1 Yeah right. It's going to disappear. From the news and from Obama's head.

2 what can b. hussein obama say about iran? well he'll be reading the statement prepared for him by the dinner jacket as soon as it can be loaded on the totus

3 Solidarity began battling the government in September of 1980.

Reagan spoke in their defense in December of 1981.

Over a year later.

4 Obama's too busy Barney Franking Charlie Gibson in the Oval office over socializing healthcare and killing old people, by slashing medicare and handing money to illegals and welfare queens, to comment about Iran. But rest assured, his staff is taking notes for the 2012 election.

5 So we're now hoping that the Jug Eared Fuck channels Ronaldus Magnus, and get's this right?


Not. Gonna. Happen.

6 Waste of time trying to get the One to do anything, Ace.  As far as he is concerned, the Gipper was just another racist white oppressor.  He is "hope and change" and all that.  Obama will do what Chicago thugs always do - side with the winner and screw everyone else.  And right now the winner still looks like Ahmadman. 

7

8 As someone with no particular memories of Reagan due to my age, was the man really that inspiring or it simply nostalgia on conservatives' part?

9

Drew--nothing in the last century counts.

Not even Hank Aaron's homer record. 

10

was the man really that inspiring

Go watch this and then you tell me.

11 8 As someone with no particular memories of Reagan due to my age, was the man really that inspiring or it simply nostalgia on conservatives' part?


Being old enough to remember the Carter debacle with all it's malaise, thankfully I also remember the Reagan Revolution.

He was that good. I supposed there is also some nostalgia as that time is held up to the events of today.

I guess the best barometer of how great Reagan was, is to look at how the left in this country attempted to destroy his legacy. They were merciless in their revisions of administration.

12 10

was the man really that inspiring

Go watch this and then you tell me.

And my day just got 100% better, thanks for that Circa.

13 Posted by: Tom in Korea at June 16, 2009 10:23 AM (9H4sW)

Yeah, he was. Sure time has added to the myth but yeah, he was the real deal. When you see liberals praising him now it's pure bullshit. They hated him more than they hated W.

He wasn't perfect and I have my bones to pick with him but overall, the man had a vision for America and the world and he could communicate it like no other. Obama on his best day is honestly not in Reagan's league.

14
Muslihoon has a contrary viewpoint over at IB. It changed my mind.

15 Er my last should have a caveat....

Obama on his best day is honestly not in Reagan's league when it comes to giving a speech.

Obama's never in his league on policy or moral clarity.

16

Remember when Russia invaded Georgia and how Obama blamed both sides until McCain showed him what to say?

 

I'm afraid that Obama's true feelings were represented by his initial response.  His later aping of McCain was out of electoral necessity.  Our postmodern President is so steeped in moral equivalence and foreign policy realism that he cannot bring himself to raise his voice against the brutal repression of the Iranian people.  I wonder exactly what he thinks going to happen when all the foreign journalists are safely removed from Iran?

Oh well what are the aspirations to be free of millions of Iranians compared to his opportunity to go over to Iran, have some really sweet photo ops and sign some sort of treaty that the Iranians will be violating before the wheels on Air Force One are up?  Priorities.

17

President Bush sided with the people during the Rose Revolution in Georgia

President Bush sided with the people during the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon

President Bush sided with the people during the Orange Revolution in Ukraine

...but Barry Obozo is siding with the dick taters during the Green Revolution in Iran

18

What will Barry say? Probably,

uhhh....ummm....I.....uhhh.....uummmm....I.............uhhhh........

 

Here's an idea. Send Jimmah over there. The Iranians love him. As a punchingbag.

19 As someone with no particular memories of Reagan due to my age, was the man really that inspiring or it simply nostalgia on conservatives' part?
Posted by: Tom in Korea

He WAS that inspiring, at times, because he honest-to-God believed in things.  What you saw was what you got.

Obama doesn't really appear to believe in anything other than himself.  For all the countless comments I've seen about his Machiavellian brilliance, I truly believe the opposite: that there is simply nothing there. He is as empty as he looks.

-

20 Solidarity began battling the government in September of 1980.

Reagan spoke in their defense in December of 1981.

Over a year later.

Wrong.

Solidarity was formed in September of 1980. Martial law (the crackdown) was not imposed until December 13, 1981. Reagan's speech was on December 23, 1981.

TEN DAYS LATER.

Do your fucking homework before you attempt to piss, even indirectly, on Ronaldus Magnus.

21 I don't know that he needed to come out and support the protesters or even call for a new vote.

But why did he take that moment to say he'll continue to negotiate with whomever wins? Couldn't that have been left unsaid right then?

22 Why wasn't Jimmah Carter there to certify this election?



/snark

23 Due to heavy flatulence from eating a large cheeseburger, the president is unable to comment today about Iran. 

24

I've done such a good job at ensuring there is no fraud in the TARP funds, Obama is going to propose sending me, The Sheriff, to Tehran to ensure there was no voter fraud.

This is the test that I warned you teabaggers about, now watch and learn as Obama deftly handles this crisis.

25

except it's not foreign policy realism-that would require that his thinking and presumptions are realistic.  the Iranians are realistic-they are calculating that they can do what they want and no one will do much more than bleat a bit.  Obama is thinking he's still at a U of C faculty function.  I don't think affirmative action is recognized on a global scale and liberal white guilt isn't going to affect the thinking of the mullahs.

26 Posted by: geoff at June 16, 2009 10:31 AM (rHo94)

Maybe but he didn't just play it down the middle, he announced that no matter what happens he'll still do business with Iran. Now that's a debatable position but you don't basically tell the government of Iran, "kill however many you need to, just get this wrapped up so I can talk to you".

As appalling as his silence was, I preferred it to what he ultimately said.

27 Reagan wasn't shit, he didn't even use me to his fullest advantages.  All that crap he said he just came up with on the spot.  Loser.

28 What can Barry say about Iran? "Present, present, present!" and anything that fits on to the teleprompter.

Personally, I think it was TOTUS thinking aloud "I'm troubled by the violence I see on the television" and Barry happened to be around. A country's imploding and the dynamic duo are watching TV?

29 Thanks for the Reagan link, Circa.  God how I wish we had a leader today with such convictions.  We got zero now.  Heaven help us.

30

21 I don't know that he needed to come out and support the protesters or even call for a new vote.

But why did he take that moment to say he'll continue to negotiate with whomever wins? Couldn't that have been left unsaid right then?

He didn't need to say anything.  If he had any brains he would have said something to the effect of "We urge peace and progress of the Iranian people" or some such.  But no, he had to open his mouth and make an ass out of himself.  Why?  Because he's an liberal softy who doesn't have a clue of how to deal with people who are serious and who has no sense of what's really going on.  Look who else is there:  Biden, Clinton, Panetta.  All fuck ups.  This ain't the varsity squad and the goons that run Iran know it (as do the Russians, Norks, the PRC)  I have no doubt in my mind that Obama's staement about talking with whoever wins will be used to great effect by Ahmadjihad.    

31 "Solidarity was formed in September of 1980. Martial law (the crackdown) was not imposed until December 13, 1981. Reagan's speech was on December 23, 1981."

Not to mention, Reagan wasn't president until January '81, so expecting him to do something as president in September 1980 is kinda, well, dumb.

Qwinn

32 Obama's message so far to freedom-seeking iranians:

"stop being green-fingered teabagging little punks and bend over, damnit"

33 Well, poon's a known idiot.  So that tracks.

34 Obama is thinking he's still at a U of C faculty function.

Bingo.

Liberals have this quaint idea that the US can deal with other nations like you deal with people at a dinner party.

The reality of international relations is that the world is rather like dealing with the Crips & Bloods on a Compton street corner at 3:00am.

35 Qwinn, Zero was just a candidate when he mumbled his bullshit about Georgia. I was trying to keep it apples-to-apples in deference to the underpowered brain who originally wrote that shit.

Otherwise, it's a good point.

Not to mention that in 1981, there was very little news coming out from behind the Iron Curtain. The news cycle was longer, there was no internet, and what reports did make it out had to be analyzed and verified.

Ten days was pretty fucking quick.

36 We were doing OK as a nation until we elected President Dickless.

37 The thing about Reagan - and I think this is important - is that he was about principles and ideas. Unlike Obama, he never claimed that he himself was special. He thought the principles and ideas that he communicated were special.

It's true that we talk about Reagan nostalgically, but it really isn't about Reagan being so great that we miss. It's was the clarity and timelessness of his ideas, his ability to communicate them and that he never apologized for them despite a hostile press and congress.

Reagan was a great man. But what made him great was his devotion to principles and ideas totally independent of him. He would have been the first to tell us that.

38 22 Why wasn't Jimmah Carter there to certify this election?

For those who asked about Dhimma Carter; well he was in Gaza commiserating with them about Bibi's speech, so no time for elections.

Khaled Abu Toameh had an article in the Jpost in 1998, September if I remember, about Carter's certification of Arafat's election and how in Abu Dis the lights went out in the election hall and the box with the cast votes disappeared.

39 I've always been a prayer of 'specifics'.  I give God a complete list of my prayers.  It has gotten to the point will I have to just pray, 'God, you know my concerns that way heavy on my heart.'  I never thought I would ever get to this point.  May God help us all.  Obama's lack of character is effecting the entire world.  To all the innocents out there I am sorry that our President does not stand on your side.

40 These Iranian protests are about a bunch of Persians hating our black president.

It's racism, straight up.

41 38 22 Why wasn't Jimmah Carter there to certify this election?

For those who asked about Dhimma Carter; well he was in Gaza commiserating with them about Bibi's speech, so no time for elections.


thus the "/snark"

42 "Mr. Gorbachov, tear down this wall."

That's the fucking shit, right there.

43
Now that's a debatable position but you don't basically tell the government of Iran, "kill however many you need to, just get this wrapped up so I can talk to you".

You're absolutely right about that.

44 hey, it's not like Iran is hurting late term abotionists!  Then there would be heck to pay from Obumbles.

45 Pictures of Reagan: looking directly at the viewer, wide, friendly smile.

Pictures of Lenin: looking away from viewer, chin raised and thrust out in arrogant pose.

Pictures of Obama: (see - Pictures of Lenin)

46 Poon,

Martial law was declared in December of '81. Your reference to Solidarity 'began battling the government" in 1980 is a bit of a stretch with what you're trying to imply. The timeline you're talking about is when Solidarity was formed and it was formed as a non-violent movement. Martial law came a year later and Reagan was responding to that.

I think you're looking for a conclusion and then moving backwards.

47

ABCNEWS Senior Vice President Kerry Smith on Tuesday responded to the RNC complaint, saying it contained 'false premises':

"ABCNEWS alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the president. Like any programs we broadcast, ABC News will have complete editorial control. To suggest otherwise is quite unfair to both our journalists and our audience."

 

So a bunch of Obama cheerleaders will choose a bunch of Obama cheerleaders with scripted questions to make Barry look good.

48

Hell has frozen over:

John 'coward' Kerry cares about the troops:

Global warming threatens U.S. security by leaving important military hubs vulnerable to rising seas and possibly fomenting anti-American sentiment, U.S. Sen. John Kerry said on Monday.

 

Okay, so I am full of snark today.  Sue me.  Actually, please don't. 

 

49

shouldn't Jimmy Carter be near and dear to the mullahs-after all, he helped usher in the return of Khomeini from France to Iran. 

50 So a bunch of Obama cheerleaders will choose a bunch of Obama cheerleaders with scripted questions to make Barry look good.

So they're running it like their campaign coverage...

51 ABCNEWS alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the president.

So we'll be assured of the kind of hard-hitting questions Barry faced in the campaign.  They'll load it up with a bunch of people with no knowledge and their hands out.

Wouldn't it be far better than one of these moronic 'town meetings' to actually have questions from people who know what they're talking about, instead of a man-on-the-street level of inquiry?

The whole point to this is the 'razzle-dazzle,' nothing else.

52 I join the other folks on this thread who've said that the thing with Reagan was that he was genuine.

I, too, remember the Carter years (heck, I remember Nixon and Ford, but I was a precocious kid). Malaise describes those years perfectly. Now we have an administration that has purposefully tried to evoke the Great Depression (btw, does anyone else hate those Allstate ads as much as I do?) and who wants to model the U.S. after Old Europe. Great.

But, back to Reagan. At the time, I was not as sold on the great communicator thing. It seemed like media hype. In fact, I worked for a different candidate in the primary, although I did work for Reagan in the general election. But, looking back and also looking forward, I realize now how important it is to have a president who embraces his role of communicating the spirit and positivity of this country.

Sarah Palin has helped me to renew my appreciation for Reagan. She has many of the same qualities. But, for me I think Reagan will always hold a special place because he ended the cold war and gave hope to people living under oppressive regimes and to those in struggling democracies.

It's so ironic that Obama's marketing team came up with "Hope" as their tag line... 'cause I haven't felt this hopeless in years. Ever, really.

53

http://tinyurl.com/m5tkbr

Gateway Pundit:  George Bush stood with Democracy activists, Obama stands with dictators.

“All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you.”
 GWB  2nd Inaugural address Jan 20, 2005

 

PS-Palin accepted Letterman's apology

54

Why should he say much of anything; any overt support would strengthen the regime by allowing Mousavi to be portrayed as a US puppet.

Also, I can't get too pumped about who wins in these kinds of elections, because the problem in Iran and Iraq too is not the elections or the lack of them.

The problem is the underlying anti-modern, anti-liberal, pro-sharia viewpoint of the electorate that is rooted in the dominant understanding of Islam itself. I don’t see anything Mousavi or any other Iranian politician has said that will reverse that fundamental aspect of Iranian society.

55

I prefer the alternative universe expressed in What if?? #56 What if Obama was President during the 1980's. In this episode Obama stood in Germany and said "Mr. Gorbachov I respect your great country and noble people who developed the printing press and algebra. Let us come together as a people and have a dialogue about this wall."

56 48: Kerry is going to cause a panic talking like that. I can see Biden freaking out, "we've got to save the Navy! The seas are rising!" Our nautical Pres'ent will be right at home, though, on the murky seas of roiling tidal surges...

57 Why did Ahmadinejad rig the election?   Because he couldn't stand the possibility of his being called "Imaneedajob" by Tehran Radio's wacky Morning Drivetime Zoo.

58 It isn't as if Reagan's going to sue if Obama plagiarizes Reagan's speech. Feed it to the TOTUS.

59 Does this mean Obama isn't flying to the Iraq/Iran border to give a major speech supporting the protesters...?

60 14
Muslihoon has a contrary viewpoint over at IB. It changed my mind.

Well, crap, he used what I presume to be Farsi in air quotes, he must know what he's talking about!

61 Roach makes good points.  But the Iranian people in their masses appear to care quite a bit about this election, which makes me think two things, one good and one bad.  The bad thing is that the Iranian people agree with their major candidates about nukes and Israel.  The good thing is that the fervor stirred by fraud in an election between two basically indistinguishable dirtbags is being driven by something else, something sublimated, some desire that as yet has no channel for itself, and so must make use of other channels.

62 From the alternate timeline in which Jeff was elected president.

"To the Iranian people... your courage in standing up for the right to elect your own leaders has shown me that you merely prefer a different flavor of crazy to the existing flavor of crazy that currently runs the country.

You want the help of the United States? Bring me Khamenei's head. That would be a good start. As long as your batshit crazy mullahs are running the country, it's shakin' time, bitch. Get the fuck out of my face.

In conclusion, fuck you all, and may God continue to bless the United States of America."

63 @57 Okay, that was funny.

64

sohbet

sitesi üzerinden chat ve aþk odalarýnda muhabbet edilebilir.

sohbet siteleri

irc

65 Take heart, fair Iranians, that the US gov't and media are prepared to stand aside forcefully in the face of any conflict.

We are furthermore prepared to issue non-specific declarations.

Be at peace knowing that we will not interfere in the internal discussions you are having with your rightful state security forces.

Hope! Change! Present!

(Praise Be Unto Me)

66 RWR was the first President I didn't vote for.
I was a 20yo Lefttard, and Reagan was the last guy I wanted to be President. He stood for everything I was against.
Years later as I moved away from chidish things, I came to see Reagan as one of the last authentic pols this nation had ever seen.
The man may have driven me crazy when I was young, but as an older much more conservative political junkie, I have come to see his stands as the core of my belief system now.
The guy in the WH now drives me even crazier then RWR did back in the day. Why, because unlike Reagan this clown doesn't believe in anything but himself!

back to lurking

67 So a bunch of Obama cheerleaders will choose a bunch of Obama cheerleaders with scripted questions to make Barry look good.

Yup, that's the plan.  So are you gonna play ball, or what?  You have a nice family, it would be a shame is something were to happen to them...

/rahm

68 Guys, give poon a break.  Solidarity happened 20 years before he was born, he can't be expected to know all the facts and get all the dates right.

69 22 Why wasn't Jimmah Carter there to certify this election?

Yeah, we can't really know for certain that it was all a big fraud until Carter says it was valid.

70

On one hand I can see where any support of the Iranian reform movement could be used by Achmedinajad (sp??) to denounce them as US/Israel puppets and any crackdown as quelling a treasonous group -- so it's probably best if we just shut up and pray for them.  We are not in a position to do anything of any real value with this outside of words.  And words do not mean dick, to be perfectly blunt -- not if you're not willing and able to back them up with action (which is one of the reasons I think Ronnie was so successful -- people really got the impression that he just might back up his words with actions, so he really didn't have to act all that often).

On the other, there was definitely no need to insinuate that we would deal with "whoever won", aka. Mr. Nutjob and his tyrannical little friends -- thereby tacitly saying any crackdown on the reformists was Aok with us.  That is truly disgusting.  That is not the pronouncement of any principled person.

On one hand, I don't really see Moussavi as being any great improvement over Ajad; on the other, these protests are a step in the right direction, imho, for the Iranian people, and damnit it goes against the grain to not put in one's support for anybody whose fighting for a little taste of freedom.  It also goes against the grain to sit back and watch people beaten and killed trying to gain that little bit of freedom and do or say nothing about it.

I think I'm going to just continue to say a little prayer for freedom and hope that there are those around the world who realize that our administration does not speak for our people 100%.

 

71

Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket.

72

3 Solidarity began battling the government in September of 1980.

Reagan spoke in their defense in December of 1981.

Over a year later.

As someone pointed out earlier, Reagan was not President until 1981. Another point to remember is that martial law was declared by the Polish government on December 13, 1981, so if Reagan spoke in December of '81 his response was appropriate and timely. If one wants to argue that Reagan's response was delayed, you might consider that the news cycle was much slower in that day.

 

73 Not to be over the top or anything but let's remember who mentored the one, communists, terrorists and religious zealot haters.  It is pretty apparent that Obama is not going to be too terribly hard on despotic regimes when the end result of what he is doing to this country will more than likely be something similar.  Would want to offend a brotha would we?

74 do you think poon realizes that Khomeini jetted in from France?  or that he was ushered into power by Jimmy Carter?  or that we didn't have an internet/twitter feed/global information network in 1980/1981?  do you think he/she is still on an allowance from his mommy and daddy?

75 Why doesn't Obama say somehting like this:

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama says he believes supreme leader Ayatollah ali Khamenei has deep concerns about the civil unrest that has followed the hotly contested presidential election there.

Obama repeated Tuesday at a news conference his "deep concerns" about the disputed balloting. He said he believes the ayatollah's decision to order an investigation "indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns."

GA_googleFillSlot("news_story_instory");

But at the same time, Obama said it would not be helpful if the United States was seen by the world as "meddling" in the issue.

The president did say, however, that he worries "when I see violence directed at peaceful protesters, when I see peaceful protest being suppressed."

Pussbag

76 I can't get too excited.  I don't want a strong, corruption-free well governed Iran but a weak confused Iran.  These are Muslim rag heads we're talking about.  What do you think their democracies will look like?  (Remember Hamas was elected in Palestine and a popular movement brought the Mullahs to power in 1979, also bitching about corruption and oppression.)  Stop acting like they have anything in common with the European Christians of Poland's Solidarity or the other anti-communist movements of Eastern Europe.

77 We are talking about an Islamic poltical party in an Islamic state. Almost no one talks about how Mousavi ran the show in Iran in the 1980s as Prime Minister when Iran was America’s mortal enemy, and his track record then–when Iran was supporting kidnappings of Americans in Lebanon and attacks on US ships in the Gulf–is chiefly why the Iranians like him. Why should we think his vague anti-corruption platform means we’ll have a friendly regime there? Why do neocons lose their judgment every time some “color revolution” comes down the pike?

78

I really long for the good old cowboy days.  It is hard to believe how much damage the O has done in such a short period of time.  I shudder to think how bad it can get in 3 1/2 years.

I am more than old enough to remember the Carter years.  Memories of standing in the freezing weather at 5 am just to get a tank of gas, being told to "put on a sweater" and his total and complete failure in Iran.  I worked with one of the Navy officers who was a hostage for those 400+ days and he did not even want the incident mentioned.  Not a good time.

The O is weak and empty.

79 On the other hand, there is a significant block of people in Iran who are undecided on the election outcome.  They constitute the tipping point, and it appears that the Iranian protesters are close to winning them over.

If the US does not tread lightly, we risk creating the perception that these protests are "sponsored" by the United States...  which is what the regime is already trying to convince the public.  Why offer them any proof in this regard.

I don't care what Obama's motives are in this.  I am sure they are driven by expedience.  But I don't know that a symbolic gesture by ANY American officials on behalf of the opposition is going to do anything except offer moral support for the protesters.

In practical terms, though, it actually could hurt them.  The protesters are trying to convince the rest of the public that the elections were rigged.  More and more people are coming to believe this point.  And this is the key, to undermine their faith in their whacko leaders to the point where another election is necessary.

80 Having said that, even if they get another election, there's no guarantee that they won't elect another whacko.

And, what would the point be in having the President endorse another whacko?

81

#8

Tom if you have to ask about why Reagan was great, you'll never get it.

 

You might as well ask why Washington was great.

82 This crackdown has been happening for two days.  It is still a possibility that the election was legit.    Richard Lugar agrees that it would be unwise to get involved or jump to conclusions this quickly.

As someone pointed out above, Reagan didn't make a statement on the Polish crackdown for ten days and that wasn't following a supposedly fair democratic election. 

Suppose Obama gave a speech.  (He likely will anyway)  To what end?  Who is going to be influenced?  Not the Iranians.  They already know we, and much of the world, disapproves.  If anything, criticism by the U.S. will be used by the Iranians.  Most of those people protesting are still not fans of the U.S.  As Obama said, any response has to be tempered by the reality that the U.S. is often used as a "handy political football." 

Not that it matters what Obama does.  If he gave a soaring speech two days ago, you would have been all over him for empty rhetoric. 

Honestly, the fact that Obama isn't going out there with a bunch of empty rhetoric ("feedom is great."  "oppression is bad." transparency is the hallmark of democracy") is amazing.  He could easily score political points by taking a very easy stand and looking "presidential."  You should support a measured and careful approach.  There is the possibility of a revolution here.  Revolutions are organic things.  We should allow this to happen on its own - unless we are willing to support it.  And support means planes and tanks.  Support in this case means declaring war against the Iranian government.

Recall that President H.W. Bush encouraged the Shiite and Kurd revolt against Saddam after the first Gulf War.  However, also recall that they got crushed and we refused to help them.

83

Seattle:

The O did not need to give a full speech.  The problem is that he does not seem capable of saying anything without TOTUS.  His off-the-cuff speaking is lame.

He was more forceful in condemning the man who shot Dr. Tiller.

84 Recall that President H.W. Bush encouraged the Shiite and Kurd revolt against Saddam after the first Gulf War. However, also recall that they got crushed and we refused to help them.

And it was that second part that was the sin; that and letting the Iraqis have combat helicopters.

85

As usual we are have our intelligence abused by Seattle Slough.  Of course the Iranian elections were fair, one million people being shot at the the regime are just confused about hanging chads.

 

Isn't it terrible that they are hanging everyone named Chad in Iran Seattle?  Perhaps you can get Carter to vouch for another democracy.

 

Any com-arison between Reagan who stood tall with the Poles and Obama's wormlike whines defines clueless.  Seattle Slough makes Elmer Fud sound like John Wayne.

 

As we all know Seattle Slough is a noted expert on Iranian having listened to Obermann and the Daily Show to be educated.  Tell us all how many years you worked in the Middle East and your experience in national security or foreign affairs.  And you're many visits to Hunan Gardens and Medina Kabob do not count as "foreign policy experience" regardless what they may have told you at CretinsRUs Community College.

President Chimp is the symbol of empty, meaningless rhetoric spiced with loads of incorrect information, strawmen, and nonsense.  When chimpy is good at is waiting for things to blow over, throwing people under the bus and taking credit for actions he had nothing to do with, like the Somali pirates episode.

Remember when you call Obama wise you demonstrate both your moral compass, your education, and your intellect.

86 Recall that President H.W. Bush encouraged the Shiite and Kurd revolt against Saddam after the first Gulf War.

He also gave the Chicken Kiev speech and has been damned for doing so. Let's be honest, G.H.W. Bush was a crappy President for the most part.

87

that wasn't following a supposedly fair democratic election.

An election where the choices are narrowed in advance to Islamo nutjob #1, Islamo nutjob #2, Islamo nutjob #3 and Islamo nutjob #4 is neither fair nor democratic.

88 Until these Iranian dissidents join ACORN and send lots of cash to Obama, they ain't gonna get squat.

89 "Here's hoping that Obama avails himself of a second chance to get this right"

Come on, who you trying to snow.  Obama made his nut by taking both sides of every issue.  When it came time to make a decision, he voted "Present".  You think he's going to change now?

90 Suppose Obama gave a speech.  (He likely will anyway)  To what end?  Who is going to be influenced?

So you are saying, 'just words' don't matter? I seem to recall someone, Orama, Barama, Obama, yeah Obama was his name, disagreed with that.

More to the point, Obama's statement such as it is simply reflects the craptastic worldview that informs his policy...namely talk to anyone and everyone no matter who they are. That puts us permanently on the defensive and subject to the whms of dictaors everywhere.

It also sets up the idea the ' negotiated agreements' are the end all and be all of DIPLOMACY. Of course, you are making those agreements with governments that cheat on their own elections. Why exactly should we expect them to honor their word to us?

91 Who gives a crap if the Mullahs or Ahmadnijead blames the US for "interference", if our pussy-and-Marxist (and Muslim) President would pipe up?  The protesters already don't believe the regime, and after-the-fact they are going to believe that simpering Barry O put them up to going into the streets to be shot by Revolutionary Guard thugs? 

Reagan shouldn't have talked about the evil Empire, or "bring down this wall" or whatever he said, because the E. Germans might have realized it was an AMERICAN PLOT to bring about the downfall of Communism.  Oh nooooo!! 

For heaven's sake.  Barry couldn't bother to say that those people deserved fair elections?  (Then again, would he own up to ACORN's shenanigans here, but that's another thread).  That he was opposed to the regime murdering its own people who were protesting what looked mighty damn suspicious?  He waited, what, 28 seconds after the late-term abortionist Dr. Tiller was killed to make a big boo-hoo about that.  Nothing about the Army guy killed in Arkansas and then finally a hemming and hawing slack-jawed nothing about the brave Iranians standing up to the jackboots.  And no, I have no illusions that those Iranis are going to all-of-a-sudden all be our best buddies, but playing mindfuck games via Hillary's "nuanced" diplomatic murmurings won't exactly win their hearts or minds. 

In 1956, we promised the Hungarians we'd stand behind their Revolution.  Then we pissed all over it and allowed thousands to die.  I'm not saying go into Iran, but sheesh, Barry O and Hillary, the Moron Alinsky Duo (MAD SQUAD) can't even bother to give a word of encouragement to the protestors, and just tiptoe across the whole thing, lest they offend the Mullah Poobahs and the Mad Mahdi Ahmadinejad. 

Losers.  Our POTUS and Sec.  And America, for having voted these clowns in. 

If we long for Reagan, who was not perfect, it's because he seems like it relative to these total jerks.

92 freedom is great = empty rhetoric.  isn't the left grand in its convictions?

93

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama says he believes supreme leader Ayatollah ali Khamenei has deep concerns about the civil unrest that has followed the hotly contested presidential election there.

But at the same time, Obama said it would not be helpful if the United States was seen by the world as "meddling" in the issue.

 

Unreal. The dipshit doesn't get it. They don't care if he kisses their asses and never will. He can bow and scrap to them forever and it won't change their opinion or goals.

94 I don't understand why all those mullahs won't just calm down.

Haven't they seen my cool walk?

Maybe I should do it for the cameras again ... this time with my shirt off.

95

Regarding Poon's post:

3 Solidarity began battling the government in September of 1980.

America elected Reagan in November of 1980.

Reagan took office late in January, 1981.

Reagan spoke in their defense in December of 1981.

Just under Over a year later.

FIFY.

96 Obama delivering a speech at the Berlin Wall if he were president instead of Reagan:

Mr. Gorbachev, please build the Wall larger so that we may all be insider her protective shield.

97 ... we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy." ...  it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

Sheriff Joe really the nail on the head with that one, didn't he?  Sucks for the Iranians, they're getting a big ol' bite of 'hopenchange' just like we are.

98 you mean that the religious fanatics of Iran are just a little tougher than the faculty lounge at U of C?  don't they know that they need to inflate Obama's rhetoric by 20% to meet global AA standards?  don't they realize there is a separation of Church and State?  don't they realize he doesn't like Europeans either and, as a black man, can understand the ways of those brown of skin (even if they still have actual slave markets in the ME)?

99 I like the way Seattle Slough uses Richard "Dick" Lugar as if that appeal to lame ass douche bag Republican authority means a God damned thing.

That's priceless.

100

Oh look Seattle Slough left another comment.  Any bets on if he'll actually attempt to address anything others said in response to him.  I don't expect the Declaration of Independence hating fool will come back to this thread again.

As someone pointed out above, Reagan didn't make a statement on the Polish crackdown for ten days and that wasn't following a supposedly fair democratic election

And as someone else pointed out, that was with a much slower news cycle at the time.  Or shall you admit that Obama is no better than Reagan.  Keep in mind that you'll have to lower Obama to below or equal to Reagan or admit the greatness of Reagan by your admittance.

Not that it matters what Obama does.  If he gave a soaring speech two days ago, you would have been all over him for empty rhetoric. 

And you'd be praising him for his quick response to the matter.  And be glad that he wasn't doing any saber-rattling.  You are pathetic.

You should support a measured and careful approach. 

Let us know when Obama does that, because right now their approach seems to be hoping to avoid talking about it until asked questions on it.

There is the possibility of a revolution here.  Revolutions are organic things.  We should allow this to happen on its own - unless we are willing to support it.  And support means planes and tanks.  Support in this case means declaring war against the Iranian government.

Why does support mean that?  Did we support the collapse of the iron curtain?  Can you show me where our tanks and planes were used in this support?  Do we support the end to genocide in Darfur?  Where are our boots on the ground there.  Your assertion that our support requires military force is baseless, you Declaration of Independence hating idiot.

101 Did Raygun say that before or after he gave a bunch of weapons to the Islamic Revolution?

Is that what real Presidents do? 

102 >Why does support mean that?  Did we support the collapse of the iron curtain?

Yes.

>Can you show me where our tanks and planes were used in this support?

Vietnam?  Korea?  Arming bin Laden to fight against the USSR? 

Ring a bell?

103

There is no way Barry can say anything at this point -- he's already shown his hand...and there is no way he could pull a Reagan-esque type speech and pull it off (which he tries all the time anyway; the man cribs off of Reagan speeches and tries to put a new spin on them with alarming frequency).

Words do mean something, but only if the person saying those words means something.  In this case I don't believe it to be so -- so perhaps it's better if he doesn't open his mouth too much as empty words often have bad consequences. (and if he comes out after the fact, braying about his support of whichever party comes out on top, then a pox upon him and his groupies).

 

 

104

I know this won't be popular, but i think he is doing the right thing in this case.

 

Right now, Iran can't blame the protesting on american interference, funding, or scheming. In the eyes of Iranians and the world, the protesters or people with legitimate greivances who dispute the election result.  However, if the Americans take the side of the protesters then the Iranian media will use their monopoly to play the clips over and over again on TV, leading Iranians who might otherwise sympathize with the protestors to take the governments side.  We need the media to cover the events going on there, hopefully the Iranian police will make a mistake and fire on a crowd killing dozens or hundreds of people that would galvenize the middle class of that nation against the ruling class.

This isn't quite the Soviet Invasion on Hungry or Prague, because the Iranians have a chance at forcing a change, whereas the Czechs and Hungarians were doomed from the getgo. Besides what did america's sweet talk in those invasions accomplish?  Nothing but free propaganda for Pravda and Isvestia to claim the revolts were not indigenous but rather due to capitalistic foreign influence.

 

I think we should sit back, not say anything, do whatever we can behind the schenes to stoke the fires and pray for a collapse of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Sure Oil and Natural Gas prices will  spike if there is a collapse, but a world without the theocratic iran government would be well worth it. We keep hearing about the 70 percent of Iran under the age of 28 that are western oriented, they couldn't be any worse than the current theocrats(famous last words). 

 

Besides, I do not think Obama could say anything that would make a difference.   He is weak, we all know it, but his lignuini spined nature may benefit us in this specific situation.

 

 

105 And I really don't care if the Iranians are my best buds or whatever after the fact -- that's for the cold, hard world of realpolitik and foreign affairs, which never goes perfectly anyway and will as always have to be worked on -- from a personal standpoint, as an American, I support anyone who wishes for some freedom from a tyrannical government and perhaps a bit better life for themselves and their children; that's the idea that founded this country, that's the idea that brought people over here; that's the idea I'll stand behind.  Yes, that does come down to feelings over reason, but I'd rather adhere to those sort of feelings every once and a while.

106 So wait.  Presidents need network news to tell them what is going on in the world?  Wow.  To think that we have all those spies and intelligence officers sitting around watching the news all dayl

If you are telling me Reagan didn't know there was a militant crack down going on in Poland because Fox News didn't tell him, you are nuts.

107

More Sullivan Hackery... They teach English idioms in Iran edition

Even as he leads the resistance from the front lines of Provincetown while drinking green tea he can't help shill for his one true love

A reader writes:

I'm an Iranian living in Canada. A few hours ago I talked to my brother who is a student at Sharif University, he was at the big rally yesterday and they were only feet away from Karoubi when they marched from the university entrance to Azadi square. He asked what had Obama had said and I started reading the transcript. When I got to "the United States can be a handy political football, or discussions with the United States [can be]" my brother sighed and said thank God this guy gets it.

Leadership is not always grandstanding. But that means that the support of civil society across the globe becomes more important.

108 Not to mention, Reagan wasn't president until January '81, so expecting him to do something as president in September 1980 is kinda, well, dumb.

Qwinn

Game...Set...Match

109

While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75 year old rancher, whose hand
was caught in the gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a
conversation with the old man.  Eventually the topic got around to
Obama and his bid to be our president.

The old rancher said, 'Well, ya know, Obama is a 'Post Turtle''.
Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him, what a ''post
turtle'' was.

The old rancher said, 'When you're driving down a country road and you
come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a 'post
turtle'.

The old rancher saw the puzzled look on the doctor's face so he
continued to explain. 'You know he didn't get up there by himself, he
doesn't belong up there, he doesn't know what to do while he's up
there, and you just wonder what kind of dumb ass put him up there to
begin with'.

110

The Iron Curtain in Europe Palooka, you dumbass.  Where were our tanks and planes in East Germany? In Poland?  Support does not require military force in all circumstances.

If you are telling me Reagan didn't know there was a militant crack down going on in Poland because Fox News didn't tell him, you are nuts.

Posted by: seattle slough at June 16, 2009 01:19 PM (H5l9d)

Not saying that at all you Declaration of Independence hating fool.  But we're talking about news events and the timing of presidential statements here.  Not what did he know and when did he know it.

111 "arming bin laden"-a true moron has arrived.  all hail the moron of the day. 

112 >The Iron Curtain in Europe Palooka, you dumbass.  Where were our tanks and planes in East Germany? In Poland?  Support does not require military force in all circumstances.

But the cold war was a global conflict.

113 If speaking up about Iran's brutal regime is only going to get more people killed, what's going to happen if we allow them to build nukes?

114 Did Raygun say that before or after he gave a bunch of weapons to the Islamic Revolution?

Iran was defenseless against their Soviet neighbors who were hell bent on getting a warm sea port.  Some times you have to help the bad guys when you are fighting a bigger enemy.

115 ss's parents should revoke his allowance-maybe getting out of his parent's basement would work some wonders.  as to statements, obama hasn't been silent.  he's let the mullahs know he'll be there to negotiate when the blood has been hosed off the streets.  he's empowered Khameini by noting that he must be "concerned".  by the way, where did we launch our invasion of the Soviet Union at-surely palooka can answer that one.

116

All the morons supporting Presidente 666 demonstrate their moral compass.  The USA will not support freedom or the people's aspirations for liberty in the face of a police state.  Obama values his dictator friends and tyrants more than our allies like the UK or Israel.

 

But then again we all know what Obama's true colors are.  Red all over.

117 Andrew Sullivan's "readers" are always worth a laugh.  Obama doesn't get it, and never will.   Many, many Eastern Europeans (including Vaclav Havel) have talked about how Reagan's words (which aren't soaring and lofty, but hard-edged and specific) were like a jolt of electricity to all the dissidents behind the Iron Curtain.  THEY heard him, and they started the journey that ended eight years later with the fall of the Berlin Wall, because his words showed them that they were right, and that others in the Free World supported them because they were right.  Obama could do a lot worse than repeat GW Bush's words to the Iranian people, that one day they will be free.  They are disposed to like him, and want to think that he is what they believe him to be (more fools they), so any encouragement from him would be rapturously received.  But he'll do what he always does, and bumble about putting himself and his image first.  The strength of the Iranian reaction to this election says that the Iranian people yearn for something, yearn for it powerfully, but it is as yet inchoate in their collective consciousness.  Reagan would have crystallized it for them, and helped them move in the direction they need to move in order to throw off their shackles.  As it is, the mullahs will crack down, repression will be restored, and Obama will get his meeting without preconditions, which is all he cares about.

118

I’m eating dinner and watching the Fox News footage of blood in the streets of Tehran, and I’m reliving my childhood spent watching Cronkite and more sane Dan Rather describe the scenes of Iran in the throes of uprising against the Shah, interspersed with Coke/Mean Joe Greene commercials. 

 

Obama doesn’t have the moral stature or the desire to back street protests against electoral irregularities—for an Illinois politician, elections rarely matter.  To the average, conspiratorial minded Iranian, they’ll vent, get intimidated, say “inshallah” (in Farsi), and return to their lives under the yoke of Islamic governance.  Obama probably recognizes this and won’t risk backing the wrong horse. 

119 If speaking up about Iran's brutal regime is only going to get more people killed, what's going to happen if we allow them to build nukes?


Something wonderful.

120 buzzion:

Why do you think I don't like the Declaration of Independence?

I don't consider it US law (because it isn't) but it is a fine historical document and an enduring testament to the courage of the founding fathers.

Oh, and this:

"But we're talking about news events and the timing of presidential statements here.  Not what did he know and when did he know it."

Stupidest thing I've read in a while.  Bravo.

121 spineless pricks

TAPPER:  Has the president reached out to Arab allies or other conduits, to Khamenei or any other of the power structure in Iran to talk about what happens next?

GIBBS:  Not that I'm aware of.  Again, I think I would, you know, stress for you the importance of what the president discussed also in his comments both yesterday and today about ensuring that, while we -- while we abhor the violence associated with this vigorous Iranian debate, that we also respect their sovereignty.

122

You obviously don't read your own writing then SS.  Reagan took 10 days to make a statement back in 1981.  Is that the baseline we should establish?  Obama has a 10 day window to give a full statement on what is going on in Iran.  But that's 1981, shouldn't we expect a faster turn around in today's age when information gets out faster?  So at what point do you believe Obama should make a statement?  5 days after? 10 days? A month?  Wait until the mullahs get everything under control and Dinnerjacket is still in power so he can resume his asskissing in his efforts to get credit for normalizing relations with Iran?

As for the Declaration:

You don't believe people are allowed to make political choices based on religious belief.  You've said so.  You have basically admitted that opinions without religious influence are worth more than those with it even if the opinion is exactly the same, all because one didn't utitlize what you deem to be imaginary.  The Declaration is a document rooted in religious belief.  The inalienable rights are given to us via our Creator.  That in your view makes the Founders arguments for Independence weak since they didn't make them without resorting to religion.  That eliminates the document as something worthwhile in your view.

123 Let's be honest, G.H.W. Bush was a crappy President for the most part.

Yeah, I gotta agree with DrewM on this one. Nice guy and all, but this mythos that's developing that he was this great president is a pretty transparent attempt to slight his son.

124

As usual we have numbnuts Seattle Slough tell us about the Declaration.  Oh poor ditums doesn't like because it isn't law.  Moron, it is the basis of the nation more than any other document.  No law surpasses it in demonstrating what the nation is and should be.  Men who wrote it and signed it were also signing their death warrants if things went wrong.

 

So tell us why any law sdeserves more respect?

Asusual the oozing pus head cannot realize the importance of Reagan's statements and their sequence.  What is mind boggling about this ignorant knave is how rteadily he worships at the altar of dictators and tyrants and above all the poltroons he has elected who happily shred our Constitution.

Do keep posting Seattle.  You demonstrate how the US educational system has faiuled and why additional funding is needed for the Special Olympics.

 

People like you should run and exercise rather than be allowed near a computer.   We all ready have enough cretins at the NY Times although you are probably practising for when it dies.

125 If you are telling me Reagan didn't know there was a militant crack down going on in Poland because Fox News didn't tell him, you are nuts.

Slough, Fox news did not exist in 1980 or 1981. Yer stoopit.

gibbs sez:

while we abhor the violence associated with this vigorous Iranian debate, that we also respect their sovereignty.

Pity dumbass carter didn't have the same sort of respect back in 1979 or so.

126 'The American Conservative' agrees with Obama (and Ben, and Myself, and others)...

http://tinyurl.com/lrdunw

127

Poland had much higher stakes for the US in 1981 than Iran does in Year 0.  Most of our statesmen in 1981 had active memories of the outbreak of World War II in 1939--they were also rather cognizant of the vast array of nuclear missiles aimed at the US, while the US had just emerged from the Hollow Force days of the Carter regime.  With that in mind, Reagan was more circumspect while his anti-communist credentials were well-established. 

128 Obama likely can't say much that would be useful in this process.

That said, it might be nice if he paid at least an homage to real freedom and real democracy. Pretending that the mullacracy is anything other than a totalitarian religious state is teh stupid.

I don't wish to force others to live as I do. But I do wish that America's leaders would defend her citizens' choices more fully. I remember when that used to happen.

And I'm sure the first time it didn't happen was Jan 20, 1977 during Carter I. Carter II ain't no better.

129 You people are so Pavlovian.  Saakashvili in Georgia is a thug who invaded South Ossetia.  Mosuavi helped start Hezbollah in the 1980s.  Just b/c lots of people want one side to win an election doesn't mean they're not a bunch of rag-head Muslim idiots.  It's like watching the Russian campaign of WWII.  It's very hard to know who to root for.

130 ^{ABC "News" Whores Itself To White House On Health Care (With Apologies To Any Honest Whores Who Are Insulted By The Comparison) . . .}

Fuck you.

131 Okay, we're honest whores but somewhat stupid from all of the whoring we do.  We posted this in the wrong thread.  Sue us.

132 buzzion:

You are wrong.  The Declaration of Independence does not make reference to any religion or religious text.  It speaks of a creator and speaks of universal human rights.  The Declaration was us throwing the Magna Carta back in England's face.  Not biblically based.  Not based on any religious instruction.  Merely a deistic reference to a non-specified source of our inalienable rights. 

The Declaration is also not written to the American people.  It is a letter.  It was written to a specific audience. 

It is a very important document but it is not law.  The constitution is law.  When we actually sat down and got to work on our legal framework, much if not all the religion found in the declaration was abandoned.  This was done on purpose.

And I never said an opinion cannot be influenced by religious teachings.  I said, when you are justifying your policy decisions, do so with non-imaginary bases. 

You can have a religious reason for your policy, just don't justify it as such.

An example:  Your religion says no pork.  Fine.  Why?  Not good enough to say God said so.  Talk to me about food borne illness.  Talk about the environmental impact of raising hogs.  Since we all cannot agree on whether any specific religious text or interpretation has any validity whatsoever, we need to discuss these issues with things we can agree are real.  Even if we disagree on the facts.  You might have a study that says few people die from eating pork.  I might disagree.  At least neither of us is relying on some beyond-reproach magic book.

I understand that people are going to want to have laws follow their religious mores.  You want girls to abstain from having pre-marital sex?  OK.  Tell me actual real reasons why I should support that.  Don't tell me its a sin. 

This shouldn't be difficult to understand.  My viewpoint here should not be contriversial. 

buster:

No. Shit.  You don't say.  Gee. 
 

133 Why isn't Christian Religious belief about moral matters reason alone not to do something legally?  I don't see any problem with that, whether it's gay marriage or whatever.  We are a Christian nation and even if the Deist Jefferson didn't like it, nearly all the 13 Colonies had established Churches until fairly late in the game in addition to oath requirements, blue laws, and other obeissance to Christianity--the true religion.

134

You are wrong.  The Declaration of Independence does not make reference to any religion or religious text.  It speaks of a creator and speaks of universal human rights.  The Declaration was us throwing the Magna Carta back in England's face.  Not biblically based.  Not based on any religious instruction.  Merely a deistic reference to a non-specified source of our inalienable rights. 

Is belief in a creator religious?  How about the fact that the rights given to us come from that creator?  Belief in a deity is still religion no matter how much you want to try to twist around your attempt to deny your hatred of the Declaration, which you do. 

You can have a religious reason for your policy, just don't justify it as such.

The Declaration justifies its policy based on religious grounds.  Why do we have inalienable rights?  Because they were given to us by our Creator.  This makes the Declaration worthless in your view, due to its religious influence.

I understand that people are going to want to have laws follow their religious mores.  You want girls to abstain from having pre-marital sex?  OK.  Tell me actual real reasons why I should support that.  Don't tell me its a sin. 

Let me know when people are attempting to do this.  Stop pulling shit out of your ass you elitist bigot.

This shouldn't be difficult to understand.  My viewpoint here should not be contriversial. 

You're declaring the if two people hold the same opinion one should be superior to the other simply because one individual is basing his opinion on religion.  I don't know about controversial but it is fucking stupid.

135 buzzion:

I don't hold that where "two people hold the same opinion one should be superior to the other simply because one individual is basing his opinion on religion."

If two people hold the same opinion THEY FUCKING AGREE and the debate ends.  What I am saying is, contrary to what Roach says above, we are not a Christian nation.  We are a nation of Christians, and Jews, and Muslims, and Wiccans, and Scientologists, and lots and lots of atheists.  And withing each of those groups are vastly different interpretations of what those belief systems (or lack of) require.

Whether some policy or lack of a policy runs afoul of one person or another's religion is simply not relevant. 

Let you know when people attempt to justify policy with religion?  Really?  Ever heard an anti-gay marriage argument that didn't include reference to scripture?  Ever heard an argument on science instruction that didn't devolve (pun recognized) into a religious debate?

NO policy debate should devolve into a religious debate.  I shouldn't have to make scriptural arguments in support of my opinions.  For most religious people, only scripture can combat scripture.  Facts simply aren't credible against faith.  I'm not a bigot.  I just don't believe the bible is a reputable document.  So do millions of other Americans.   I'm less of a bigot about Christianity than I'm sure you are about Islam.  Far less.

Imagine if this country was majority Muslim.  Now wouldn't you want public policy to be justified without reference to what Allah wanted or what the Quran says?  If you say no, you are a liar.  If you agree, you are as bigoted as me.

It is really that simple.

136 Most people are Christians.  The others can simply accept that or move back to where they came from.  The 90% of us who believe in Christianity should not have to self-censor b/c a few religious minorities might get offended, any more than Israel is not a Jewish state b/c a few Muslims and Christians live there too.

137

If two people hold the same opinion THEY FUCKING AGREE and the debate ends

No you spent an entire thread saying that you can't base a political view on religion if you want it enacted or whatever.  You are deciding if the source is religious it is not valid.  Hence even if the opinion is the same since one is sourced from religion that opinion isn't valid.  That's what you spent that thread saying: Religion can't be the basis for the policy.  You hold that view.  Make peace with your moronic statements.

Let you know when people attempt to justify policy with religion?  Really?  Ever heard an anti-gay marriage argument that didn't include reference to scripture?  Ever heard an argument on science instruction that didn't devolve (pun recognized) into a religious debate?

Gee maybe you should spend some time actually reading here.  Since those topics have come up and people have made arguments not based on religion.  Of course these aren't cases of people trying to make it illegal to have premarital sex.  Your baseless claim that you attempted to pass off as an example.  Like I said let me know when they attempt your example dipshit.

NO policy debate should devolve into a religious debate.  I shouldn't have to make scriptural arguments in support of my opinions.  For most religious people, only scripture can combat scripture.

Shifting your goalposts.  Now its turning policy debate into religious debate.  Before it was you can't get your policy from your religious views.

  Facts simply aren't credible against faith.

Like the belief in global warming.

I'm not a bigot.

Yes you are.

I'm less of a bigot about Christianity than I'm sure you are about Islam.  Far less.

I doubt it.

Now wouldn't you want public policy to be justified without reference to what Allah wanted or what the Quran says?  If you say no, you are a liar.  If you agree, you are as bigoted as me.

Sure, but that's your shifting of the goalposts again of your original complaint.   Your original complaint makes you the bigot.  It wasn't about what you wanted.  It was your criticism and view of people who based their opinions on their religion.  You represented those views as being less valid than ones that came from non-religious sources.  Hence my attacks on you, you pathetic Declaration hating retard.  These are the views you hold.  Deal with it.

138 And I'm not bothering with Roach.  He's a fucking idiot, that probably thinks Iran is incapable of actually having a true democracy.  Something I wouldn't be at all surprised to be you stating a similar opinion about Iraq here in the past.  I'm not going to bother to search but you are a liberal and you guys just don't think those backwards muslims in the middle east are capable of running a democracy.

139

@3: "Solidarity began battling the government in September of 1980."

Um, just so you know, Jimmy Carter was Grand Poobah in September 1980, Reagan wasn't even elected until November 1980, and didn't take over the gig until January 1981.

Nuance!

140 buzzion. 

Don't confuse your strawman argument with me shifting goalposts.  My position has remained constant.  I mean, to the extent that one opinion relies on religion and another identical opinion relies on more tangible evidence, I suppose the latter is "better" much the same as two people can come to the same answer on a math problem where one guesses and the other shows his work. 

But that's neither here nor there.  I am saying your, or my, or his religions simply should not be relied upon as bases for public policy.  That's all I've ever said.  I don't like that people try and mold public policy to meet their religions.  But I realize this happens.  However, using religious JUSTIFICATION (even if it is obviously the impetus) for a policy is simply unacceptable and in my mind, unamerican.

And I'm not an anti-muslim bigot.  There are legitimate anti-muslim bigots on this very thread.  That's not me.  I am an equal opportunity offender when it comes to religions.  I think they are all bullshit.

141 I mean, to the extent that one opinion relies on religion and another identical opinion relies on more tangible evidence, I suppose the latter is "better" much the same as two people can come to the same answer on a math problem where one guesses and the other shows his work.

'cause, that would be unamerican, right?

142

And I'm not an anti-muslim bigot.

That's why I called you a bigot, bigot, and not and anti-muslim bigot.

There are legitimate anti-muslim bigots on this very thread.  That's not me.  I am an equal opportunity offender when it comes to religions.  I think they are all bullshit.

Shocking that you didn't attempt to claim I was wrong on your view about the mid-east and democracy, guess I was right.

Don't confuse your strawman argument with me shifting goalposts. 

What strawman?  I'm saying exactly what you believe.  If an opinion is based on religion then it is worthless to you.  That's a fact you sniveling turd.  The Declaration is based on a religious belief.  So its worthless to you.

Of course you could always just go ahead and say I don't know what you really think.  But then you're going to open yourself up to your other idiotic statements, like talking about what conservatives believe in your myopic worldview.

I noticed you also no longer want to address your claims on what people want enact that is religiously based.  What's the matter SS, can't find anyone wanting to make pre-marital sex illegal?

 

143

Buzzion:

Seattle Stupid is a cretin.   He has never read the Declaration or does not understand it.  There are various references to God in it.  Its basis is that rights come from God and not a king or government.  This is what annoys the little dullard.

As you nail him its amusing to see it twist and employ various strawmen.   The bottom line is Seattle is the worst form of bigot, the one destined for the ninth ring ofhell.  Is there a sin he hasn't committed?

144 Oh I know Thomas.  I was seeing if I could goad the twerp into arguing against me that I actually don't know his views.  And then point out how I can't know his views but he can apparently so readily claim to know conservative views despite not even being close to conservative.  Hell he proved it here again by claiming there were no arguments against gay marriage that don't involve quoting scripture, despite reasons being laid out here that are against gay marriage without citing religious reasons.  This proves he can't grasp conservative thought and even when its laid out before him on a website he frequents he's more blind than stevie wonder.

145

Need to know before buying lace wigs Our lace wigs are made of human hairs classified lace human hair wigs on our web. 100% Indian/Chinese remy human hair and best quality Swiss/French lace are used in lace human hair wigs. Lace human hair wig is thin, your scalp can get good breath, so you can feel comfortable just like real hair. You may find hundreds of units and almost 150+ styles of full lace wigs in our store. By using our web searcher, you may locate just the wigs you want without bitter searches. Also, you may customise lace front wigs here, all you need to do is just to follow our custom options or leave your specials in the "comments". A custom wig can be completed within 25 workdays generally. Thanks for Paypal and our Co-work World Wide Ship corporations, we can ship wigs to all over the world! Show your beauty, show your individuality, experience our wonderful service and dress you up right now!

 

wedding dresses wedding dress wedding gowns bridesmaid dresses bridesmaid dress

146 Bizzion:

But you don't understand my view. Obviously. You seem to think it has changed. It hasn't.

I have no problem with people wanting certain public policies enacted because they think they are a good idea (be it because of their religion or otherwise).

What I have a problem with is people trying to justify these wishes with religious justifications. That you seem unable to discern the difference here is honestly frustrating.

I'll say it one more time. I don't care why you are against gay marriage. Just give me real reasons for your opposition. Not imaginary ones.

I'm not a bigot. I'm a non believer. There is a difference.

Suppose we had a President who was into mediums and psychics. Now suppose that this President tried to justify his policy decisions by using a Ouija board. Would you accept that? If not (and of course you wouldn't) would you be fairly considered a bigot because of that? No. Of course you would not. You are simply exhibiting the only logical reaction a not ouiji board believer could possibly have.

That is not bigotry. You know it. So stop being a fucking idiot.

And your argument about me apparently believing muslims are unable to have healthy open democracies is just completely out of left field. Truly a strawman in every regard. Of course all people are capable of open democracies. That isn't the question however. The question is whether a nation's institutions are capable of it.

Obviously, it isn't happening in Iran right now. It has nothing to do with the Iranian people or Persians in a more general sense. It has everything to do with the institutions that exist in Iran.

Thomas Jackson:

I've been avoiding responding to you because, quite simply, nothing you have written has been worthy of a reply.

That is some weak tea my friend.

Toby:

Thank you for posting that prior comment. It truly demonstrates that my "goalposts" haven't moved at all. I doubt that was your intent, but it spared me the trouble of finding it myself.

So again, thank you.

147 So again, thank you.

You're welcome.  However, it was indeed my intent to show that you are still as provincially ignorant of the intent of the founders and the functioning of a pluralistic society as you ever were.  It would not be a sign of inconsistency to admit your categorical errors after being schooled for a couple of days on your misunderstandings.  It would be a sign of growth.

148

And your argument about me apparently believing muslims are unable to have healthy open democracies is just completely out of left field. Truly a strawman in every regard. Of course all people are capable of open democracies. That isn't the question however. The question is whether a nation's institutions are capable of it.

But that in my experience is what liberals believe.  Are you suddenly saying its wrong of me to do this and ascribe that belief to you?  Then why do you do it all the fucking time with what conservatives believe?  You come in here and state what conservatives believe as if you are right, when real conservatives are here telling you how full of shit you are.

I'll say it one more time. I don't care why you are against gay marriage. Just give me real reasons for your opposition. Not imaginary ones.

Religious reasons are real reasons you bigot.  The people believe them to be real.  You are not the arbiter of what is real and imagined.  And like I said maybe you should actually read here sometime and realize that there are arguments against gay marriage not based on religion.

What I have a problem with is people trying to justify these wishes with religious justifications. That you seem unable to discern the difference here is honestly frustrating.

I'll say this now.  Tough shit.  The source is immaterial.  If I want a law that says everyone must wear purple hats on tuesday, I don't need any real reason to want that.  If I can convince enough other people that its a good idea then perhaps it can become a law.  The origination of the view is not what matters.  Except in your world.  Because you see I can read what you say and know what the meaning behind  "I just don't want the BASIS of your opinions to be some religion." is.  So like I said in your worldview if the opinions are based on religion then its not good enough for you, just like the Declaration happens to be.

149 buzzion:

"If I want a law that says everyone must wear purple hats on tuesday, I don't need any real reason to want that."

Actually you do.  Its called the rational basis test.  Its the bare minimum a law must meet if brought up for review.

I couldn't help but notice you ignored the Ouiji Board example.  It's OK, I answered the questions for you.  And just so we're clear, those answers I made on your behalf, and which you will not and cannot disagree with, lose your argument for you. 

I would have thought you'd realized this.  Yet here you are continuing to make the same arguments.  Its sort of odd really.  You would not accept the irrational policy justifications of other (non-christian) adherents yet you expect me to accept yours.  That is called hypocricy. 

Unless your opinion on the spreading of Sharia law in Europe has changed?  I mean, who cares why we should force women to wear head scarves?  As long as we get the votes, "tough shit."

Oh, and thank you for admitting your argument is a strawman argument.  And where, generally, do you see liberals holding anti muslim views regarding their inability to self govern?  I see that here.  I see that at other conservative sites.  Where on the left pray tell?

150 Need to prove that it is completely correct, it is not easy, so I only wrote his own opinion; bmw like sony and you can compete? Who said it was not clear, of course, it is entirely different industries, but how can you did a few years whether they need to compete with a market? Or too short a lot of things that a good happy life, hard work, but also need a good rest, which in fact does not contradict a well, and the other can also do a good job. Friends, I wish you good luck, I wish everyone good luck.
seoone
百度关键词优it
网站关键词优sense
长尾关键词To
关键词排名of
链接锚文本and
沙盒效应is
反向链接qualities
死链接affection
百度搜索引擎提交of
软文give
Google网站管理员工ground
google关键词工具suddenly
博客群发the
google左侧优化and
杭州江干区空调维修effort
T恤衫from
seosymbolizes
杭州办公室装and
杭州搬家spring
电雕机meaning
杭州植物租赁recognition
缝纫机维修underlying
缝纫机维修培of morphemes.
杭州厨师培训or
去痘of
seolegs
祛斑sense
杭州google排名printing
杭州网站优化and
nofollowhate
内链such
外部链接its
404页面from
外部链接from
博客收录its
反向链接and
杭州公司注册代理To
杭州IT培训of morphemes.
杭州私家侦探kinship
杭州网络公司underlying
外保温材料meaning
杭州消防器材writing
杭州公司转让and

151 Poon...Post #3 ..YOU'RE WRONG.
Reagan spoke out against Soviet aggression starting on day 1, publicly and directly to Brezhnev and Gorbachev. Get some facts before you spew your air-headed comments like you know what you're talking about.

Reagan's letters are available at NARA.GOV so go do some homework or shut up you weak, ignorant mouthpiece.

152 Let them live their own way in their own land.

free classifieds
jobs part time
articles

153 Excuse me. Wonderful and informative web site. I will recomend this site. Excelent work. Help me! It has to find sites on the: Cheap atlanta flights. I found only this - cheap flights students. If you have found the offer through a travel agent then you two should have a discussion about the conditions of the cheap flights and the flying options in general. Tips for finding cheap flights and traveling on low cost airlines. Thanks for the help :cool:, Pleasance from Mali.

154 discounthair straighteners
ghd hair
chi hair straightener
ghd straighteners
chi straighteners
chi hair
chi hair iron
hair straighteners ghd
ghd hair straighteners
free shipping!

155 Discount Boots
Womens UGG
UGG Shoes
UGG Australia
UGG UK
UGG USA
discount ugg boots
cheap ugg boots

156 discountugg boots sale
ugg shoes
tall ugg boots
ugg classic boots
nike shox
air jordan shoes
nike air max
nike air force one
bailey button ugg
rainier ugg boots
ugg classic cardy
ugg crochet boots
ugg mini
ugg classic short
classic tall ugg
ugg coquette
ugg baby boots
ugg knightsbridge
ugg lo pro
new ugg boots
ugg short boots
ugg nightfall boots
ugg skimmer
ugg sundance boots
ultra short ugg
ugg ultra tall
discount ugg slippers
ugg sandals
ugg halendi
ugg slippers
ugg layback
ugg matala sandal
ugg napoule sandal
ugg persephone
tasmina ugg
air force 1 shoes
jordan air shoes
nike shox shoes
air max nike
free shipping!

157 Your post very good,thanks for sharing!Are you also like these:ugg boots uk,buy ugg boots,australia ugg,cheap ugg boots,ugg boots,ugg boots sheepskin,womens ugg boots,ugg australia boots,cheap ugg boots

158 buy Discount Boots
Womens UGG
UGG Shoes
UGG Australia
UGG UK
UGG USA
discount ugg boots
cheap ugg boots
air force 1 shoes
nike air force
air force 1 mens
air force 1 boots
air force onefrom usa

159 discount Discount Boots
Womens UGG
UGG Shoes
UGG Australia
UGG UK
UGG USA
discount ugg boots
cheap ugg boots
air force 1 shoes
Nike air force
air force 1 mens
air force 1 boots
air force onefree shipping

160 Come to our website for shopping with high quality and best service! There have new products,MBT M. Walk
and MBT Lami,Welcome everybody to buy it.

161 cheap ugg
buy ugg
ugg usa
ugg boots
ugg uk
ugg australia
ugg shoes
ugg sale
womens ugg boots
discount ugg boots
cheap ugg boots
ugg shoes sale
ugg boots sale
ugg sundance
ugg 5819
ugg 5815
ugg knightsbridge
ugg 5825
ugg rainier

162 Buy discount ugg shoes
cheap ugg shoes
cheap ugg
ugg rainier
buy ugg
ugg usa
discount ugg boots
ugg 5825
ugg shoes sale
ugg sundance
ugg shoes
cheap ugg boots
ugg 5815
ugg sale
ugg uk
ugg knightsbridge
womens ugg boots
ugg boots
ugg australia
ugg 5819free shipping

163 Hi! wUgHDX

164 nike dunk sb

Do anything needed to support an idea, a good idea usually brings good results, doing

business is like that.http://www.dunksky.com/.This site has always been on

165 buy [url=http://www.reviewups.com/]discount ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-coquette-casual-shoes-c-22]ugg rainier[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]buy ugg[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg usa[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]discount ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-short-c-1]ugg 5825[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg shoes sale[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-sundance-c-5]ugg sundance[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-tall-c-3]ugg 5815[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg sale[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg uk[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-knightsbridge-c-27]ugg knightsbridge[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]womens ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg australia[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-cardy-c-2]ugg 5819[/url]from usa

166 Replica Rolex | Replica Watches | Replica Breitling Watches | Fake Watches | Replica Breitling Watches | Fake Maurice Lacroix | Bvlgari Fake | Omega Replica Watch | Ebel Watch | Rado Watches Replica | Fake Girard Perregaux | Rolex Fake | Rolex Replica | Fake Hamilton | Wholesale Raymond Watch

167 Replica watches | Replica Breitling Watches | Replica Rolex | Replica Breitling Watches | soccer jersey wholesale | Fake Richard Mille | Replica IWC Watches | Fake Girard Perregaux | Tag Heuer Watch Replica | Fake Panerai Watches | Fake Girard Perregaux | Fake Omega Watches | Cartier Watches | Vacheron Constantin Fake Watches | Fake Christian Dior Watches

168 Fake Watches | Replica Cartier | Replica Rolex | Replica Omega | Replica watches | Replica Porsche Watch | Frank Muller Fake Watch | Rolex Replica | Fake Fendi Watches | Piaget Watch | Replica Seiko | replica watches | Frank Muller Fake Watches | Fake Bvlgari Watch | Baume & Mercier Replica Watch

169 Replica Cartier | Replica watches | Fake Watches | Replica Cartier | Replica Omega | Hublot Fake Watches | Corum Fake Watches | Fake Rolex | Cheap Louis Vuitton Watches | Tag Heuer Watches | Cheap Calvin Klein Fake Watch | Iwc Watches | Replica Tudor Watches | Omega Watches | Cheap Cartier Watches