It’s just a QT3 meme, there’s no hate. Do people hate Koontz or do they just like to goof on him for his idiosyncrasies? Do people hate DeepT or do they just like to marvel at his, um, creativity? Did people hate TRexDX or just like to make fun of someone who gnaws on his own hand and then asks medical advice about it?
Probably for the same reason most of us do. Because someone still listens and occasionally says something worthwhile in return. Self pity doesn’t suit you.
FWIW I don’t hate ‘bags. I’ve only read a bit of the First Date Smoochin’ Tread (that mamajamma is looooonnnngg) But in his first post on this thread he ointlessly misogynisticly calls Hill a “cunt”.
He’s pretty much wearing the asshat at that point isn’t he?
Anyway, back to the point, if George W. Bush wasnt the son of George H.W. Bush, we wouldn’t be burdened with his feckless administration. It is possible that Hillary could a mayor, or city councilperson somewhere, maybe even a state rep. But a Senator (from NY no less) and presumed presidential frontrunner without her marriage to Bill? Pshaw.
So her personal life is important.
I think Hillary is certainly talented and intelligent, she does not have the requisite political tools to be an effective president. At best her administration would single handedly reenergize the GOP, at worst she would lose the white house along with congress by 2012.
Jesus Christ stop being such a fucking pussy.
What’s really interesting is the strategy behind these books - attacking Hillory, not personally, not as a women, but on those points which her supporters most often believe; that she is intelligent, driven, self aware, cunning, the woman behind the throne, ect. Painting her as a devoted mother that instead of a scheming, cynical politician.
Pretty smart, imo.
Got it. Thanks, you magnificient transexual bastard.
Maybe if people hadn’t run around thoughtlessly calling me a “dickhead”, “cock”, or “prick” every time I acted in an overbearing manner, I wouldn’t have felt the need to blow through my retirement fund swapping my outie for an innie.
If only everyone were as sensitive and thoughtful as you, gentle sir.
I heart you Glenn. Post pictures.
A person affiliated with a rival campaign directed my attention to this Ted Koppel commentary on NPR in which he observes:
[INDENT]I ran into an old source the other day who held a senior position at the Pentagon until his retirement. He occasionally briefs Senator Clinton on the situation in the Gulf. She told him that if she were elected president and then re-elected four years later she would still expect U.S. troops to be in Iraq at the end of her second term.
[/INDENT]
I’m sure, barring a total collapse, 'a la Vietnam (in this case there is no force big enough to take over the whole country, unless Iran invades, in which case, Apocalypse, ect), that we will have a military presence in Iraq for the next 20 years. We are still in Kosovo, and that was a sucess. Bush broke it, we will be making payments for a long time.
So, I’d give Hillary points for honesty,y’know, if she actually said this stuff out loud. What is not clear (from the link) is the size and scope of US military involvement in Iraq under Hillary. Given her “Hillary must be Strongest of All!” stance, stemming from the inevitable attacks from the right that she will be too weak, I’m guessing her footprint would be a lot bigger than even some of her GOP rivals.
Well, the difference I think with Kosovo is that we won, and the population doesn’t hate us.
What concerns me about Hillary is that her opinion on Iraq is basically “good idea, Bush fucked it up.” You can’t unshit the bed - it’s fucked now. She’s presented no grand ideas about how to somehow make it work. So right now, I have to interpret that as “keep the troops there dying for years and years with no end in sight just like Bush”.
By contrast, Obama’s position is that it was a stupid idea in the first place, not just a process criticism. I’d expect him to actually make big changes like leaving, not continue this idiotic strategic occupation for oil access crap.
I do think we have some obligation to defend the innocents in Iraq. We broke their country. Lets not forget whom was laying dukes in the matress.
Has Obama called for complete withdrawl? It sounds great, but its in it own way irresponsible.
It’s not irresponsible to call for a complete withdrawal. It’s irresponsible to just withdraw without careful planning and cooperation with the Iraqis and others who stay after the pullout.
We will never completely withdraw. We are still in just about every country we have had military conflicts with. Japan, Germany, Korea ect. Hell, we still have troops in Cuba (or am I mistaken Guantanamo is in Cuba?). I suspect we will have a heavily fortified base that protects a small area in Bagdad, some troops stationed in “friendly” areas, and a larger garrison in Kuwait (in case Osama makes an appearance or Iran decides to break bad).
In any case the next president will withdraw some troops and decrease our footprint, the Iraqis are going to have to stand on their own at some point (then maybe we’ll let them vote us out of the country).
If she can just straighten out on the family values/video games bullshit, she’s got my vote. I suspect that doesn’t mirror very many other potential voters who’ve formerly voted Republican, so it’s not much of a trend. But it is the kind of realistic attitude that deals with the war-head on as the miserable mess it’s become rather than the peachy keen world it would be if Americans just left.
By contrast, Obama’s position is that it was a stupid idea in the first place, not just a process criticism. I’d expect him to actually make big changes like leaving, not continue this idiotic strategic occupation for oil access crap.
I’d expect him to disappoint you, then. No matter how much he wanted to, it would be physically impossible to leave Iraq in any sub 4 year timeframe without potentially turning over a ridiculous number of military assets to Iran and other assorted undesirables. A lot could be done to reverse that trend, but I personally do not relish the thought of Ahmenidajabad tooling around in an uparmoured Humvee.
I don’t expect him to up and leave overnight. I just want a commitment not to colonize the damn place as the 51st state of the American empire.
Do you regard our commitment to Korea as colonization? Because that’s the best case scenario…
Sort of. Look at Korea in retrospect - we supported a right wing dictator for years and years there, including quite willingly letting him use troops under the unified command suppress a rebellion for free speech. The Koreans in opinion polls sure act like they do, for that matter.
…Or controlling both Iran and Iraq’s oilfields.
I’m still for Obama, but I do the “reality vs campaign retoric” math in my head and see us in Iraq for the foreseeable future, even into his Second Wildly Sucessful Term.
- Karnac