Comments Posted By Rick Moran
Displaying 331 To 340 Of 1317 Comments
While the Republican party is all in favor of build walls at the border and other punitive measure directed at illegals, you here almost nothing about actually enforcing the laws against employers who hire illegals and exploit them.
Holy Jesus are you kidding me?
You really should read something about Republicans on immigration besides Kos or Think Progress. Every single pro enforcement member of Congress not to mention blogger has been SKEWERING the Chamber of Commerce, NAM, NFIB, and other business groups FOR YEARS! It is absolutely vital that along with closing down the borders we severely punish employers who hire illegals - EVEN IF THEY DO IT UNKNOWINGLY!
Your remark was pathetic and indicative that you have no clue of what you're talking about.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 18.05.2007 @ 12:01
COMEY'S TALE RAISES STAKES FOR BUSH
I thought very seriously of disabling comments on this post because of idiots like you.
THERE IS NOT ONE IOTA OF PROOF - NOT ONE ANYWHERE - THAT THIS PROGRAM WAS USED FOR ANY BUT ITS INTENDED PURPOSE. NOT ONE.
And for you to say otherwise reveals you to be a paranoid loon and not a serious man.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 17.05.2007 @ 09:31
Tom:
If you're still lurking, this piece on a Brookings Study on our current options in Iraq is interesting.
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/17218752.htm
This option is probably closest to my thinking at the moment:
"CONTAINING THE DAMAGE
If the United States decides it can't stop civil war in Iraq, an option short of withdrawal is to redeploy U.S. troops out of Iraq's cities and closer to its borders. There, they would provide haven for refugees fleeing the violence and try to stop foreign fighters from crossing into Iraq.
U.S. diplomacy would be pivotal in preventing Iraq from becoming a battlefield for its neighbors. Washington would have to persuade Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia not to intervene to defend their interests.
The past record of containing spillovers from civil war "is poor," states a January Brookings Institution report. "Despite these odds, if Iraq does descend into all-out civil war, the United States probably will have no choice but to try to contain it."
The report recommended more than a dozen steps, including establishing "catch basins" in Iraq borders to protect refugees. "This option would require the extensive and continued use of U.S. forces," it said.
Pollack acknowledged that containment "is going to be hard to make work" politically, not least because of the sight of U.S. soldiers ignoring the likely ethnic slaughter in Baghdad and other cities."
The question I have is whether a large enough US force would be a deterrent to the kind of wholesale slaughter that you seem to be predicting. But even if it isn't, there really aren't too many other options as the Brookings boys point out.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 14.05.2007 @ 07:30
I gave up on "victory" as defined by the President and most of the right months ago, something you would once again know if you read any of my stuff. Instead, like some lock step lefty, you assume facts not in evidence and over generalize the positions of people you believe disagree with you.
That is shallow thinking, Tom. I would have expected better from you.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 13.05.2007 @ 14:22
I take you too believe in the lefties’ No. 1 Article of Faith – nothing bad happens in the world unless the United States makes it happen.
Pretty shallow - and, an exaggeration of course.
And I actually agree with Jim - that the best we can do is mitigate disaster - something you would have known if you've read any of my other stuff. But you were too busy throwing your own tantrum.
The point isn't that the US is to blame or that it's our fault. The point is that it is our responsibility to do what we can in the context of our national interest to keep a Darfur from occurring in Iraq. Or perhaps my India-Pakistan partition example is more apropos of what would happen.
Either way, Kondracke is not being pragmatic for suggesting we back Maliki. He's being dumb. That empty suit of a Prime Minister has been playing us for fools for more than a year, promising the moon and delivering considerably less. And to believe that our support would turn into some kind of Shia gratitude sounds like beginning of the war pipe dreams about Iraqis greeting us with flowers.
Perhaps the ultimate question is if, as you say, this has been written in the stars and is unalterable, why bother at all? Why not just pack up and come home - as the left wants. The alternative is to have American troops standing by and allowing thousands - perhaps tens of thousands - of Iraqi Sunnis be slaughtered while millions are driven from their homes.
If that's "pragmatism," count me out.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 13.05.2007 @ 13:25
"And you wonder why you are losing readers?
Not true. I know exactly why people like you are not coming back.
The unflattering reason - you don't want to know.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 11.05.2007 @ 14:04
ASSAD SHOWS HIS THANKS TO NANCY, CONDI FOR THEIR EFFORTS
Per Q & O:
"Several readers this morning have already commented to me that Jim Quinn, political talk show host based here in Pittsburgh from 104.7 WPGB, has cited a source with authority on the subject that Howard Dean personally called the Governor to set the wheels in motion for her to claim that efforts were being hampered by lack of equipment due to the war in Iraq.
The story is plausible because both Senator Sam Brownback and the White House have issued conflicting stories where, after contacting officials in the state, they were told there were plenty of resources for the recovery effort.
The source claims that Sebeliuss called Senator Brownback to express her regret over the remarks and reassure him that they were not her own feelings but that rather those of the Democratic leadership."
Brownback issued a statement where he quotes the Commander of the Kansas Guard saying that they had everything they needed and that the governor's claims were false.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 10.05.2007 @ 11:26
Why invade? Not necessary to accomplish the goal of making Assad do what is necessary to keep foreign fighters from crossing into Iraq.
And the NG story is a lie - you're about 2 days behind the debunking of that myth.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 10.05.2007 @ 10:11
Ray:
You have the brains of a goat and the memory of a flea.
http://rightwingnews.com/quotes/demsonwmds.php
Every major intel agency in the west thought Saddam had WMD stockpiles - including El Baradei and the IAEA believing he was close to reconstituting his nuke program. Tommy Franks was warned by Putin, Chiraq, Mubarak, and other world leaders that Saddam would use chemical weapons on our troops during the invasion.
Your selective memory rewrite is idiotic to anyone who knows how to Google. Go away.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 10.05.2007 @ 18:31
I WISH WE COULD HAVE AN ELECTION LIKE THAT
Frank:
I was basically referring to the laying to rest the ghosts of the 1960's. If 9/11 couldn't do it, I wonder what can?
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 7.05.2007 @ 09:35
