Comments Posted By funny man
Displaying 471 To 480 Of 492 Comments
HALFWAY HOME AND DEMS STILL CAN'T FIND UNITY
retire05:
Comment Posted By funny man On 28.08.2008 @ 11:50
when did I say Michelle was a victim? Yeah, I know blah, blah, she only got in because of basketball, affirmative action. Middle class, working class what is the difference here? She didn't come from a background of academics but her family had, IMHO, pretty conservative family values as does her current family. I'm not going to be a cheerleader of her politics but looking at her life's work I do admire her. Luckily the old guard of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are history as most AAs that I know don't even take them serious anymore. They just love media attention the way a drug addict needs his fix. Just like so called conservatives named Coulter, Hannity and the likes. Down the toilet with all of them.
Why can't we have a discussion of how to fix our health care system then all this petty nonsense.
In my opinion some Hillary supporters are dragging their feet just as a lot of conservatives are still going to vote for McCain in spite of a lot of things. Frankly, I don't have the nerve to watch through an entire convention regardless of the party, just too boring. However, I watch the highlights and Hillary gave a good speech just as you have pointed out. I also thought Michelle gave a great speech. I mean politics aside, her story is compelling. I used to live in inner city Detroit for a few years and I know she had to fight her way out. I don't agree with her politics but I admire her for her accomplishments.
Comment Posted By funny man On 27.08.2008 @ 13:53
If the Dems keep the focus on economics they will win. That is just my opinion.
I just look at the whole thing as a chess game that both sides want to win. You move your people and opinions in a way to have a stronger position and win the game. Are there really morals involved, yeah right, I thought so. Unfortunately this has absolutely nothing to do with left and right, conservative and liberal or whatever else you can find.
Comment Posted By funny man On 19.08.2008 @ 19:27
Rick, with the war now winding down, here is my take on this. However, I surely do not have a silver bullet on how to handle situations like this. So here it goes: this conflict had been simmering for a while and Russia did (does) not like Mikheil Saakashvili. However, here is where I disagree with Kagan: the Georgian side totally miscalculated this adventure and was hoping the West would back them when they attacked (and they first attacked). Russia saw their chance went in and will now be open for 'negotiations'. You will see Saakashvili is finished cause Russia will demand talks only without him. BTW, we need Russia for our dealings with Teheran so nobody ever considered military actions against them (except some posters). In my opinion the West was outmaneuvered and all that Georgia joining NATO talk will have to wait until the very distant future. Do I have some sympathy for those little democracies? Sure, but they have to be realistic about their surroundings and don't expect a Pax Americana for the whole world. Lastly, I agree with some posters that sometimes you have to stand up for your beliefs. This conflict wasn't that occasion and please don't constantly see 'appeasement' written on every wall. We didn't have to fight the Soviet Union fortunately and we were able to 'wait' them out, remember?
I'm afraid I agree with much of what you say. I think this is a case where everyone overreacted - including the Georgians who miscalculated the Russian response. This is not to blame them for the invasion but it showed poor statecraft on Shaashvili's part.
I am not so sure that the NATO membership isn't going to be hurried along - especially in the case of the Ukraine who is really under the gun now. But we'll see how bold NATO wants to play it with Putin. Could be they'll just pack it in and let the whole region fall back into the Russian orbit.
ed.
Comment Posted By funny man On 12.08.2008 @ 13:52
Is it really in America's interest do get drawn into this. I'm a conservative who has had it with the crazy neocons. I blame them most for our current perceived weakness and I'm worried about McCain's shoot from the hip style. This is a good piece that already had John's trip to South Ossetia in it.
http://www.amconmag.com/2008/2008_02_11/cover.htmlI appreciate the concerns of those who wish this would just go away or that it is not our concern. But the Caucasus - even without the oil and gas which all goes to Europe by the way, none here - is next to the Middle East, the most strategically important area on the planet. It is, as I say in the article, the back door to the Persian Gulf - a door the Kremlin has been trying to pry open for 150 years. The Black Sea is hugely important to central Europe and those ports in Georgia handle a lot of tonnage destined for us as well as our European friends.
As a side note, there does appear to be genuine attempts to bring democracy to states that previously were held under Russia's thumb - or one of their stooges. I don't see how we can just turn our back on that aspect of the regions importance.
ed.
Comment Posted By funny man On 11.08.2008 @ 17:12
The world does not revolve around the Obama/McCain race. Russia's expansion into the Caucasus began under the Czar in the 19th century. Have fun reading Tolstoy, Dostoevsky etc. I'm not saying Russia is right here, all I'm saying is that you should try to understand Russians. Russia always felt they had a special place in the world and that is a line that goes from at least as far back as the Napoleonic Wars (more recent just read some comments of Solzhenitsyn). Anyway, they surely feel humiliated by the West and that's a dangerous place to be (for all of us). The problem is: how much do we want to antagonize Russia? I think every sensible mind would see that there should not be a military conflict with Russia (and that has nothing to do with Iraq) because that clearly is not in our interest. Of course Russia doesn't really care about South Ossetia but there were waiting for Georgia to make the wrong move which they did. Now what? I don't think Russia wants to occupy Georgia but Yes, they wanted to send a message to the Ukraine and others that they no longer fool around. Anyway, to repeat myself whether Obama makes a 'weak' statement or McCain 'strongly' condemns, Putin will give a rat's ass (and the majority of Russians).
Comment Posted By funny man On 11.08.2008 @ 14:11
USING RIDICULE AS A WEAPON COULD BACKFIRE ON McCAIN
There is a German saying "Humor ist wenn man trotzdem lacht" (humor is laughing in spite (of it all)). It's always good to make fun especially of oneself. Difficult for politicians with big ego (are there others?) to take. Anyway just in case people on this blog haven't noticed even Obama supporters are not too happy about the state of affairs:
http://www.theroot.com/id/47621
Comment Posted By funny man On 13.08.2008 @ 11:46
This conflict has it's root in Stalin's rule and how he set up boundaries. The conflict was not solved in the nineties and simmered on. Georgia was given the understanding that they can only join NATO if these two conflicts (also with Abchasia) are solved. The West (and especially Bush) made the big mistake on not being clear about their objectives in the region. So the Georgian president gambled and lost. And to some of the hawkish posters on this site I have to say this: just imagine how good it feels for the wounded superpower to show the world who is boss in that region. BTW, there is nothing that anyone can do about it.
Comment Posted By funny man On 10.08.2008 @ 16:16
'WHY OBAMA CAN'T WIN' - CASTELLANOS
I'm so bored with this he said, she said. I mean wtf, Dems/Reps are both hypocrites. Men are dogs, why constantly write about it.
Comment Posted By funny man On 7.08.2008 @ 01:05
I know this election will never be about issues so let's all enjoy the Paris Hilton show (I actually thought her ad was pretty funny).
Civility in warfare was introduced, in part, after the horrors of the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) in Germany. Of course that intent went down in WWI and surely in WWII. However, the prospect of relatively benign treatment by the Americans and Brits made the prospect of surrender for the average German soldier much more attractive then being sent to Siberia. BTW, the Germans also didn't torture the American POWs. That short excursion into history was meant to illustrate that respect for the dignity of individuals and nations has served the Western World well and shouldn't be given up, period. What is to be gained? Al Quaida are just a bunch of criminals that don't really pose a serious threat. I mean who cares what these morons think. More importantly, how can anyone justify torture if you believe in Western values as I hope Conservatives do? Torture and Western values don't go together and that is the end of the story!
Comment Posted By funny man On 4.08.2008 @ 00:31
