Graeme Frost ring a bell? We have a saying in NY- "If ya don't want it don't ask for it" He knew he'd be thrown to the proverbial wolves the second he opened his mouth. I don't think it's fair to attack the guys personal life- only issues relevant to his inquiry- you know, "putting his money where his mouth is." Maybe he can get a gig on Ghost Hunters...Comment Posted By RememberNovember On 17.10.2008 @ 17:26
Goodererling too, must sting a bit when the tables are turned. I for one don't know the whole Ayers thing, but rumor and innuendo are stock in trade for the GOP, so anything these whisper campaigns say are highly suspect to me anyway- they've never been vetted by any reputable source and are the equivalent of a Corsi 9-11 conspiracy. Rumor and innuendo got us into Iraq and let Bin Laden slip away. Who are the real villians here? No, it's more like "We know our candidate sucks...but look! A distraction! Obama's a muslim!" If you look at the RNC website, it's all about Obama( and smearing and discrediting), if you look at the DNC website, it's all about Obama....Comment Posted By RememberNovember On 30.08.2008 @ 07:56
"On the other hand, McCain’s attacks against Obama are biting, caustic, sarcastic, and ringing true which is why he is staying close to Obama and why, in the end, all the re-invention Obama can muster isn’t going to matter:"
Rick, while I enjoy reading your take on things, I'm gonna call BS on this one- his attacks are merely ad hominem fact-skimming whisper pieces. It's your blog/your opinion, just don't miscast it as fact. people tend to gravitate towards these things and misconstrue statements. To wit:
and to be fair-
Heh - good points - except I said "ring true." which I suppose is different than actually being true. But I didn't mean it that way. He may not of "snubbed" wounded troops but the fact is he could have gone if he had taken his senate staff with him - unless there was another explanation from the Pentagon. Even Fact Check says the particulars are true - the insinuation that he passed up visiting the troops to go to the gym is false. In that sense - since he could have gone - the ad is correct.
But this is all baloney anyway. More people watch reruns of MASH than are paying attention to ads at this point.
ed.Comment Posted By RememberNovember On 7.08.2008 @ 13:14
Did a Hillraiser write this? Ricki Lieberman maybe( seems to be a trend among that name leading to fence hopping)
What I don't get is the mentality of "my candidate didn't win, so Im gonna sabotage my party's chances waaaaaghhhhh" At least McCain does not seem to be suffering from this crybaby syndrome.Comment Posted By RememberNovember On 17.07.2008 @ 09:28
I'm just disgusted with the whole process- it needs the heavy hammer of reform smacked down on it.
People need to put their big pants on- but then again this is indicative of the no-personal sacrifice, everybody gets a trophy-even-if-they-suck attitude. Pfft.
To # 6Comment Posted By RememberNovember On 9.07.2008 @ 13:37
Sorry to say but Bush is beyond making a bottom of the ninth two-out rally.
Even a 5-10% bump is too little too late.
/agree. if the Iraqi Gov't says it's ready to stand on it's own two feet, we should respect that- isn't it what Bush said in the first place, or was that appeasement rhetoric? We run the risk of wearing out the welcome in the very near future if this is so- and our over-stressed,turnstile-deployed troops need time to re-charge.Comment Posted By RememberNovember On 9.07.2008 @ 08:57
Question: When did your crowd start giving a s*** about America’s world financial and integral standing anyway? I spent 20 years in the Air Force, and been watching the political scene for over 30 years, and, whoa, this is all news to me.
"my crowd"? ah, the ad hominem fallacy rears its ugly head early. Nice to see your knee jerk skim reflexes are working.Comment Posted By RememberNovember On 16.05.2008 @ 07:20
By what specious assumption are you drawing that type of oppositional position? I am merely saying, that if roles were reversed, you're "damn skippy" the same would apply. Gee I guess being in the minority makes one a bit testy. Losing your seats ( and I say this because as a former registered Republican the Republicans today bear no resemblance to the republicans of the late 80's early 90's) is going to happen to any elected offical when all they can do is posture and pander. Call me disenfranchised, call me Independent, call me rational. I just want my elected official to do their damn job and not sling drive-by-divisive insults on foreign soil.
The old "It was Clinton's fault" cry is dry and dusty. 9-11 happened 9 months into Bush's term.
He had Clinton's notes, and notes from 42 other Presidents to draw on. He never studied them maybe because he wanted to write his own"test". Terrorism has existed for hundreds of years. That's a no brainer.
Ah, sagacious words from our Feckless Leader on Foreign Policy...Tell me something Rick, if you were the opposition and the constant revelation on a daily basis that this war is costing America its world financial and integral standing, wouldn't you pick up that ball?Comment Posted By RememberNovember On 15.05.2008 @ 15:51
This is all pre-game nonsense anyway- the proof is in the pudding, and speculation is like a rocking chair- it's a nice place to sit but you go nowhere.
For those of you who aren't aware of the tired comparison of Chamberlain:
( from Glenn Greenwald's blogspot- yeah THAT Glen Greenwald, but it is pertinent, imho)
In fact, though Ronald Reagan has been canonized as the Great Churchillan Warrior, back then he was accused of being the new 1938 Neville Chamberlain because he chose to negotiate with the Soviets and sign treaties as an alternative to war. Conservative Caucus Chair Howard Phillips, for instance, "scorned President Reagan as 'a useful idiot for Kremlin propaganda,'" and published ads which, according to a January 20, 1988 UPI article (via LEXIS):
likens Reagan's signing of the INF Treaty to British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's signing of an accord with Nazi Germany's Adolf Hitler in 1938. The ad, with the headline, ''Appeasement Is As Unwise In 1988 As In 1938,'' shows pictures of Chamberlain, Hitler, Reagan and Gorbachev overhung by an umbrella. Chamberlain carried an umbrella and it became a World War II symbol for appeasement.
According to the January 19, 1988 St. Louis Post-Dispatch (via LEXIS), when Pat Robertson was campaigning for President in Missouri in 1988, he "suggested that President Ronald Reagan could be compared to Neville Chamberlain . . . by agreeing to a medium-range nuclear arms agreement with Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev." The Orange Country Register editorialized in September, 1988 that "Ronald Reagan has become the Neville Chamberlain of the 1980s. The apparent peace of 1988 may be followed by the new wars of 1989 or 1990." And even the very same Newt Gingrich, in 1985, denounced President Reagan's rapprochement with Gorbachev as potentially "the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with Chamberlain in 1938 at Munich."
God help us that we actually talked to Russia, had Arms-talks etc ( granted the USSR wasn't a tosspot terrorist organization- they were a BIGGER threat all together.) Move to strike Hitler from the discussion. Next.Comment Posted By RememberNovember On 15.05.2008 @ 12:16
Pages (1) :