The president had no announcement to make — not even an opening statement. Instead, he plunged right into the queries, nearly all of them posed in a challenging tone....
Again and again, the president seemed to be saying: "OK, that didn't work out so well, but I tried to do what needed to be done and the Republicans wouldn't let me."...
But no matter how frustrating a president finds this dilemma at the heart of our shared-power system, it does not advance his cause to wear his frustration in public....
३० एप्रिल, २०१३
"Logic Behind Obama News Conference Hard To Fathom."
"It felt as though something newsworthy must be happening. But as it turned out, not so much."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
२०९ टिप्पण्या:
209 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»" Obama is a gifted presenter, holding forth with the timing and wit of a professional comedian and then turning reflective and serious. Addressing an audience, he is nearly always on.
But in the unscripted free fall of an on-camera news conference, that mastery is notably missing. "
What was missing ? THE TELEPROMPTER!
UNCouth! (More importantly, the after event parties were LAME). What up?
There's no reason to expect this act will change. He can only blame congress, he doesn't lead, his signature accomplishment will be a "train wreck" very soon. Enjoy the decline Obama lovers.
You, NPR can't even figure it out! Be calmer and more sociable and surely those Republicans wanting to see your birth certificate will come around.
Maybe it's over when you can't get your lickspittle sycophants to give you a really good public buzzfeed.Though my reading of that imperial court was that plenty of persons there were still ready to carry his thunder mug.
Why should he continue to try to hide his less desirable character traits.
He didn't like having to do it and he doesn't need to do it anymore.
When he was asked about all that's gone wrong so early in his second term and all he could say is, "Maybe I Should Just Pack Up and Go Home. Golly.", you get the distinct impression he intends to do as little as possible the next 4 years that cannot be described by the phrase, "livin' large".
PS Part of that may be his big kiss-off to the Hispanics (to whom he "owes" so much), as Rubio's admitted AmnestyCare can't pass the House.
"Yes, Mr Obama, you may already be a whiner!"
Well, when you've NPR you've lost...
garage, which republicans are those?
Seriously.
And for bonus points: how many of them were among the questioners today while he was whining like the little cunt he is?
edutcher said...
When he was asked about all that's gone wrong so early in his second term and all he could say is, "Maybe I Should Just Pack Up and Go Home. Golly.", you get the distinct impression he intends to do as little as possible the next 4 years that cannot be described by the phrase, "livin' large".
Worked for Ike.
Republicans are meeting you at least half way for goodness sake! Why won't Republicans vote with what 90% of the country wants?
what's that, garage?
W's approval rating is higher than Barry's. I'm pretty sure no part of his agenda is anywhere near 90%.
Have you decided to try and fill the Ritmo quotient this evening?
He'll always have Chris Matthews,the court masseuse, to oil him up and flatter his every pouty syllable.
He's gonna be a rich rich man, mean Republicans or not. And he can come out after 2016, to huzzahs and even more money.
The rest of us will be struggling to keep things going, however. Medical care will as expensive as it is rare. The economy will maybe begin to recover, should the idiots be replaced by lesser idiots.
But he's got his, and that's all he's ever cared about.
He won, and that was somethin'.
Obama is a political agitator. It's all he is, all he knows. He exploits divisiveness. That's his past, and his present.
No surprise there. It's been there all along for any and all to see.
You expected fresh ideas? Leadership? Ha!
I mean, come on garage. You're a smart guy (despite what a few people say). Why go down this road?
I think it's safe to say you like Barry more than I do, but I also think it's safe to say he's not your ideal POTUS.
Yeah?
"Blogger garage mahal said...
Republicans are meeting you at least half way for goodness sake! Why won't Republicans vote with what 90% of the country wants?Blogger garage mahal said...
Republicans are meeting you at least half way for goodness sake! Why won't Republicans vote with what 90% of the country wants?"
You mean free condoms ?
Wow, three and a half more years of this...
I listened to national NPR new tonight (been half a year at least), All Things Considered and part of Marketplace in the car.
I was a little shocked at how pathetic it was. They've followed their ideas to their logical conclusions. NPR always was a child of the 60's and a kind of Dewey-eque pursuit of the public good and social justice, but still...really?
The conservative media, like PJ, needs to go to NPR's code of ethics, copy it, and maintain the same high standards.
The market is huge. Manage that with the new medium and there's a pretty open window.
A two term president with the poor mees.
Did he bring his brass knuckles?
Wow, three and a half more years of this...
To be followed by four to eight years of Hillary. Happy days are here again!
Obama is a gifted presenter, holding forth with the timing and wit of a professional comedian and then turning reflective and serious.
I've heard this many times and I've never understood it. I've always found him to be a mediocre speaker, with tiresome intonation and very bad speechwriters. Where the hell do people get the idea that he's a great orator? Was Dubya's bad speech bad enough to make people think this high-school debate club-level boremonger is the reincarnation of Demosthenes?
To be followed by four to eight years of Hillary
LOL. Yeah, right. Obama stuck a fork in that old leather handbag. She's done.
Was he medicated?
Was he medicated?
CEO-MMP said...
When he was asked about all that's gone wrong so early in his second term and all he could say is, "Maybe I Should Just Pack Up and Go Home. Golly.", you get the distinct impression he intends to do as little as possible the next 4 years that cannot be described by the phrase, "livin' large".
Worked for Ike.
As someone who lived through those times, I distinctly remember he had a lot of rough sailing.
Li'l Rock.
Quemoy and Matsu.
Lebanon.
A bad recession.
The steel strike.
Yeah, he just coasted.
It's maddening that Barry is trying TRYING so hard to come to our rescue but those dastardly Rethuglicans keep heading him off at the pass.
LOL, ed-t.
How much golf did Ike play in his second term.
Still, I suppose you couldn't see the ironic grin from the words of my post, so you can't really be held responsible for not knowing what the fuck I was saying.
So in Althouse world he is bad when he doesn't submit to questions and bad when he does. Probably not the most rational viewpoint.
I love the sentence: "As usual, the president was mostly calm and explicative."
Our explicative president.
Meanwhile, in 1996, Yankee Magazine quoted Calvin Coolidge as saying, " I find it helpful for me to go back [home] once in a while to see that I am not forgetting how people earn their living, how they are required to live, and what happens when those who have harness breaks, or one of their shoes need some repairing, sit down and mend it. You can go out and do some work on fence, do such odd jobs as are necessary to keep the house in repair, and in general do such things as are necessary for the ordinary American citizen to do. There is always a little danger that those who are entrusted with the great responsibilities of business and Government may come to forget about those things and disregard them and lose the point of view of the great bulk of citizens of the country who have to earn their living and are mainly responsible for keeping their houses, farms and shops in repair and maintaining them as a going concern. I find it very helpful to go back and revive my information about those things, lest I should be forgetful about it and get out of sympathy with those who have to carry on the work of the nation."
Imagine that.
From the article:
"On Tuesday afternoon, President Obama declared May as Older Americans Month, National Foster Care Month, National Building Safety Month, Jewish American Heritage Month and National Physical Fitness and Sports Month."
They forgot that under Obama, every month is declared as "Give Me a Fucking Break from this Joker" month.
But it's NPR, so what the hell did I expect?
To be followed by four to eight years of Hillary. Happy days are here again!
There are still people who think Hillary has a shot at the Presidency? That's so cute!
The winner in 2016 may well be a Democrat, but Hillary's only role will be a congratulatory speech to the winner at the '16 DNC Convention.
Bengazi, was Obama stealing Hillary's life jacket on the Titanic. If she tries to run, she's gonna regret working for him. Everybody will, sooner or later.
LOL. Yeah, right. Obama stuck a fork in that old leather handbag. She's done.
Actually, I suspect the next President will be a Republican, based on the simple eight-year cycle theory that's held true for much of post-WWII history. And I for one welcome another Bush in the White House. But don't count Hillary out.
"...while he was whining like the little cunt he is?"
I daresay, that's unfair, as I'm reasonably sure there are cunts we love much more than Obama.
And by "love much more than," I mean we don't hate them.
Why won't Republicans vote with what 90% of the country wants?
According to garbage 90% of the country is panting for suicide served cold by garbage's vicious prick god.
Can you find a take where it's a bit more dramatic on that last line?
Someone help me!!!
The Republicans are being mean to me!!!
somefeller said...
LOL. Yeah, right. Obama stuck a fork in that old leather handbag. She's done.
Actually, I suspect the next President will be a Republican, based on the simple eight-year cycle theory that's held true for much of post-WWII history. And I for one welcome another Bush in the White House. But don't count Hillary out.
Sure. That explains Bush 41 and Roosevelt - Truman. Had Poppy still not been recovering from his bout with the flu in '92, there may well have been a second Bush term.
Hillary's had it, to be sure (she's a lousy candidate if she has a real opponent and a worse administrator), and even Willie's clearly looking for a stand-in.
St. George- from your Coolidge quote:
"...There is always a little danger that those who are entrusted with the great responsibilities of business and Government may come to forget about those things and disregard them and lose the point of view of the great bulk of citizens of the country who have to earn their living and are mainly responsible for keeping their houses, farms and shops in repair and maintaining them as a going concern. I find it very helpful to go back and revive my information about those things, lest I should be forgetful about it and get out of sympathy with those who have to carry on the work of the nation."
Obama wants to tax that. More. More. More. Then waste the money.
The blame someone else.
As we watch homelessness and poverty grow.
And I for one welcome another Bush in the White House.
You're probably the only one!
garage mahal said...
Be calmer and more sociable and surely those Republicans wanting to see your birth certificate will come around.
It's quite amusing watching garage pretend Republicans are overwrought extremists compared to our diplomatic and ethical Democrats. Yet somehow he never once managed to criticize President Obama for lying that Bush refused to help Katrina victims because they were black. I mean, Obama's only the president and random internet fools like Mick naturally take priority.
I'd suggest he should be embarrassed, but be serious. Anyone with his track record of idiocy is incapable of embarrassment.
Obama is a gifted presenter, holding forth with the timing and wit of a professional comedian and then turning reflective and serious.
I've heard this many times and I've never understood it.
That's the narrative talking. The sycophants need it at this point to not feel totally stupid about voting for this grifter.
Hillary! will never be president.
I've always found him to be a mediocre speaker, with tiresome intonation and very bad speechwriters. Where the hell do people get the idea that he's a great orator?
Palladian: I've wondered the same thing. I think, for those inclined, Obama evokes the sixties -- JFK, RFK, and MLK all rolled into one tall slim black man with Ivy League credentials. It's the dream of the Civil Rights Movement made flesh. It makes Obama irresistible.
Being liberal is very much about feeling good, feeling right, feeling superior, and Obama hits those buttons.
He'll always have Chris Matthews,the court masseuse, to oil him up and flatter his every pouty syllable
Just like Matthews and cable TV D+ pundits couldn't get enough of the Iraq flight suit debacle that will cost us anywhere from 2 to 6 trillion dollars.
But that doesn't count. Wars is FREE!
You're probably the only one!
Perhaps, but if history is any guide, others will welcome Jeb Bush enthusiastically if he wins the GOP nomination. And quickly forget their enthusiasm if he loses in the general election.
somefeller said...
I for one welcome another Bush in the White House.
I'm assuming this was meant ironically.
"So in Althouse world he is bad when he doesn't submit to questions and bad when he does. Probably not the most rational viewpoint."
Maybe if you phrase it more correctly it will become more rational.
In the rational world he is bad when he doesn't submit to questions because he is refusing to be responsible for his decisions or lack of decisions and relies on his designated hitters to deflect and obfuscate. He bad when he does submit to questions because he is unable to keep himself from being petty and vindictive and pouting. He is not able to demonstrate the minimum qualities of leadership.
"Wow, three and a half more years of this ..."
It could be worse. Of course, with Obama there is little point in paying close attention to what he says. It's just the convenient rhetoric of the moment, all to be walked back or forgotten entirely when it suits his interests. All that matters is what he does, and all of his 'blame the nasty Repubs' stuff is his long-winded way of conceding he isn't doing anything domestically. Is there anyone who would prefer a situation where he was in a position to bestow more of his 'green energy' or tax policies?
Pointless press conferences are perhaps the best use of his time and skills. But there is a downside to his empty rhetoric approach to the presidency. The Syrian 'red line' stuff is the most recent example, and unfortunately for us, is likely to have serious consequences.
"Iraq flight suit debacle"
As compared to the Arab Spring debacle or the Benghazi debacle?
Do we have a money amount on those yet?
somefeller said...
You're probably the only one!
Perhaps, but if history is any guide, others will welcome Jeb Bush enthusiastically if he wins the GOP nomination. And quickly forget their enthusiasm if he loses in the general election.
Even Barbara doesn't buy it. Jeb's few tentative tries in the water and seen the crocodiles nipping at his toes.
some phony folksy is trying to be droll and, as usual, failing.
Theoretically, Christie would be the man, but I'm half expecting him to switch parties.
Who else do the Demos have?
Moochelle?
Andy Cuomo?
It's quite amusing watching garage pretend Republicans are overwrought extremists compared to our diplomatic and ethical Democrats,
Elected Republicans *are* fucking nuts. That has changed in the past 10 years. Democrats have just replaced what we used to call moderate Republicans. It was around 2007 that the big Democrat groups just said "fuck it, let's just become Republicans".
There isn't an economist alive that thinks what Obama and Republicans think we should do in this economy is a good idea. What do we get? Exactly what they tell us NOT to do.
"Obama is a gifted presenter, holding forth with the timing and wit of a professional comedian and then turning reflective and serious. Addressing an audience, he is nearly always on."
The author is still in the thrall.
Just like Matthews and cable TV D+ pundits couldn't get enough of the Iraq flight suit debacle that will cost us anywhere from 2 to 6 trillion dollars.
My recollection is that the chattering crowd gave Bush immediate hell over that, and still haven't stopped.
One may have any opinion one wants, but not their own set of facts.
Stop shilling. Stop trying to find a way to cover for your Golden Child. Its embarrassing.
I had high hopes for Cuomo until his womb ruptured after Sandy Hook.
Garage,
What do living economists think we should do?
It seems that NPR is expressing frustration with our "shared-power system".
Will Obama lose the comfort of his most ardent supporters?
I thought the problem was not enough news conferences.
Gee, it's almost as if he was never qualified for the job in the first place! if only somebody said something before it was too late!
I keep thinking he's lowering expectations, using a little rope-a-dope, and will slingshot off it, but nope - he just sucks more every day.
The Iranians, the North Koreans and every other dangerous regime that is only moderated by the threat of U.S. resolve and power are licking their chops, planning, doing what they want carefully and methodically with confidence that they have nothing to fear for at least 3-1/2 years. That's just enough in many cases. Many people bitched about the neocons' adventurism, but we will soon see what happens when our enemies have no fear of cowboy Americans.
강남스타일
What do living economists think we should do?
Do what always do: Goose the economy with public dollars to right the ship again. Remember, Paul Ryan & Co. used to vote for this sort of thing under Republican presidents.
The dirty secret is that public investment = corporate revenue.
I distinctly remember he had a lot of rough sailing
And at least one heart attack.
Why won't Republicans vote with what 90% of the country wants?
If 90% of the country wants it, the Republicans who voted against it will be voted out of office.
When that doesn't happen, I expect the conspiracy theories to follow like night follows day. :)
bagoh20 said...
Many people bitched about the neocons' adventurism
It wasn't their adventurism that was the problem it was their stupidity. Could any sane person look at the outcome in Iran and think that this was a smart move in the best interests of the country? Could anyone seriously think that more intervention in the middle east would be in our long term best interests?
Blogger garage mahal said...
Elected Republicans *are* fucking nuts.
And Obama's Mr. Collegiality. As are the leftists like you who rant when excessive accusations are made against your side but support the most perverse charges imaginable when convenient. You show your true colors with your inability to reach even the barest level of human decency. You're slime.
We should be pouring money into education and into the arts, which is exactly what we're cutting right now. Stupid and self defeating. Does anyone know know what just the arts alone contribute to our our economy? A shit-ton. It's a huge number that shouldn't be minimized, yet that's what we do. I don't get it.
We should be pouring money into education and into the arts, which is exactly what we're cutting right now.
But we have poured money into education. A lot of money. And what do we have to show for it?
As far as pouring money into the arts, I'd agree. But private money. Public monies turn the arts and artists into State clients, which is distinctly unhealthy for art, at least for functioning contemporary arts.
But we have poured money into education. A lot of money. And what do we have to show for it
You?
"Could anyone seriously think that more intervention in the middle east would be in our long term best interests?".
I think the mistake that will become evident is thinking we can just ignore it, and everything will be fine for us. After 8 years of running away, we'll see how that works, and if it doesn't there will be no options left bad or worse. There is no putting that genie back in the bottle.
Even if we get smart and elect some wingnut that wants to drill drill drill, the middle east will still have tons of income from everyone else, be run by the most radical and dangerous people ever, and will use it for no good purpose. You just can't walk away from some things in the nuclear age, and hope to have a better future. I don't like it either, but backing up is a proven losing strategy with nuts, and they are fucking nuts.
garage mahal said...
We should be pouring money into education and into the arts, which is exactly what we're cutting right now.
Funny how after you spend money it's gone. Maybe if we hadn't been on a spending orgy over the last two decades we'd still have some to spend. Maybe next time the left will care what's in their "stimulus" package.
Yes, just what we need, artistic versions of Solyndra.
"Funny how after you spend money it's gone."
Most of the largest stimulus in history, which can never be repeated, was used to prop up private and public union jobs that could not support themselves in a free market because,...well, they're union jobs. That money is now gone, and we're supposed to listen to the same people who did that? Maybe we should ask someone else what to do.
Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system. Stop tearing it all down for one minute and celebrate what we continually produce. The world's best.
If you want money for your art, get it the same way the rest of us do; convince someone you are worth it. PBS has some great programming, and they are funded mostly by private money now. Apparently that works just fine. Public money is lazy, unearned money and it produces bad lazy art.
No, garage, pouring a shit-load of money into "education" and "the arts" are what got us you. Brainwashed and entitled, you want that government teat and you want everyone to want it just as much as you do.
When local communities were responsible for seeing their children were educated, some did better and some did worse. Now people who rely on the states, or god forbid the feds, to see that the system actually works are pretty much screwed, because the people in charge are so many steps above the pay grade of those who actually have to listen to people like parents. In other words, you love the system that disenfranchised your parents (or at the least the parents of the lower classes) and made you what you are.
Yep, I believe you actually are the poster child for our current system of funding education and arts. Call it reverse-marketing.
Yes, I'm sure Einstein and Hendricks got their talents from Womyn's Studies instruction, and Diversity in Government classes.
But we have poured money into education. A lot of money. And what do we have to show for it
You?
Well, thanks, but I was a high-IQ failure in public school. They had no idea what to do with people like me, so I was placed variously in gifted and remedial programs. My education, the education that enabled me to get into very good schools later, was entirely self-directed, from an early age. I was lucky to have grandparents and one paternal relative who were worldly, well-traveled, and willing to let me read and learn at my own pleasure and pace.
And I'm afraid that the few good experiences I had in public school were the product of luck and a manifestation of the values and teachers of another era. I graduated high school in 1993. I wish you were right, that money was all that was needed, but I think there are a lot of factors, problems that money can't solve.
Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system.
Einstein was born in Germany and had his early education there. Later he studied advanced physics and math in Switzerland, at the end of which he was generally considered unsuited for academia. Hence the Swiss Patent Office gig.
As far as I know, Hendrix received no publicly-funded musical training.
You really are the poster child for our current system.
garage: "Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system."
My God, you are one of the dumbest dim bulbs ever.
So much stupid compressed into such a short sentence.
Albert Einstein, primary education in the 1800's and Jimi Hendrix, high school dropout in the late '50's are garages examples of why we shouldn't point out the terrible performance of our public school system today.
But Garage, I will believe you wrote the Einstein/Hendrix comment while wearing a toga.
Einstein was educated in Europe btw.
Will someone please inform the certifiable moron garage precisely where Europe is?
"Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system. Stop tearing it all down for one minute and celebrate what we continually produce. The world's best."
They are graduates of the school system before the 1960's. Bring up some more recent examples. Public education is my career, but I can see clearly that we have not, in the main since then, producing graduates that can be called the world's best. There are many successful people in the United States who we can call the world's best, but the public school system can't really claim much credit for them.
I went to public school, and I am not "the world's best". In fact, I got a very poor education compared to what many get today in other countries where their systems have improved dramatically while ours has gotten much worse. What changed? Big Education became a bastion of liberalism, full of incredibly stupid ideas and theories, and they ran silly failed experiments on American children. That's what.
produced
Einstein was a product of German public schools, Garage, hardly "our" public schools. Also, "When Einstein was ten years old, Max Talmud (later changed to Max Talmey), a poor Jewish medical student from Poland, was introduced to the Einstein family by his brother, and during weekly visits over the next five years, he gave the boy popular books on science, mathematical texts and philosophical writings. These included Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, and Euclid's Elements (which Einstein called the "holy little geometry book")."
Where I come from, brilliant family friends serving as informal science tutors is not included in public education.
Re: garage:
Republicans are meeting you at least half way for goodness sake! Why won't Republicans vote with what 90% of the country wants?
If you're talking about gun control, if the President lost with 90% of the voting public behind him, there is word to describe his performance other than incompetent. Unless you want to add a few intensifiers in front. Like "rank." Or "complete and utter." Or maybe "gobsmackingly mindboggling."
Fortunately for the president, the 90% number isn't really real. There's probably a majority in favour of stricter background checks, but it's not clear that that majority actually understands what current law on background checks is. Either way, though when you've lost, thanks in part to members of your own party, you'd think you'd realise at some point that bleating about how you had 90% of the public with you and you still lost just makes you look pathetic. I mean seriously. It takes a real screw-up to lose under those conditions.
haha, "no word," I meant to say. No word to describe it other than incompetence.
"Where I come from, brilliant family friends serving as informal science tutors is not included in public education."
Oh shit! Don't give him any ideas. Adding brilliant family friends to the public school payroll and then unionizing them is all we need.
Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system.
That's a joke, right. I thought Albert Einstein was born and educated in Germany, coming to the US just prior to WW II.
Although I do think Einstein would have done okay in the present-day public school system. He pursued subjects that interested him beyond any classroom setting.
How does the saying by Mark Twain go - "I didn't let school get in the way of my education." That is probably pretty good advice.
Einstein came to America in 1933 when he was 54. They must have held him back a few years.
I went to public school, and I am not "the world's best".
I know. Me either. But we can't judge the brilliance and innovation of this nation on just the two of us.
Yes I seem to remember when Einstein took Edna May Oliver to the prom. Or was it Allie Oop?
Albert Einstein was a German, Garage. He immigrated as an adult.
He went to a Catholic elementary school in Germany.
It wasn't their adventurism that was the problem it was their stupidity. Could any sane person look at the outcome in Iran and think that this was a smart move in the best interests of the country? Could anyone seriously think that more intervention in the middle east would be in our long term best interests?
ARM: I assume you mean Iraq, not Iran.
Sure. I'm sane and I supported the Iraq War, just like some of our most prominent Democrats did, as you will recall in the votes leading up to that war.
I'll agree that the war was arguable, but not that it was insane as you unreasonably and typically claim.
It's a long discussion. Briefly, though:
(1) We removed Hussein which was a benefit to us and the world. Most anti-war people like you never bothered to check or care about the Iraqis, but the large majority of them supported that we wage war to get rid of Hussein. He was that terrible and he was truly intent on acquiring WMD and becoming the hegemon for the Middle East. That threat was canceled.
(2) We moved the theater of the War on Terror to Iraq and killed thousands of jihadis, thereby reduced al-Qaeda's power and influence, which one can measure by the steady decline of Bin Laden's approval in the Muslim polls as the 2000s wore on.
(2) We gambled that nation-building in Iraq could turn the Muslim world to a more democratic vision, which doesn't look like it panned out too well, but given the stakes of the War On Terror still seems to me a risk worth taking.
You can disagree. We can argue about the costs vs. benefits. It seems to me too early to tell and history will have the final judgment. But your smug overreach that anyone who disagrees about Iraq must be insane is just stupid and nasty.
Of course he came here on the eve of the Germans bombing Pearl Harbor.
We should be pouring money into education and into the arts, which is exactly what we're cutting right now.
Enough people have jumped on Garage that I don't have to.
However, I would like to point out that most of the increased money we have spent on schools has gone to administrators and bureaucrats, not teachers.
I have no idea why Garage imagines that pouring money into the arts for schoolchildren is a high-priority except as liberal boilerplate.
I wonder how much money China pours into the arts.
In 1960's North Dakota I had Latin, German, French and Spanish to pick from in high school. Very small town North Dakota- 140 kids in my class. I stupidly took German and French!
I didn't like it at the time, but I'm now grateful for my parochial school education. I'll bet my graduating class was better educated than most college sophomores today.
Could anyone seriously think that more intervention in the middle east would be in our long term best interests?
I don't know how long you think you can hold the tiger at bay, but you're really foolish to believe it will turn tail if we walk away. Money spent on Iraq adventurism will seem a bargain compared to the ultimate clean up costs from Libya to Egypt to Iran to Syria and beyond.
There will come that day of the unthinkable ... perhaps a dirty bomb in Tel Aviv. Then, where will we be?
You cannot bargain your way out of confrontations with fanaticism and death cults. We learned the hard way in WW2 with both the Nazi death cult and the Japanese. The good thing is death cults haven't had much luck in winning protracted wars. We no longer have technology on our side, and I fear that perseverance is on theirs.
Herewith an analogy to help Garage understand his 90% approval paradox:
Obama's Taker of the Royal Poll asked the People, "Would you like a sandwich?"
90% of them said "Sure."
But the Republican and reddish state Democrats knew exactly what His Obamaness wanted to put in that sandwich and they knew what taste the sandwich would leave in the mouths of the People who bit into it. Further, they realized that this taste would help the People decide whether to let the legislators remain in the palaces of Columbia's District or send them in ignominy back to the cow barns of flyover land whence they came.
They decided not to blow their chance to stay in the palaces.
I don't get Garage's hard-on for Obama. He doesn't even like the guy.
EMD: Well said.
Rock bottom in my support for the Iraq War was the scenario where radical Islam grows strong enough to nuke New York or Tel Aviv and spark a nuclear war in the Middle East killing hundreds of millions of people.
It's always seemed to me remarkably short-sighted that liberals never seem to factor that risk into their calculations.
In that vein, I am horrified that Obama has just now been caught bluffing about Syrian WMD. If anyone in the Middle East wondered if Obama was at all serious about stopping Islamic WMD, they now have their answer.
No.
ARM - You don't think we have a monumental cultural conflict with wahhabism and it's offshoots?
Unreformed Islamism is incompatible with Western philosophy.
In other words, Winter is coming.
edutcher said...
When he was asked about all that's gone wrong so early in his second term and all he could say is, "Maybe I Should Just Pack Up and Go Home. Golly.", you get the distinct impression he intends to do as little as possible the next 4 years that cannot be described by the phrase, "livin' large".
Worked for Ike.
***********
We all remember those Desi/Luci/cleaver days of roiling social unrest, massive debt and out-of-control government like it was just yesterday.
Oh wait....
ad hoc said...
Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system.
*********
And they both played the accordion....right???
I don't get Garage's hard-on for Obama. He doesn't even like the guy.
He hates Republicans more.
The thing that I detest most is the idea that what wins or loses in the Ultimate Party Throwdown is more important than what is good for the country.
Obama works the team v. team dynamic very well. And this is where we're at.
He hates Republicans more.
Of course, but Romney isn't teh preezy. Republicans didn't call a press conference.
Can he debate the "Obama side" without bringing up the Wisconsin GOP or like?
Hell, I'm not a big fan of Republicans, but they're not the President whinging to his press fan club, are they?
Worked for Ike.
Actually historians have been revising their estimate of Eisenhower as an amiable oldster, steering the ship of state with a light hand while golfing.
The current thinking is that Eisenhower was a hard-working committed POTUS charting a course through the treacherous waters of the Cold War. The golfing image was a pretense to reassure Americans that things were OK, when they were not.
Which makes Eisenhower the opposite of Obama, who pretends to be a brilliant, hands-on leader, while more of a golfer and party-person.
"Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system."
Hendrix had talent, which as far as I can see, isn't part of the curriculum at most public high schools.
Public schools do a great job of churning out upper middle to upper class white kids. They fail spectacularly at helping those that need it most.
Back on topic -- Obama is getting clobbered for his terrible press conference today.
Dana Milbank wrote today:
It’s never a good sign for a president when he feels compelled to assure the public he still has a pulse.
Dana Milbank!
I've always found him to be a mediocre speaker, with tiresome intonation and very bad speechwriters. Where the hell do people get the idea that he's a great orator?
The same people who think Dear Leader is a great speaker also think that he is a great basketball player.
Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system.
LOL. Einstein was a product of the German and Swiss school systems (both Catholic and public). He emigrated to the United States when he was fifty-four years old.
You must be a product of our public school system...
We should be pouring money into education and into the arts
"We should funnel as much money as possible to people who vote a straight Democratic ticket"
Hello friends, nice post and nice urging commented at this place, I am in fact enjoying by these. W.D.Shane Latham
AnUnreasonableTroll said...
Many people bitched about the neocons' adventurism
It wasn't their adventurism that was the problem it was their stupidity. Could any sane person look at the outcome in Iran and think that this was a smart move in the best interests of the country?
Iran and Iraq were completely different.
The mess in Iran was the brainchild of that Lefty defender of Human rights, Ol' Bucketmouth Carter. He threw his weight behind the Lefties and lost the power struggle.
Saddam was actively underwriting terror and had to go. In the end, as we've discussed, we won in Iraq, due to David Petraeus' surge tactics, but the Lefties are going to keep beating the drum (like there were no WMDs) because they can't be seen as being on the wrong side of history.
Hillary! hasn't been this much of a shoo-in for the Presidency since the last time she was a shoo-in for the Presidency.
Meanwhile, every living economist agrees that there's nothing wrong with the economy that can't be fixed by more welded-metal public sculpture.
garage mahal said...
Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system.
Words can't describe the stupidity.
Better headline:
"Logic behind the Obama Presidency Hard to Fathom"
"Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system."
I know others have already piled on here, but I felt it necessary to get my oar in.
Garage -- this is perhaps the weirdest, stupidest thing you have ever written.
There. I feel better now.
garage mahal said...
Do what always do: Goose the economy with public dollars to right the ship again.
After beclowning yourself on Einstein, Einstein, you go and type this idiocy.
I think you should go on pretending a government spending over $3 trillion per year is not spending "public dollars"
I think you should go on pretending the Obama stimulus didn't happen.
I think you should go on pretending "all economists" agree with this approach you can't even accurately articulate.
Does it even begin to bother you that you come here every day and post silly, idiotic lie, after silly, idiotic lie?
garage mahal said...
We should be pouring money into education and into the arts, which is exactly what we're cutting right now. Stupid and self defeating. Does anyone know know what just the arts alone contribute to our our economy? A shit-ton.
This has to be a parody account.
Nobody is this stupid or really believes this stupid shit.
This must be the 90% that garage was talking about:
Impeccable logic --
"I love Obama because now I can get health care even though I'm unemployed."
"Why are you unemployed?"
"I got laid off because my employer can't afford to pay for Obamacare."
I remember back in my AP U.S. History class when we learned about how Einstein taught Hendrix to play mind-blowing unearthly melodies on secret Internet routers, and then disco danced all night with Hammurabi.
I've heard this many times and I've never understood it. I've always found him to be a mediocre speaker, with tiresome intonation and very bad speechwriters. Where the hell do people get the idea that he's a great orator?
I thought my wife and I were the only two people who felt this way. He has never been an effective speaker except when speaking from a teleprompter to an audience prepared to applaud every line he speaks.
And now he's badly overexposed.
Speaking of pouring money into education, anyone checked out Detroit, Chicago, NYC, LA, lately? All totally dominated by Teacher's Unions, and now all totally incapable of achieving even the most primitive education goals. Illiteracy among high-schoolers rampant, pension funds safely secured, just the way the Democrats like it. Keep the people stupid and the "ruling class" flush. The TU's have been waging a war on education for decades, they should be expunged from the national political scene. Too corrupt to fix.
EMD said...
ARM - You don't think we have a monumental cultural conflict with wahhabism and it's offshoots?
Unreformed Islamism is incompatible with Western philosophy.
In other words, Winter is coming.
This is paranoid fear mongering. If we keep killing people and interfering in ME countries of course we will be locked into permawar. Disengagement from the ME has not been tried for sixty years. We have no borders with muslim countries. Even if what you claim is true, with a sane foreign policy we would not be in the firing line, Jihadism would be the problem of countries that actually have borders with muslim countries like China and Russia. With a sane foreign policy it would be the problem of our actual geopolitical rivals and we would could expend our financial and personal resources attempting to maintain our commercial and technological edge, which has degraded dramatically over the last twenty years.
This constant military intervention has a cost and that cost is seen in the decline of our schools, our intellectual competitiveness and the competitiveness of our businesses. Our former strength was built on our intellectual and technological advantage. If we lose that then genuine existential threats will exist in the form of countries like China, with strong economies and technology, not backward countries like those of the ME. For us the ME is a distraction not a serious threat.
garage: "I know. Me either. But we can't judge the brilliance and innovation of this nation on just the two of us."
And yet, very very very recently you attempted to judge the "brilliance" of our public school system on just 2 noted individuals, neither of whom are actual products of the modern (since 1960's) public school system of the United States.
One of whom was never even educated in the US.
So please, do continue to lecture the rest of us about sampling and outliers (even though you have no idea that is what you are attempting to do).
And besides, there is no "brilliance and innovation" in this country since, according to your liege lord Obama, nobody really "built that".
And so castles made of sand melts into the sea, because General Relativity
And so castles made of sand melts into the sea, because General Relativity
Brilliant!
He is an incomptent ass, bereft of anything creative, negative in desires and hateful in attitude.
What can one expect when he comes from the Party that demonizes everything and everyone else?
Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system. Stop tearing it all down for one minute and celebrate what we continually produce.
You are aware Einstein was educated in Germany and Switzerland and Hendrix never finished high school right?
This constant military intervention has a cost and that cost is seen in the decline of our schools, our intellectual competitiveness and the competitiveness of our businesses. Our former strength was built on our intellectual and technological advantage.
Help me out here and please do so without making any assumptions that
you know my feelings on the issue.
Please explain how constant military intervention causes a decline in our schools.
Further, please back up how our former strength was based on intellectual and technological advantage.
Seems to me that our real strength was pure productive power. We were behind in many key areas going into WWII, which, as the grand bull moose of all military interventions, was the reason we were so successful in the latter half of the 20th. Everyone else was rebuilding (with our help) while we just kept churning out consumer goods. This isn't to say we didn't have our share of technological innovation, but I fail to see how military innovation had a negative affect on it.
Our former strength was built on our intellectual and technological advantage.
Actually, a lot of the technology used in our every day lifes was first developed by the military.
But of course idiots who believe Albert Einstein went to America's public schools don't know this.
This constant military intervention has a cost and that cost is seen in the decline of our schools
Who says such silly shit?
AnUnreasonableTroll said...
You don't think we have a monumental cultural conflict with wahhabism and it's offshoots?
Unreformed Islamism is incompatible with Western philosophy.
In other words, Winter is coming.
This is paranoid fear mongering. If we keep killing people and interfering in ME countries of course we will be locked into permawar. Disengagement from the ME has not been tried for sixty years. We have no borders with muslim countries.
One wonders what part of intercontinental jet air travel eludes him.
They can get from there to here in a matter of hours and, contrary to the Lefty wet dream, they do not want to COEXIST. To quote CAIR's former chairman, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran ... should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth".
The war is here and has been for a long time, probably since Ike sent Marines to rescue Lebanon from the crazies back in '58. Better we make them die over there than have more 9/11s.
Unless Troll is OK with a few more Baaston Marathons?
We have no borders with muslim countries.
Doesn't have quite the same ring as "a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing", however similar the sentiment.
We have no borders with muslim countries.
We have no border with China either.
Great insights.
Islam has been locked in permawar with the West since Islam was founded. When a cartoon sends them into a murderous rage, I'm not sure what kind of disengagement you're talking about.
We are a mobile global society. Borders are meaningless, particularly in this country when 10-15 million people can enter illegally and remain.
Paul Zrimsek said...
We have no borders with muslim countries.
Doesn't have quite the same ring as "a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing", however similar the sentiment
As I say, what part of intercontinental jet air travel eludes this moron?
How many Moslems have been slipped into this country from Mexico? Something like 10% of the people we catch at the border are not from Latin America.
We know Hugo was working with the Dinner Jacket. Is Maduro keeping up the fire?
President Obama has learned a lot from Mayor Richard Daley. Just play dumb without admitting you are.
How many Moslems have been slipped into this country from Mexico? Something like 10% of the people we catch at the border are not from Latin America.
I doubt border patrol can ask for creed. However, most of that 10% are eastern Europeans. Many from the most oppressive or war torn regions.
This is paranoid fear mongering. If we keep killing people and interfering in ME countries of course we will be locked into permawar. Disengagement from the ME has not been tried for sixty years. We have no borders with muslim countries. Even if what you claim is true, with a sane foreign policy we would not be in the firing line, Jihadism would be the problem of countries that actually have borders with muslim countries like China and Russia. With a sane foreign policy it would be the problem of our actual geopolitical rivals and we would could expend our financial and personal resources attempting to maintain our commercial and technological edge, which has degraded dramatically over the last twenty years.
Ideology knows no borders.
This constant military intervention has a cost and that cost is seen in the decline of our schools
I am always a bit suspicious of anything phrased in a somewhat passive voice. There could be one communist party member teaching at some obscure college believing this. Or, maybe just Garbage Mahal.
Obama has made famous something very akin to this, by his constant use of straw men in his arguments. "Some Republicans say that the world was literally created in seven days" is used to justify a statement that they are unscientific and ignorant as a class (also fails as logic when generalizing from the specific example to the general case). That sort of thing.
Why does the left in this country utilize so many logical fallacies in their arguing? My short answer is that they would otherwise have to move to the right, and maybe even become Republicans. Their appeal is invariably to emotion, and not to logic, because their positions rarely can be supported by logic and facts.
There are all sorts of problems with the statement in question. For one thing, military spending as a percentage of GDP is down, while education spending is up, resulting in eroding quality in education. In other words, all three parts of the statement are false. But, notice the emotional part of the argument, that if we weren't killing all those rag heads overseas that never did anything to us (except declare Jihad, bring down the Twin Towers, etc.), then we could pay our underpaid teachers more, and therefore provide a better education for our precious children. Of course, this ignores a lot of other things, including that administrators, etc. have captured significantly more of that increase in educational spending that I mentioned above, than did the teachers, with many districts now having more non-teaching staff than teachers.
As was pointed about by other posters here, it was one of the silliest statements made here in awhile.
It would also be a massive mistake for the jihadists to take their fight to China. China's ROE will make ours look like child's play.
There could be one communist party member teaching at some obscure college believing this. Or, maybe just Garbage Mahal.
It is funny you say that Bruce because I was just sitting here thinking that I bet the sock puppet who uses the garagie handle posts as this troll as an alter ego thing.
"So in Althouse world he is bad when he doesn't submit to questions and bad when he does."
No, he is bad when he doesn't submit to questions and pathetic when he does.
"I wish you were right, that money was all that was needed, but I think there are a lot of factors, problems that money can't solve."
There is no problem that can't be solved by pouring money into it. At least in the (putatively) liberal mind.
Note the indiscriminate verb usage. Pour. They don't even pretend to spend wisely, they just "pour" and think that alone is sufficient strategy. I wonder how long it will take them to realize you can't fill up a sieve no matter how hard you pour.
"Both Albert Einstein and Jimi Hendrix came from our public school system."
Dennis Prager likes to say that being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry. **cough** Inga **cough**
He should also add that being Left means never having to admit you were wrong.
So many times so many Leftists post things here that are just patently, plainly false and, as far as I can tell, they never admit they were wrong. Seriously, lot of stupid on that side.
There could be one communist party member teaching at some obscure college believing this. Or, maybe just Garbage Mahal.
Garbage Mahal. I see what you did there. That is damn funny bro!
Scott M said...
Seems to me that our real strength was pure productive power.
Which was largely due to superior manufacturing technology.
The bottom line here is that our foreign policy of constant engagement and intervention is stupid. Stupidity has costs. It diverts resources from productive areas, such as R&D, to stupid things, like paying off regimes with boatloads of cash.
Again, ME countries are not an existential threat to us. Our own stupidity is proving to be so. On every imaginable index our intellectual, research and business competitiveness is in relative decline. Our security is based in our intellectual and technological strengths and our relative geographical isolation. By constantly engaging in conflicts that are not direct threats to us we are throwing away those advantages.
Paul Zrimsek said...
Doesn't have quite the same ring as "a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing", however similar the sentiment.
Petulant name-calling is not rational argument. Apparently you have nothing.
Which was largely due to superior manufacturing technology.
The bottom line here is that our foreign policy of constant engagement and intervention is stupid. Stupidity has costs. It diverts resources from productive areas, such as R&D, to stupid things, like paying off regimes with boatloads of cash.
Again, ME countries are not an existential threat to us. Our own stupidity is proving to be so. On every imaginable index our intellectual, research and business competitiveness is in relative decline. Our security is based in our intellectual and technological strengths and our relative geographical isolation. By constantly engaging in conflicts that are not direct threats to us we are throwing away those advantages.
I think the claim that we had superior manufacturing technology is debatable. We simply had a shitload of it that was mostly unhindered by tons of regulations and lawsuits and labor costs. The Germans were at least on par, if not superior, in techniques and technology up until the Allies made their rubble bounce.
None of which addresses what I asked you to clear up. You maintain that interventionism (which, again, I'm not saying I'm for or against) is degrading our schools.
We have a shitload of people in college today and yet the flunk-out rates are higher than ever and those that do graduate either aren't in technical fields at all, or are of ebbing quality. Why is that? I don't think it has anything to do with foreign deployments.
If "petulant name-calling" means "the standard historical parallel", and "you have nothing" means "you have me dead to rights", then everything you say is true.
Look, it's not that complicated: either countries that don't border us can be the source of threats against us or they can't. If they can, then it's not irrational to worry about them. If they can't, then intervening in them can't put us "in the firing line", unless it somehow causes them to start bordering us. (And as someone else mentioned, it makes it unclear in what sense Russia and China, which also don't border us, can be "geopolitical rivals".)
Garbage Mahal. I see what you did there. That is damn funny bro!
I don't think he can spell correctly without 60 votes.
Paul Zrimsek said...
it makes it unclear in what sense Russia and China, which also don't border us, can be "geopolitical rivals".
Self-evidently China is a geopolitical rival because the are cleaning our clock in manufacturing and increasingly in R&D. Russia is our main nuclear rival. Neither of these criteria apply to any ME country and are unlikely to apply in any foreseeable future.
Willful blindness to the self-evident is not an argument.
Willful blindness to the self-evident is not an argument
But reductio ad absurdum is.
Again, ME countries
Iran? Forget about it.
Jihadists are not militarized enough to threaten us as a conventional force. But by exercising terrorism as a political tool, they seek to create imbalance within the world. It's frightening to think that just because Al Qaeda can't invade us, that they won't seek to disrupt the way we live our lives, within or without our borders.
It's strange you'd think that another 9/11, in France, say, won't cause a worldwide tremor than affects our foreign policy and how we deploy it.
Recall, we weren't threatened in WWI, either. But someone went and shot an Archduke halfway across the world, and ta-da! Imbalance, insecurity, and peril! Extraregional conflict! U.S. involvement!
You're naive to think that we aren't at the global table with obligations to uphold and allies to protect, and have been for the better part of a century.
Scott M said...
I think the claim that we had superior manufacturing technology is debatable.
No it's not. The US was unmatched in terms of productivity at that point in history. The Germans were and are now extremely strong in technology and manufacturing but it is increasing hard to remember just how good the US was back in the 1940 and 50's. Our products were considered the best in a broad range of fields and our productivity was unmatched in either Germany or Japan.
Scott M said...
None of which addresses what I asked you to clear up. You maintain that interventionism (which, again, I'm not saying I'm for or against) is degrading our schools.
What I said is that constant military intervention has a cost and that cost is seen in the decline of our schools, our intellectual competitiveness and the competitiveness of our businesses.
Two things are unarguable, since the second world war we have been engaged in permawar and all major indices of the country's intellectual and technological health have been in relative decline and some have been in actual decline. Every national commitment has a cost. By avoiding military interventionism Germany, Japan and China have rebuilt or built their technological and industrial strength to rival or surpass our own. Russia, which pursued a similar strategy to ourselves, has collapsed. Resources are finite. We have over invested human capital in other unproductive areas such as finance, which is equally damaging to our long term interests, as is seen quite clearly for the UK. Poor strategic thinking has seriously damaged the long term interests of the country. Part of this is the conduct of a permawar diverting resources from more productive areas.
This is paranoid fear mongering.
If you think we can get along with a worldwide fanatical movement that destroys great works of art, hangs homosexuals, and blames women for rape, be my guest.
I say they need to change more than we do.
has a cost and that cost is seen in the decline of our schools, our intellectual competitiveness and the competitiveness of our businesses.
Correlation without causation.
EMD said...
Iran? Forget about it.
Let them remain regional conflicts from which we remain largely aloof. We are squandering one of our great strengths, our geographical isolation. Turn down the war machine, strengthen our manufacturing and research, let regional conflicts sap the strength of our actual rivals. The two world wars showed the value of isolationism. After major conflicts arise we may have to get involved but we engage from a position of strength not from our current position where we are suffering death from a thousand cuts.
Brennan said...
How many Moslems have been slipped into this country from Mexico? Something like 10% of the people we catch at the border are not from Latin America.
I doubt border patrol can ask for creed. However, most of that 10% are eastern Europeans. Many from the most oppressive or war torn regions.
Not from what I've read. Quite the opposite.
AnUnreasonableTroll said...
None of which addresses what I asked you to clear up. You maintain that interventionism (which, again, I'm not saying I'm for or against) is degrading our schools.
What I said is that constant military intervention has a cost and that cost is seen in the decline of our schools
My God, what drivel!
What's degrading our schools is union teachers only interested in their pensions and how many students they can molest and teaching from curricula created by people like Howard Zinn, Kathy Boudin, and William Ayers.
EMD said...
If you think we can get along with a worldwide fanatical movement that destroys great works of art, hangs homosexuals, and blames women for rape, be my guest.
This is the same kind of reasoning that led to the Vietnam war. The godless communists were a constant threat to be fought at every opportunity. In fact the Vietnamese hate the Chinese and this regional rivalry would always have predominated over ideology. We should take every opportunity to avoid being sucked into the tar babies of regional conflicts. We don't have the money any more, if we ever did.
Troll thinks we're looking at "regional conflicts".
These people are into proselytizing. Consider the Tsarnys.
To that end consider, 3 more suspects have been arrested in the marathon bombing.
PS Troll doiesn't know the first thing about 'Nam. ho Chi Minh was in bed with the Russians. That's why people were worried. that and the fact he wanted to run Indo-China.
All of it.
And what made 'Nam a "quagmire" was Lefties like Troll committing treason to give aid and comfort to the Commies.
Funny how things never change.
The logic is not hard at all. He showed up and does nothing. That's what he always does. I'm here. I'm the president. Now fawn and adulate towards me. I need not say anything while actually using words. That is my way, it's the way you like it. Look, my mouth is moving, words are forming, sound is exiting. Nothing is happening.
Let them remain regional conflicts from which we remain largely aloof.
I'm not opposed to this, at all. I think we are more on the same page with how we engage, and choose who to engage with. I don't, however, think we can afford an ostrich approach.
I'm just saying be prepared for another 9/11 somewhere (or worse) that is outside the realm of "regional conflicts." that changes this dynamic, again.
The jihadists operate outside that conventional sphere. They'll radicalize more (no matter our actions, frankly.) young men into committing terrorism against soft targets against us and our allies. It will happen. And the emergence of technology will make the consequences potentially awful. It may not happen tomorrow, or within five years ... but it will happen.
EMD said...
The jihadists operate outside that conventional sphere.
No, they are classic provocateurs engaged in an asymmetrical conflict. Stupid people allow provocateurs to dictate national policy. Disengage and they will largely refocus on their real targets, which are their execrable political and military leaders and the various ethnic and religious rivalries that render the region such a basket case.
The problem for those who want to argue for constant interventionism is that there is no evidence that it has done us any good at all. It clearly doesn't make us safer and there are undoubtedly costs. National resources are finite. Good leadership is all about the allocation of resources to the long term benefit of the country. Permawar is not working out for us.
"And I for one welcome another Bush in the White House."
I agree. I have no problem with a woman president as long as it is not Hillary.
ARM - What is the main mission of Al Qaeda?
Disengage and they will largely refocus on their real targets, which are their execrable political and military leaders and the various ethnic and religious rivalries that render the region such a basket case.
The Iberian peninsula disagrees with you.
EMD said...
ARM - What is the main mission of Al Qaeda?
What does it matter? Are we going to let the policies of a mosquito dictate the path of an elephant?
There is an almost desperate need to be liked underlying this line of thinking. So they hate us, get over it. We have have much bigger problems, stalled middle class incomes, failing families, increasing income disparities combined with decreasing intellectual competitiveness. Our self-inflicted problems are so ingrained and resistant to remedy that nothing Al Queda can do is remotely as threatening to our long term future. The US needs to look inward for a long time and focus on peace and prosperity at home.
AReasonableMan said...
Part of this is the conduct of a permawar diverting resources from more productive areas.
Except the fact that education funding in America has increased 1000% - counting an adjustment for inflation - since 1970.
Student enrollment during the same time fram has increased 6%
In other words, there is no reason anyone with a brain would believe your silly bullshit.
What I said is that constant military intervention has a cost and that cost is seen in the decline of our schools
You're a fucking idiot.
Scott M said...
The Iberian peninsula disagrees with you.
Again, we don't have any borders with Muslim countries. Let's focus on our actual problem, which is dramatically declining competitiveness. In the modern world intellectual strength and technological strength are what matters and we are falling behind. Who cares what a bunch of goat fuckers think?
Part of this is the conduct of a permawar diverting resources from more productive areas.
Considering the US government spends $3.1 trillion dollars per year, this statement is idiotic beyond belief.
So is the absurd contention that if just closed out our bases in the Middle East, AQ would leave us alone.
Why do you take to the Internet to say such moronic things?
Jay said...
You're a fucking idiot.
Sadly Jay you are a perfect example of the overriding problem.
Again, we don't have any borders with Muslim countries.
You keep repeating this as if it means anything.
Why?
AReasonableMan said...
Sadly Jay you are a perfect example of the overriding problem.
I'm not the one taking to the Internet to type easily debunked silly bullshit.
You don't know what the fuck "competitiveness" means or is.
For example.
I wonder if this dumbass troll can bring itself to understand that AQ has carried out terrorist attacks in countries that don't have any military bases in the Middle East.
Probably not.
Again, we don't have any borders with Muslim countries.
You do realize, don't you, that southern Iberia had no common borders with Islamic lands prior to the Umayyad conquest of norther Africa, right?
In fact, there are quite a few places in the world that didn't have any common borders with Islamic nations prior to their neighbors being conquered by the aforementioned jihadists.
I'm still not arguing for constant intervention. Just pointing out that the foundation of your argument is flawed in a way that it seems like most on the left share.
I think there is a place where unabashed commie libs like AReasonable Man and unreconstructed neatherhal conservatives like me can agree.
We don't give a rat's ass for the Towel heads and their problems. Certainly not to get involved in shitholes like Lybia and Syria. Lets just load up the Jews with lots of bombs and planes and help them refine their nuclear weapons (which they have developed for decades). They can take care of themselves.
Then we can use our domestic energy sources from natural gas and fracking to eliminate our dependance on the camel jockeys oil deposits. Let them kill each other like scorpions in a bottle.
America First. I like the sound of that.
Matt writes,
Dennis Prager likes to say that being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry.
He should also add that being Left means never having to admit you were wrong."
Quick! Name three things (or, if it's too hard, name one thing) that Prager has ever conceded during his long career as a pundit, where he either apologized for, or admitted the error of, a a single conservative stance he took.
"The liberal position was right," some version of that. Shouldn't be too hard to find, since Prager upholds it as such an important thing to be able to do.
Then Matt writes:
"So many times so many Leftists post things here that are just patently, plainly false and, as far as I can tell, they never admit they were wrong. Seriously, lot of stupid on that side."
And so: Quick! This one might be easier. Matt, name at least three falsities you have bought into or stated in support of a conservative cause, and then turned around and said, you know what, I was wrong, the liberlas were right.
But forget about the "my opponents are all a bunch of liars!" strawman, Matt. Since you value so much, the ability to admit when one is wrong on a political issue, I take it yuou have lots of experience doing this. And so how about some issues on which you have admitted the conservative position you took was "wrong," and the liberals were right?
Let me guess. The answer is some version of, Prager has never taken a position for which he should be sorry, or been wrong on an issue? Some version of conservatives so rarely lie, and you so rarely lie, that nothing comes to mind? Some version of, you can't think of something where you realized the liberals were right?
How convenient for you if these hyperbolic possibilities all line up to be true in your mind.
AReasonableMan said...
Scott M said...
The Iberian peninsula disagrees with you.
Again, we don't have any borders with Muslim countries. Let's focus on our actual problem, which is dramatically declining competitiveness.
Why do you suppose that is.
In the modern world intellectual strength and technological strength are what matters and we are falling behind.
Again. Why?
Who cares what a bunch of goat fuckers think?
I only care about their ability to export their terroristic islamic actions. You should too.
Scott M said...
You do realize, don't you, that southern Iberia had no common borders with Islamic lands prior to the Umayyad conquest of norther Africa, right?
In fact, there are quite a few places in the world that didn't have any common borders with Islamic nations prior to their neighbors being conquered by the aforementioned jihadists.
When Canada falls into the hands of the caliphate I guess this will be an issue but until then a little perspective and distancing might go a long way.
Obama is a gifted presenter, requiring a telemprompter to appear articulate and numerous straw-men to appear reasonable..
There, fixed it for you.
When Canada falls into the hands of the caliphate I guess this will be an issue...
The internet and airliners render the whole 'proximity' objection moot, yes?
When Canada falls into the hands of the caliphate...a little perspective and distancing might go a long way.
...or, you know, Hezbollah finds a base of operations in the hemisphere
When Canada falls into the hands of the caliphate I guess this will be an issue but until then a little perspective and distancing might go a long way.
I'm sure there were plenty of people in Seville looked at Egypt and said the same thing about Gibraltar, much good that it did them.
You're missing the point. The brand of fanatics we're dealing with believe in aggressive expansion of their influence. Every time in the last 1000 years that they have thought it possible to expand, they have.
Republicans are meeting you at least half way for goodness sake! Why won't Republicans vote with what 90% of the country wants?
When Obama moves to repeal Obamacare, which majorities have always opposed, we will talk.
Which was largely due to superior manufacturing technology.
And few regulations on manufacturing.
Sadly. Not true anymore.
Scott M said...
You're missing the point. The brand of fanatics we're dealing with believe in aggressive expansion of their influence. Every time in the last 1000 years that they have thought it possible to expand, they have.
I would like to own the waterfront property just down the road, but never will. You are not distinguishing hopes and fears from reality.
Territory is irrelevant.
Baron Zemo said...
I think there is a place where unabashed commie libs like AReasonable Man and unreconstructed neatherhal conservatives like me can agree.
Not sure I fulfill all the criteria to be considered a commie lib but I agree this is an issue that doesn't fit neatly into left/right ideologies. For me the politicians the that make the most sense are isolationists, who are largely on the right. Many left politicians are too anxious to prove that they are 'tough' on foreign policy rather than thinking through what is best for the country in the long term.
EMD said...
Territory is irrelevant.
Have you ever studied history?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा