Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
and what did he base this brilliant opinion on if he didn't see that report?
He could see what was coming from years away. It's one reason why he'd be a great president - he sees through political maneuvering. I expect that would extend to foreign countries' political maneuvering as well.
He's just smart. We're not used to that.
Last edited by delusianne; 06-01-2008 at 01:04 PM..
Reason: added "countries'"
If obama gets elected, AQ shall be in the USA in force inside of 4 years, then facist liberals will finally get that war they have been trying to avoid for the last 8 years, only this time it shall be on our front doorstep and in our neighborhoods. hope you have your firearms, ammunition and food ready, because it shall be here with the election of obama.
It clears this up for me. He didn't see the secret report that Randi Rodes was blaming Hillary for not reading.
So his oposing the war was an OPINION, no matter how many "I knows" are in his speech.
Randi Rodes is truly a fool. I keep giving Air America, Nova M, any left wing radio broadcasters a chance but they always prove to be hysterical and foolish.
It was more than an opinion, it was reasoned and unreflective of any party line at that time. It was based on knowledge - even for a state senator, who doesnt have to look into these things - of the realities in Iraq, the Mideast, and Washington.
And it was brave to go against the tide at that time - do you remember how speaking out against anything Bush-related was unpatriotic and to be condemned?
I dont know about Randi Rhodes. I do hate that "Bounce Your Boobies" song, though.
He could see what was coming from years away. It's one reason why he'd be a great president - he sees through political maneuvering. I expect that would extend to foreign political maneuvering as well.
He's just smart. We're not used to that.
There were lots of people(millions of us) clamoring against going to war with Iraq before it started.
1. We hadnt found Osama Bin Laden yet but now we were moving on to Iraq?
2. There was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11.
3. None of the hijackers on 9/11 were Iraqi. We knew most were Saudi, so why didnt we engage in talks over this with the Saudis?
3. The case had not sufficiently made that Saddam Hussein had any weapons of mass destruction and all avenues of diplomacy had not yet been exhausted.
Barack Obama simply excercised common sense away from the fearmongering bubble that existed in DC at that time.
There were lots of people(millions of us) clamoring against going to war with Iraq before it started.
1. We hadnt found Osama Bin Laden yet but now we were moving on to Iraq?
2. There was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11.
3. None of the hijackers on 9/11 were Iraqi. We knew most were Saudi, so why didnt we engage in talks over this with the Saudis?
3. The case had not sufficiently made that Saddam Hussein had any weapons of mass destruction and all avenues of diplomacy had not yet been exhausted.
Barack Obama simply excercised common sense away from the fearmongering bubble that existed in DC at that time.
exercised common sense - Doesnt that make him stand out? Compare the other politicos of the time.
I dont know the timeline of the protests against the war but Oct. 2002 was almost 6 months before the war even started. That's pretty early in the game to predict as well as he did.
The WMD point you make, #3 - Colin POwell hadnt spoken up announcing that Saddam Hussein had them yet. I think the inspectors were still going through the place at that time.
No, fascism in the context of American political idealogy is the result of unchecked and extreme conservatism.
We Liberals are seen by the neocons as Communists, remember?
Anyway,
Your post clearly illustrates the delusional view that many have about "the other side" being so dangerous and so scary when simple introspection would reveal to them just how extreme their "side" can be too.
Jonah Golberg has written a book (been out for a few months now) titled Liberal Fascism. I've only heard him speak on the topic and read portions of the book, but he certainly does make a case for labeling the left fascist. It's quite an interesting and thought provoking book (from what I have read so far). I was particularly intrigued by how much Adolf Hitler has in common with the left today. And, no I'm not doing the "you're a Nazi!" thing. He really does share a good many core beliefs with a lot of mainstream lefties.
Jonah Golberg has written a book (been out for a few months now) titled Liberal Fascism. I've only heard him speak on the topic and read portions of the book, but he certainly does make a case for labeling the left fascist. It's quite an interesting and thought provoking book (from what I have read so far). I was particularly intrigued by how much Adolf Hitler has in common with the left today. And, no I'm not doing the "you're a Nazi!" thing. He really does share a good many core beliefs with a lot of mainstream lefties.
I dont know, I'd never heard of it 'til just now, but at Amazon the Washington Post Book World Review has an extremely thoughtful and careful, but eventually negative, review.
Yes, the cover is fun. That's why I picked it up and started reading....then I heard him interviewed twice.
Wish I could comment more on the book, but I didn't read enough to do so.
I think it got generally good reviews, but I'd bet $$$ the NYT's hated it. They really go after conservative writers, it's quite sad what has become of that paper.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.