Comments Posted By Robert
Displaying 21 To 30 Of 46 Comments
FOR CRISSAKES MY RIGHTY FRIENDS, LET'S GET A GRIP
I didn't know you were such an expert on what Obama would do as president. Of course everyone knows the President is powerless to do anything. They are merely figureheads. Also being such a wise person, so much smarter than everyone else you obviously know where you can put the your crystal ball.
Comment Posted By Robert On 26.10.2008 @ 23:40
IF ELECTED, OBAMA WILL BE MY PRESIDENT
Mwalimu Daudi:
That's exactly the kind of argument Democrats have used to justify their personal attacks on Bush.
If they try to bring back the Fairness Doctrine, it will be fought, and they will be punished. If they attempt to stifle speech, it will be fought, and they will be punished. If they attempt to impeach former officials, it will be fought, and the more successful they are, the more likely they will be punished.
Have some faith in our Republic. We're not going to improve it by making it weaker.
Comment Posted By Robert On 14.10.2008 @ 09:58
No, JD, we should work on forcing the Obama DOJ to investigate ACORN and their activities. If he does, then he's "turned" on his own, and ACORN goes down. If he doesn't, then he's exposed. That's called a win/win situation. That's called political hardball.
However, if it's attempted with the nastiness many Democrats have shown over the last eight years, it will just be seen as one fringe group against another, nothing will be accomplished, and the country will not be better off. That is what has to be avoided, and is what Rick is warning against.
Comment Posted By Robert On 14.10.2008 @ 09:43
I agree with Rick. Once the election is over, it's time to attack the policies, not the man.
Personal attacks might make the attacker feel good, but they rarely lead to meaningful progress. Did personal attacks drive Clinton out of office? No, and in his case, he did in fact break the law by lying under oath. But it was about something that most people regard as a personal matter, and voters punished the Republican party for pursuing impeachment. While I don't believe for a second that Clinton was subjected to anything like the nastiness directed against Bush, I also don't believe that stepping up the personal attacks to a Bush level would have hurt Clinton whatsoever.
What about Bush? Even after all of the vitriol directed against him, Bush still won re-election, with coattails. 2006 was a particularly ugly election, and would have been no cakewalk in any event with the situation in Iraq at the time - but in the end, Republicans lost control of Congress because they had forgotten why they were given control in the first place.
Go back to the Clinton years. Remember Hillary's grand plan in 1993 for the government to take over health care? It was fought, and quickly shelved by Clinton, and that was while Dems controlled every branch of government. The next year, the Republican party won control of Congress. It can happen with Obama, too, if we stay focused on fighting his attempts to remake America as a socialist utopia. Remember the Clinton DOJ's war against banks in the mid 90's, and their attempts to force them into making bad mortgage loans, which should have been a clear warning about where Democrats were headed with the policies that lead to the current financial crisis? No? Well, maybe that's the sort of thing that should have gotten more attention than his liaisons in the Oval Office.
Comment Posted By Robert On 14.10.2008 @ 09:20
REZKO SINGING: OBAMA SWEATING?
If this has to wait until after the election, it will mean nothing. There will be almost zero support behind going after a recently elected President. In fact, it will probably be a huge liability for anybody who does. And even if it turned out that Obama was too much of a crook to ignore, that would give us President Biden. Pass.
Comment Posted By Robert On 11.10.2008 @ 17:01
Well, I am going to have to agree, or perhaps disagree, with everyone here.
Palin's lack of knowledge about issues that anyone on the ticket for the highest office on planet Earth should scare anyone that listens to her. President Bush has alreaqdy shown how dangerous it is, on the world stage, to be a "down to Earth" all-american, but ignorant about a great many things.
Biden, as has already been put out on many blogs, looked lik a used-car salesman, with the sly smile of his, the "come take a look at this, you'll love it!" face, trying to sell someting he knows to be faulty. Just couldn't buy it.
I could not, would not want to, see either one of these people inthe highest office. I am really not sure who to vote for. I am not really interested in the two at the top of ticket, I am really, really, really not interested in the two in the VP slot.
At this point, I am really considering Barr/Root. We really do need a viable third party in this country. Tying to lump every issue into two camps is really a bad system.
Comment Posted By Robert On 3.10.2008 @ 09:57
OBAMA FLUBS HAMAS, HIZBULLAH MULLIGAN
I'm not what you would consider a devout man but I have this constant urge to pray for this for this country in the face of such lunacy.
Comment Posted By Robert On 16.05.2008 @ 16:02
ISRAEL: IRAN COULD HAVE NUKES BY '09
No More War For Zionist Israel! Enough.
Comment Posted By robert On 7.05.2008 @ 14:58
WHY THE POLITICIZATION OF GOVERNMENT IS WRONG
re: the damage their lack of willpower has done to the functioning of government will be difficult to repair when the next President takes office in 2008.
Maybe but to the extent you and other Bush supporters quickly repudiate what has happened, the better the chance for real governance by the time of the next President...
Comment Posted By Robert On 11.07.2007 @ 22:03
"24" SPECULATION FEST AND DEAD POOL
TV Guide had a short article in this week's edition (5/28-6/3) from one of the "24" bigwigs- Manny Coto- about the future of the show.
Coto said pretty unequivocally that Jack would be back.....but that CTU might not be. The confines of the show would be broadened by a departure from the familiarity of CTU- which is a sort of "anchor". I can see some merit in that. But I could also see that, for the audience, a lack of a familiar anchor might disorient viewers.
The plot, says Coto, will be less fantastical and more credible. It will "hew closer to real life; tighter, more personal." More personal than a fight with your own dad? Hmmm....
Coto also promises many new faces in next season's cast...along with a "few" returning characters. We're pulling for you, Chloe!
Coto also said that next season's villian would be unlike any we've seen so far. I think the comment was that the person would be "fascinating", "not a terrorist (nor a Muslim)" but rather "someone with a supremely dark past who's done something horrific."
As for Jack, Coto says that he will have "found a place he thinks he belongs" and that his new job [i]won't[/i] involve the government (at least nor at first....)" and that he won't be living "under an alias".
I won't be all that sad to see this season end- depending on who lives and who dies of course- because, even for a show that demands suspension of disbelief, this year's run asked alot of the viewer. Maybe a clean slate- or virtually clean anyway- will be just what the show needs for next year.
Comment Posted By Robert On 21.05.2007 @ 16:09
