Comments Posted By TED
Displaying 1 To 9 Of 9 Comments
ARE CONSERVATIVES ANGRIER THAN LIBERALS?
It's not the anger that frightens me or the fact that most of our fellow party members are screaming things that are blurred gray at best. It's just if we as Republicans want to connect Obama to bad judgements, what's going to happen when they connect McCain to all of his bad judgements? Will the polls spread even further apart? They need to drop it before I'm forced to vote for Barr in this election. Hammer him on the Fannie/Freddie stuff or the cost of his healthcare program. But I don't need anymore examples of questionable judgement, morally and politically, when McCain has a ton of his own.
Comment Posted By Ted On 10.10.2008 @ 10:53
HONESTLY, IS JOHN ARAVOSIS A PIECE OF EXCREMENT OR WHAT?
With all due respect, Jill Carroll speaking glowingly of her captors *after her release*, and after a few months doesn't even compare with 5 years as a POW. That's like comparing McCain's resume with Obama's.
"After a few months?" Link and quote please. As closely as I follow the news, I've never heard Carroll utter a word about her captors except to say in an interview with the CSM after her release that her "glowing words" were given first with a gun to her head and then in the presence of sympathizers with her captors before she was released to American custody.
Sounds like you are repeating a rumor you heard somewhere. Carroll - whose politics are completely irrelevant to the fact that her captors were going to kill her because she's an American - covered the war in Iraq as few journalists before her or since. I found her reports (and so did the army) fair, impartial, and gripping. Whether she sympathizes with Muslims or not is beside the point. If she did, it didn't help her with her captors.
ed.
Comment Posted By Ted On 30.06.2008 @ 15:29
WAS MATTHEW MURRAY ENABLED BY THE CHRISTIAN BASHERS?
True, disrespectful comments about anybody's religion are to be avoided, regardless of how absurd a religion might seem.
I think Christians are "bashed" for 2 reasons:
they are the main religion, so religion- bashers would most frequently be Christian- bashers, not Zoroastrian- bashers;
Christianity is a mixture of monotheism and Paganism. The Pagan element remains fairly strong (e.g., the Trinity, the Saints, the Resurrection), so those who would bash religion would have at least 3 times as many reasons to bash Christianity.Still, it's not right to do this, and non-theists should be setting an example of decency and tolerance.
But people like Bill Gothard, whose teachings helped push Matthew over the edge, don't help create good will toward religious teachings.
Comment Posted By Ted On 18.12.2007 @ 19:12
BUSH VETOES CONGRESSIONAL INVITATION TO AL QAEDA TO SLAUGHTER IRAQIS
"the closer we get to the 2008 election, the better the chances that any veto of the Democrat’s invitation to al Qaeda to initiate a bloodbath in Iraq will be overridden"
Only two problems with this: first, there's already a bloodbath in Iraq; second, the invitation to al Qaeda to initiate it was given by the Bush administration in their failure to properly plan and conduct the occupation. See Thomas Ricks' book _Fiasco_ for the details of that.
Comment Posted By Ted On 2.05.2007 @ 11:24
Iran/ Syria provide a nuclear/atmoic weapon to Hiz in Lebanon. They provide a pretext to recommence hostilities. On or around August 22, they let fly with a long range Zelzal or similar to Tel Aviv.
Possible?
Comment Posted By Ted On 14.08.2006 @ 11:32
HUMBLED OLMERT ACCEPTS CEASE FIRE
This is a disaster for Israel. They have lost badly. My predictions:
1 Iran and Syria will order Hizbollah to stop firing missiles - and may even return the soldiers - and then go about taking over Lebanon over the next 2 years. By acting like a responsible ceasefire partner, Hiz gain more respect internationally and more credibility, thus more leverage to plot.
2 The increased prestige Hiz have gained will increase recruitment levels, and many Lebanese will now identify them as the true political force of Lebanon.
3 Iran and Syria will re-arm Hizbollah with weapons permitting deeper strikes into Israeli territory from north of the Litani.
4 Hiz's control in Lebanon will permit more recruitment, weapons storage and sanctuary for jihadists conducting terror in Iraq.
5 The UNIFIL force will be a total shambles, protecting neither the Israelis or the Lebanese. If they do nothing, they will be allowed to stand around. If they act against Hizbollah, expect a major terror attack on one of their barracks such as the Hiz attack on the US Marines in Beirut in the early 1980s.
6 Israel's vaunted deterrence has been smashed. Iran, Syria and other enemies of the state of Israel will take note.
7 The next round of missiles/ rockets will be far more powerful and probably tipped with WMD.
8 The Americans have been embarrassed by Olmert at the UN. They will be furious at his poor leadership. An outcome where Hizbollah comes out stronger than before the war is a defeat for America and a win for Iran. Not good news. The Pentagon will be apoplectic.
TD
We need to take into account the unpredictables. Hizbollah could do something stupid and create a pretext for Israel continuing the war - by say hitting Tel Aviv or executing the kidnapped soldiers. Olmert, under huge pressure domestically and seeing his future at risk, may have a change of heart tomorrow. Perhaps success on the ground may mean that Olmert is persuaded to continue the ground offensive. Iran may enter the fray. However as it stands things look dire for Israel.
I dont blame the Americans here. They gave Olmert & Co a lot of time to get this job done. The sad fact is that a major offensive now would take Hizbollah out of the equation. Olmert is an absolute disgrace and will be remembered as the man who exposed Israel to terrible danger.
Comment Posted By Ted On 12.08.2006 @ 07:40
THE IMMORALITY OF THE DEMOCRATS' POSITION ON THE WAR
I wanted to apologize for the posts that have been placed on this board under the pseudonym "BMOC."
Whoever is posting these messages is providing a link to a blog that I maintain. However, BMOC is not me. I have never been to this site before noticing the amount of traffic coming to my blog from this site.
"BMOC" is almost certainly an individual who lurks on my site from time to time who wants to embarrass me by posting idiotic messages linking to my site on conservative-themed websites. The sad thing is that he's been a victim of this himself (liberal posters putting up asinine posts linking to *his* website), and I stood up for him and did what I could to help track down the folks responsible for the faux postings.
Apparently he's embraced the very tactic he was victimized by.
At any rate, I just wanted to let you all know that "BMOC" is not me, and while I'd be more than happy to have you stop by my blog, I'd never say something as dopey what BMOC is attributing to me.
Thanks, and sorry again for the silly posts put up in my name.
Cheers,
Ted
Comment Posted By Ted On 21.06.2006 @ 16:51
LOOKING FOR HATE IN ALL THE WRONG PLACES
The firedoglake post is typical leftwing cant about conservatism being rife with racists and fascists, despite the control freak nature and the totalitarian instinct shown by the left in how they deal with a contrary thought.
Comment Posted By Ted On 8.04.2006 @ 17:22
THE COMPACT OF CIVIL SOCIETIES
This is nothing compared to the Tsunami.
Comment Posted By TED On 1.09.2005 @ 17:06
