Comments Posted By Mike Devx
Displaying 1 To 8 Of 8 Comments


Why can't Obama be hit on the issue of: When has he ever succeeded at reform or change?

1. What reform or change did Obama succeed at while in Chicago?
A. The Annenberg Challenge - millions of dollars, no effect. Leaders: Obama and William Ayers
B. Housing reform - Complete failure, poor people even worse off, while his rich friends skated away with millions, including Tony Rezko

2. What reform or change did Obama succeed at in the US Senate
Nothing. He led nothing. He joined onto efforts led by others, as a cosigner, but did not lead.

In other words, he's got absolutely no record of success at anything significant that I'm aware of.

If I'm wrong about anything that I've missed that he has accomplished, I'd love to know. The fact that no one is hitting Obama about never succeeding at anything, means I must be missing something?

Comment Posted By Mike Devx On 3.10.2008 @ 23:04


If you read history, the American populace often feels we are at the brink of disaster. That we're going to hell in a handbasket.

I remember the 80's, when Japan was "cleaning our clock" and America was already just a few days away from the sunset, and permanent night. Read the last few pages of "Rising Sun" by Michael Crichton again, to get a sense of our sense of American doom.

No nation lasts forever. But I think we've got at least a good hundred years of good ahead of us. Tragedies and natural catastrophes will happen. Wars will occur. And we'll keep going on.

Comment Posted By Mike Devx On 28.09.2008 @ 18:44



I believe events are proving John McCain prescient.

McCain knew he had to get to Washington. He also knew that the debate, as all debates do, was going to require him to disappear for much oof two days to hone his debate points and message.

Then McCain is dealing with calls from Paulson late Tuesday and Wednesday to publicly support "the bill". What bill? It's still being hashed out in private. Calls from slimy Harry Reid and Pelosi that if McCain did not support "the bill", there could be no consensus. Calls from Republicans.

What in the world was he to do? Couldn't you at least discuss the thorny position this puts him in? If he's going to support "the bill", he'd better be in Washington discussing it closely. And he's no dummy: The Democrats want to hang it on his neck, and he knows it. Look at all the Democrat talking points today. McCain decided he wanted a hand in the resulting bill if he's going to be under all this pressure to be a team player.

The campaign gimmick was only in *suspending* the campaign, not in taking a personal break from it. There was no way to properly do the debate and participate in creating the resulting bill. McCain made sure that the clarity of what he was doing was perfectly clear. He certainly didn't have to go as far as he did. But he did. What's so terrible about that?

And the debate was going to be about foreign policy. The moderators are surely nearly completely ready with their questions. The only meaningful debate would have switched the topic to economic affairs, making it a seat of the pants affair. What's the sense in that?

And now the Democrats have blown up completely today, and McCain *is* in Washington, helping with a Senate bipartisan effort, in close discussions with conservative House members on interesting changes in the bill that would support conservative principles!

And everyone thinks it's just a political stunt. I can't understand why more conservatives aren't being more considerate of McCain. You, and they, seem to hardly even be trying to put yourselves in his shoes, and attempt to defend what are obviously reasonable positions. Please don't pull a George Will, a Charles Krauthammer.

Comment Posted By Mike Devx On 26.09.2008 @ 02:15


Oh, Rick, such defeatism!

Barack Obama spent his entire convention speech slamming Republicans. John McCain spent a significant part of his convention speech boldly saying that Republicans had lost their way. That took great courage on McCain's part and makes it clear what his agenda will be.

Republicans will not gain control of either house of Congress. They are already in the wilderness. McCain will - if he maintains his proper fortitude - he will be able to push them.

I would rather support John McCain in his efforts for reform than to abandon the fight. I'd rather support John McCain, with his 100% rating against the anonymous, last-minute, back-room, lobbyist-written earmark process in Washington D.C., than to abandon the fight.

I'd rather fight, with hope and optimism, than ever slink away. We've got the right candidate for the right time. Let's not descend into pessimism and throw it all away.

Comment Posted By Mike Devx On 17.09.2008 @ 11:17


I do not think it is too early for pro-American Iraq war movies.
Nor for pro-American anti-Jihad-terrorist movies.

We were making popular WWII movies soon after Dec 7 1941. In these movies, Japan and Germany were clear villians. There was no quibbling, no moral equivalency between "them an us".

It hasn't been tried yet. Isn't that very strange? It should have been tried, even with a relatively small budget for limited war-themed FX. Get a fantastic script that really has us rooting for the good guys, and hissing the bad guys, get the movie out there, and see how it does.

We'd be surprised, I think.

Comment Posted By Mike Devx On 30.03.2008 @ 08:08


It's not at all clear to me whether the Mehdi army is a well-coordinated insurgency vs a well-coordinated Iranian front group.

But they're clearly not just a bunch of loose Mafia-style wel armed criminals lording it over their small domains.

I've heard that the Iraqi Shiites are not pro-Iranian. However, this smells a great deal like an Iranian front group to me, flexing its power. I've got no proof either, however.

Comment Posted By Mike Devx On 30.03.2008 @ 08:27


We will either create a vast unfunded, unpayable debt that will crash the country, or we will ration health care.

When government rations ANYTHING, it gets ugly very quickly, because government is incredibly inefficient and incompetent. The situation surrounding rationed health care - due to the illogical choices that government will make - will quickly come to appear insane.

We have a safety net in place to help the very poor and to stop a free fall from ending in horror. We probably do need a safety net in place for people dealing with medical issues. We ALMOST have such a net in place right now: A trip to the emergency room is always handled. Making this a taxed policy of the government rather than an unfunded mandate on the hospitals would ensure that these hospitals don't have to shut their doors, which is what is beginning to happen.

I don't deserve blood work or an MRI every week. I don't deserve a top of the line drug costing $1000 every month when another drug costing $100 per month is available and is nearly as effective. I don't deserve all these things for free - and any nationalized health care system would cause these things.

Comment Posted By Mike Devx On 16.02.2008 @ 12:29


Rick, such defeatism...

If we do nothing, we look weak, and Iran gets ever more aggressive across the Middle East, and especially so in Iraq.

If we resist Iranian escalations in Iraq by attacking along the border and even into Iranian terroritory, then we provoke a response far worse than anything we should imagine.

This means that there is no recourse, no action to be taken, no hope. We are entirely at the mercy of other people, and merely hope that the Iranian civilian population can save us, Save Us, SAVE US, from ourselves! (Please SAVE US!!!)

There is something very wrong with the picture.

Comment Posted By Mike Devx On 17.08.2007 @ 07:46

Powered by WordPress



Pages (1) : [1]

«« Back To Stats Page