Comments Posted By Carolynp
Displaying 1 To 5 Of 5 Comments
I'm actually shocked that anyone would accuse you of being optimistic on Iraq. I truly appreciated your honesty in the last article that you reference. I'm pretty far right and I'm a Bush fan, but that doesn't mean I need blinders or that I don't want the truth. That said, I notice people have selective memory regarding Iraq. I remember reading in Newsweek that Iraq's jets were stepping up attacks (crowding, etc...) by 400% the month Bush took office. It seems apparent to me that Hussein was attempting to provoke Bush into a confrontation and that he thought Bush would never have the political will to follow through on. I don't agree that 9/11 was "the" cause of the US invasion of Iraq, I believe that Hussein caused a US invasion by refusing to honor the peace accords that he had signed. 9/11 created the political will, but the writing was on the wall. In my opinion, the US would have already suffered another 9/11 if there had been no show of US force in the middle east. I don't have half the education that you and Mr. Crittendon have, so I am probably in the wrong on this. I still think all of these nations would have stronger al queda factions if the US hadn't taken action in Iraq.
Comment Posted By carolynp On 14.12.2008 @ 19:40
Surabaya Stew Said:
5:30 pmA real man would fly to Washington to handle the crisis AND do the debate on Friday. Why is this beyond the ability of either candidate?
Because, sigh, once again, they cannot be in two places at the same time. If the negotiations on the deal take any time at all (cmon, we're talking billions of dollars, shouldn't they take a bit of time on this?), it could very well go into the weekend and into next week. This is a dem talking point, and Obama started it. He had his pal Reid call for McCain to come back to DC, then had him say, "No Barry, we don't need you." So Obama could say it was just a ploy for McCain to go back. He set him up with a no win. If McCain hadn't gone back, Obama could have said, "Look, he doesn't care about the crisis." When he did go back, Obama said that he should be able to multi task, as he KNEW McCain couldn't be in two places at once. I wish that would bite Obama in the fanny, but of course it won't.
Comment Posted By Carolynp On 25.09.2008 @ 19:38
vioce of reason, errr...whatever. McCain has been BEGGING to get Obama on the stage for months, doubt he's worried about it. When he gets him there, he'll soundly kick his fanny because Obama can only do well if no one challenges him (and frankly, no one has, with the possible exception of O'Reilly). We had a party planned for the event, too, so you know I'm not overjoyed, but facts are facts: Obama doesn't think this pesky little economy thing is any big deal. Just like the pesky little terrorism thing: no big, other people can handle it. Reid called for McCain to come back and help settle the issue, but said he didn't need Obama to come help: EVEN THE DEMOCRATS KNOW HE'S USELESS. Being in two places at the same time isn't multi-tasking, it's omnipresence: do you guys have a lock on that now? I don't think you do. I think you just like talk better than reality.
Comment Posted By Carolynp On 25.09.2008 @ 13:35
I disagree with all the people who are calling this a political ploy. To me, campaigning is useless, stupid work. Why would Obama say, "Hey, spending seventy-two hours in a hotel room preparing to talk to you on a stage is FAR more important than participating in solving national financial crisis." Do you guys really believe that putting these two men on a stage is more important than putting them to work? The suggestion that they have to practice is ludicrously opposed to the point to a debate anyway. Don't these guys KNOW the answers to the questions they're going to be asked? This is just another example of politicians being stupid. OF COURSE they should cancel the debate. There is work to be done.
Comment Posted By Carolynp On 25.09.2008 @ 11:57
BLOGS MISSING THE REAL STORY AS USUAL
Awesome article! I worry that we are forgetting end game on the right. Is our goal really to beat opposers into the ground? Or is it to logic others to our side?
Comment Posted By Carolynp On 7.08.2007 @ 16:29
