders, with direct access to Iran via assets recruited from the literally millions of border-crossing pilgrims and others, as well as via illegals of US or other nationality. Check.

US forces in direct contact with Iranian forces and proxies, with the concomitant benefits that brings from captured operatives, intercepted materials and commo, and exposure to TTPs. Check.

US conventional force bases and observation positions on or near the border. Check.

Demonstration of US will and capacity by reaching in and snuffing out what had historically been the strongest and most aggressive of the Arab rejectionist states. Check.

Yep, son, that there's some list of failures. And of course this leaves aside the slaughter of Sunni jihadis that Iraq has seen - all of which contributes to the cause against Iran, which of course is logically banking heavily on all forms of anti-US and anti-western extremism to help them achieve their goals (shhh, don't let the morons in Langley hear, they'll get confused).

And WTF with "strengthened AQ leadership"? So strong they're changing their rationales and themes faster than a Hamas terrorist scrambling for the basement when he hears an Israeli chopper hovering nearby?

Of course, there IS that long list of successful major terror operations against the US homeland and interests abroad that AQ has pulled off since 2001. Wait ....

Oh, please, let Psycho, er, Maverick take up this child on his reckless challenge. The guy couldn't debate a smart Hill intern on foreign policy. He's a lightweight with bad instincts and very dubious analytical skills.

Posted by Verlaine 2008-05-17 11:29|| 2008-05-17 11:29|| Front Page Top

#8 Obamas Empire? You mean the Leftist Dominant Media (AKA "MAM" excpt they really arent mainstream anymore)?

How long will the press go on covering for this emptysuit messiah?

Posted by OldSpook 2008-05-17 11:46|| 2008-05-17 11:46|| Front Page Top

#9 How long will the press go on covering for this emptysuit messiah?

Until he proves detrimental to their liberal lies.

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2008-05-17 12:35|| 2008-05-17 12:35|| Front Page Top

#10 The guy couldn't debate a smart Hill intern on foreign policy. He's a lightweight with bad instincts and very dubious analytical skills.

And who doesn't seem to function well under stress.

Posted by Pappy 2008-05-17 14:36|| 2008-05-17 14:36|| Front Page Top

#11 #2 : Republican presidents, P2K. Dems only have shades of greatness...

Posted by Bobby 2008-05-17 14:59|| 2008-05-17 14:59|| Front Page Top

#12 And who doesn't seem to function well under stress.

well, thank God that's not a requirement for the Presidency

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 16:07|| 2008-05-17 16:07|| Front Page Top

#13 I don't see that all the fuss is about---of course the guy who says that Israel "is a constant sore", wants to meat the guy who says that Israel "is a stinking corpse".

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2008-05-17 19:14|| 2008-05-17 19:14|| Front Page Top

#14 I meant to write "meet", but actually...

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2008-05-17 19:15|| 2008-05-17 19:15|| Front Page Top

#15 g - I dislike Obama as much as anybody, and I don't think he's a friend or dependable ally to Jews and Israel. I also hate his ties to Wright/Hamas. That said, I think that particular comment referred ONLY to Israel. I read it as saying the 'Israel/Paleo conflict' was a "constant sore". Just my 2 cents. YMMV

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 19:18|| 2008-05-17 19:18|| Front Page Top

#16 crap.. I meant: "I DON'T think that particular comment referred ONLY to Israel."

Wow! That didn't change the meaning one bit, did it? What can I say? I'm also watching the NASCAR All-star race pre-race show. Can't handle that and typing my comment clearly? I'm a moron

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 19:22|| 2008-05-17 19:22|| Front Page Top

#17 You really believe this, Mr G?

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2008-05-17 19:23|| 2008-05-17 19:23|| Front Page Top

#18 as far as the speech should be fairly interpreted? Yes. As far as what's in his heart? I have serious doubts, and should my life and liberty depend on it, as your's does? I'd be a pessimist. I don't think he'd say :"Israel is the sore". I can't say that about him believing it, based on what we've seen so far of his brief public vetting. 'What I know' is troubling.

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 19:28|| 2008-05-17 19:28|| Front Page Top

#19 Did I clear that up at all?

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 19:29|| 2008-05-17 19:29|| Front Page Top

#20 I'm just saying I think he's too slick to be that explicit.

He might, if tired or no teleprompter is available

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 19:30|| 2008-05-17 19:30|| Front Page Top

#21 and should my life and liberty depend on it, as your's does? I'd be a pessimist.

You should be a pessimist on your own account. IMO, you Americans don't realise how much power the office of the POTUS has in the hands of somebody who doesn't share your basic worldview.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2008-05-17 19:49|| 2008-05-17 19:49|| Front Page Top

#22 I am, and I now. The impacts aren't as potentially instantaneous, however

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 20:07|| 2008-05-17 20:07|| Front Page Top

#23 know, not now....preview is my friend

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 20:07|| 2008-05-17 20:07|| Front Page Top

#24 And you, like most of the world, don't understand the checks on that power. We survived Roosevelt, we survived Carter, we'll survive Hussein.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-05-17 20:09|| 2008-05-17 20:09|| Front Page Top

#25 really? and if the C-In-C declared all intelligence currently shared with Israel to be transferred to the DOS bureaucracy "love list", that wouldn't be an immediate consequence to Americans? What immediate check is there on that power? A congressional R.O.?

I think I understand fine, thank you

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 20:48|| 2008-05-17 20:48|| Front Page Top

#26 Personal opinion? The man is an anti-Israel antisemite, because that's the fashionable view in the circles in which he travels, and he'll say whatever makes those around him accept him. He is savvy enough politically to realize, however, that the majority of American voters are not fashionable, and so will not say that in public -- unless he's stressed or tired, as has been noted.

Frank dear, I think Nimble Spemble's comment was directed at g(r)omgoru, not you.

Posted by trailing wife ">trailing wife 2008-05-17 21:02|| 2008-05-17 21:02|| Front Page Top

#27 damn

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-05-17 21:08|| 2008-05-17 21:08|| Front Page Top

#28 He said McCain will "need to answer" for a strengthened al-Qaeda leadership, killing bunnies, illegal time travel, Islam and gravity.

Obamamma can't think on his feet let alone tell the truth. McCain is going to crush this wanker.

Posted by Icerigger 2008-05-17 21:20|| 2008-05-17 21:20|| Front Page Top

23:55 Sholuck Hitler3172
23:07 Pappy
23:06 Redneck Jim
22:55 FOTSGreg
22:53 FOTSGreg
22:48 Redneck Jim
22:44 Pappy
22:41 Barbara Skolaut
22:35 CrazyFool
22:33 CrazyFool
22:31 Angie Schultz
22:04 Redneck Jim
21:59 Icerigger
21:54 Redneck Jim
21:49 DMFD
21:45 Crotch Oppressor of the Veal Cutlets9064
21:43 DMFD
21:41 GK
21:25 Icerigger
21:23 Icerigger
21:21 Icerigger
21:20 Icerigger
21:14 trailing wife
21:11 trailing wife