Politics – A Republican victory in 2008 could sink America's reputation in the world even lower, at least, that's what Joe Conason thinks.
Not a member? Sign-up today!
2jojoyo
mekhifranks1975
slashup67
rylandl831968
asolious
maneetion
hatukabu
hyooo25
TGrass3001
splitrch
nitegarito
MaryLynn_
DigiWebSol
BJTJ
2mentors
outname
Wil
DigitalBuilder
qilla
followme
Natalie1183
misterkju
fuzzylog
PoliticalScientist
Dan and Jennifer
Progressive Bum
vipworld
Radiofreeeuropa
Divad
uncogito
DawudMiracle
freeky-d
scriblerus1
markreg
God
dunkirk
endtyranny
popbob
getreal1
cptnkrk
dadesider
Obaku
ShadowX
alakazam
corey.spring
dextrase
tchef
georged100
studentambassador
Schochee5
485)
Now, this is clearly a partisan piece. I don't know that I agree; I am not interested in appeasement, but I am interested in a different approach to the issue.
The problem is that ultimately, the Presidency is going to hinge on whether you believe that the current strategy is going to work in the near, middle and long term best interest of the United States and our interests, or not.
Let me know what you think.
"The Republicans most likely to win their party's presidential nomination constantly use language that is meant to inflame anger against Muslims for political advantage."
Yes, whilst clearly partisan, there's something to it. I think this line from the article is a perfect example of what's wrong with conservative rhetoric...the all or nothing, black and white, misinformation that is spread so irresponsibly.
That strategy is a perpetuation of the current one in use by the Adminsitration.
Ultimately US votes have to decide whether it's better to be "feared" than "loved", and naturally, there's a risk value to be assigned with each choice...and then there are the policy repercussions from those decisions, both domestically ind internationally.
Good points. I well remember the transition from Reagan to Bush 41. Both Republicans but whereas Reagan called for "lean and mean", GWH Bush called for a "kinder and gentler" America. Wouldn't hurt to have a little more kindness at times.
Get used to the idea of a Republican in the Oval Office in 2008.
The present crop of Dems has too much anti-Iraq rhetoric to be able to overcome the inevitable victory in Iraq.
And who gives a d*mn what France and Germany think?
I'll wait for the elections. As for the Dems, it's theirs to lose.
"I'll wait for the elections. As for the Dems, it's theirs to lose."
They did a pretty good job of blowing it in 2000 and 2004...
You want to know why the elderly are the chief cause of crime in America? Because they're so easy to beat up and rob....
The democrats didn't blow anything, so much as they simply stood still and got mugged by neo-pub crime syndicate. Will they stand still again? Maybe, maybe not. Are the fascist neo-pubs gonna try to mug 'em again? Gee, I wonder.. What are Kathryn Harris and Ken Blackwell doing these days?
Please define Victory.
A Democrat WILL be the next president. The country is no longer split 50-50 and thus elections are much harder for the GOP to steal.
And BTW, I meant to push the neg button...
Don't worry , I did one for you. Anyone that thinks the current strategy by the Reps is going to help them is delusional. I'm an Independent that is voting for CHANGE.
You guys are delusional if you think Hillary or Obama will beat anyone.
Hmmm weren't you saying that last Nov about Dems taking over Congress?
gator,
Please outline for us what victory means to you, since it seems that our current posturing and rhetoric about Iraq is somewhat ludicrous with every suicide bombing, Iraqi government disfunction, military leaders are calling for a political solution over a military one, and some of our own troops questioning why they're in Iraq. See if you can answer those questions without partisan wishfull thinking.
And who gives a d*mn what France and Germany think?>>>>
apparently you don't care what anyone thinks.. if rudy wins look out america.. look out world.. no freedoms, no liberties, no rights.. what would john and bobbie kennedy say about all of this.. i have an idea, ' the RATS are running the ship '.
wallyone: "what would john and bobbie kennedy say about all of this.."
I suspect that if JFK were alive today, he would be a republican and would support the actions in Iraq....as far as "Bobbie" is concerned, he would likely support many actions that have been undertaken in the name of national security (wire taps) since he authorized the illegal wire taps on several people while he was US AG.
ramblingwreck.. good handle , you have to be kidding or too young to remember what jfk stood for.. he wanted out of vietnam, get rid of the cia, the federal reserve bank and challenge americans to be better citizens.. what do we have now? people willing to believe any lie their government tells them as if that made them a patriot.. bobbie may have authorized wire taps, doubtfully illegal and for the purpose of ridding america of crime families which cost him his life and probably contributed to jfk's assassination.. get serious, rudy couldn't clean his boots and that goes for the rest of the candidates on both sides.. until one of them come out and says 9/11 needs reinvestigation i will believe they are all on the take.
suspect that if JFK were alive today, he would be a republican and would support the actions in Iraq>>>>
You suspect wrong. Kennedy didn't like the military industrial complex. Didn't trust em. Smart man, Kennedy.
Why are you scared of Rudy? Were you part of the filth he threw out of NYC? Or are you mad about how he made NYC one of the safest major cities in America? Maybe you are mad NYC's economy thrived so much while he was Mayor. Who knows? Either way, If you lived in Ny, you would know that Rudy did great things.
rudy was part of the 9/11 cover-up.. he pretended to be america's mayor all the while hindering the investigation of the steel.. shipping it under armed guard to someplace like china.. he is a Rat..
I see the tin foil hat truthers are out tonight. Ramblingwreck, correct me if I am wrong here.
Wally, Rambling Wreck is a Ga. Tech handle. Even as a Dawgs fan I can say that to me it shows he/she has studied at one of the nations best schools.
Actually Tangy what he says is correct. If you go back to when they tried to investigate WHY the building fell you'd remember they had a real hard time doing that since most of the steel had ALREADY been shipped off for smelting. Which was really unusual given that it was still being investigated and was evidence in the investigation.
There was no cover up! Dunny, I am really surprised by you on this. Please go back and find any pre9/11 documentary on the contsruction of the Twin Towers. In them you will learn that what held the buildings up, unlike any other building in the world, was their shell. You might have noticed how the exterior of the towers looked different than any other. That was what held the building up. Even before the '93 attacks critics of the design said it could not hold up against a bombing or even a natural disaster. That is most likely why they chose to attack those buildings. Both times.
Pssst going back pre-9/11 tells you how the building was SUPPOSED to have been constructed it tells you absolutely NOTHING about what happened ON 9/11. Looking AFTER 9/11 tells you what failed and HOW it WAS constructed. It shows you exactly WHAT connections failed and why. ESPECIALLY since the towers were EXPECTED to withstand and in fact DID withstand being slammed into by the planes. It seems the resulting fires are what did it in BUT having the beams available to inspect would have shown that early on. It still goes beyond belief that those beams would have been sold WHILE an active investigation is ongoing.
Altho for you to question this isn't surprising since you think electrifying a fence along the Mexico - US Border is childsplay and foolproof. Again, ya gotta stop splitting boards with your forehead, you seem to be missing the obvious.
I guess for you dunny. When you lack something intelligent to say, you resort to making fun of martial arts. You are a sad little man.
ROFLMAO, maybe you should ONLY come on here when you have the reader around so someone can explain the posts to you.
thats why rudy looks the other way when police have rule of the city and kill innocent civillians
Oh yeah? Can you show me where that has happened?
With the Euro stronger than the dollar and growing ever more so, America will have to care what Europeans say and decide! Americans have always hit on all cylinders mentally when it comes to their wallets....
Then why would any American ever consider allowing the leftists taxer socialists reach into their pockets again?
ROFLMAO because they;ve seen what happens when they give the REPUBLICANS access to a credit card.
Remember - if social democratists (the ruling parties across the EU) are bad for peoples' pockets, then why is the EU's collective economy prospering much more than America's?
I'm with you, invest07. Of course, I'm sure that when the French and Germans go to the polls they are concerned with what Americans think...
ROFLMAO, inevitable victory? Which corner are you turning now?
postaphis, Ala, "Speak softly and carry a big stick".
Theodore Roosevelt, Republican,..former Bull Moose.
(Nods to Sumptousdigs)
Ah, TR - the first Politician with the brains to propose National Single Payer Health Care in the U.S.
3 words can make all the difference in how we are perceived and what the ultimate response will be:
BRING IT ON.
GIT ER DONE.
MISHUN A COMPLISHT
More quarrels could be won with
WE CAN HELP
LET US TALK
WE WANT PEACE
Add to those:
IT'S ALLOUR FAULT
WE'LL DOANYTHING FORPEACE
WE'LL TURNTHEOTHER CHEEK
in fact
WE'LL BENDOVER FORYA
WEWANNA BE POPULAR
WE FEELYOUR PAIN
WHYCANT WEALLJUST GETALONG
WHERE CANWE SENDTHECHECK
I would rather have people love me for my kindness and generosity than hate me for my cruelty and greed.
It tends to be interesting to read Right Wingers comments concerning that. There was a study done by UC @ Berkely (get ready for the right wingers on this one, they see Berkely and they start foaming) that studied a group of children from grade school thru early adult hood. What they found was those people who tended to be bullied, introverted tended to decalre themselves as REPUBLICANS. THose who were more confident and outgoing, yup you guessed it, tended to declare themselves as Democrats. It seems this desire for beating everything into submission that Repugs tend to exhibit today sounds like their need to overcome that past.
"WHERE CANWE SENDTHECHECK"
To Israel, of course.
You mean 'loved or 'hated', muslims fear nobody and thats just another lesson the neocons/zionists, and sadly normal americans haven't learned yet. Ironically, the outcome of the afghan/iraq campaigns was even LESS fear of the USA by even secular muslims. 'Fear' of the USA is not in the vocabulary of this part of the world - the middle east that is.
Personally, I don't want to be loved or feared. I'd rather be respected. I'll say this, if the dumb ass who is the current president, was more like his dad we wouldn't be in such a mess. Through good diplomacy, he was able to create a coalition of the willing, instead a coalition of the arm twisted
Quick, isn't Obama the one that most recently sent a comment that inflamed Muslims in a foriegn state? They're still rioting in Pakistan over his comments.
However, I agree in some form that the republican montra is definately more agressive toward muslim nations than the democratic montra. My question is since when is the appeasment of muslims the best stragedy or even a consideration?
THere's a difference between being tough and being a bully. Bully's are smelled first, not heard. And when you get a buffoon who is a bully, then that is an open invitation to all other bullies to test his bilk.
Some of us could sense this from the beginning and the results are no surprise because it is a predictable as the sun rising.
BTW, remember how GWBully failed his first challenge in office and his polls dropped? THe so-called "crisis" with the PC3 Orion that was captured and gutted by China? How TOUGH was this bully then? HUH?
railroad,
What is appeasement in this case?
Also indicates what is wrong with "Liberal" (or at least anti-republican) rhetoric.
all or nothing, black and white etc.. and throw in a good bit of disinformation to make the case better.
I don't want to use the "why can't we just get along" (LAME) response but how about why can't we at least try to listen to each others opinions.
I really stop caring what someone thinks as soon as they start using words like "nazi" or "commie" call someone "hitler" or the like.
"...all or nothing, black and white etc.. and throw in a good bit of disinformation to make the case better."
Um, isn't that REALLY what the neo-cons do? Honesty, I've never seen such a crop of black-and-white thinkers as seem to be among the conservatives posting here at netscape.
And disinformation? Please! You people are living in an alternate reality. You hard-core righties hold up Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly as paragons of virtue and believe that George W. Bush is a good and competent president. No matter how the facts are stacked against you, the denial seems to become more entrenched.
Quite honesty, it all astounds the hell out of me!
Hard-core righties do not like Bill O'Reilly, sorry to inform you... very few of them do. Why? because if you actually bother to listen to him or watch his show, you'd see he is pretty much right down the middle... and well, hard-core's on either side of the fence don't like him.
Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly are not even close to being on the same plane of beliefs/values, except for when it comes to hate groups on the left... besides, Ann Coulter is an extreme-hard right 'shock-jock' type of persionality... O'Reilly is not... and O'Reilly also exposes hate groups on the left frequently. Also, he puts people opposed to his views to keep it balanced and will give them a platform almost no one else will, regardless.
The other 'shock-jock' type of person on the left you could compare Coulter to would be either Bill Mahr or Al Franken... and at times you could throw in Keith Olbermann, whose vitriol is clear and evident, while at other times quite moderate... a very puzzling individual.