Letters to the Editor
Jebbie
Published Letters: 1093
-
Good Morning, Shooter
[Read the article: Keith Olbermann's reply and Obama's secret plan to protect the rule of law]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Many more sentences like this and I'll have to brand you a fool. America is the most generous nation in the world to other countries, and our own domestic budget is 66% transfer payments to retirees and the needy.
Just out of curiousity, how would your 66% of our budget fare if spending on the Iraq was included in the budget?
If you want to utter utter nonsense, do it somewhere else.
Also, it seems to me that if you really want to find out whether Iran's nuclear program is aimed at obtaining nuclear weapons, the best way is to ask. Sit down at the table, without preconditions you know will be refused, and simply ask.
The worst thing that can happen in that situation is that you'll be lied to. The best thing will be that it leads to further discussions and inspections which will ultimately lead to truth.
When Bush took office, he trashed the Clinton policies toward North Korea and renegged on our deal with Kim. Now, after 6 tumultous years, Bush returned to the Clinton Solution and guess what. We didn't have to bomb North Korea and, as a matter of fact, Bush is even taking North Korea out of the Axis of Evil.
It gets even better, Shooter. Now that we have destroyed Iraq as a country (under false pretenses), and decided that North Korea isn't bad after all, there's only one country left in the Axis of Evil - Iran. It's awfully hard to have an axis with only one point, isn't it?
Go play golf.
P.S. Why do we need to infiltrate Iran to see if they have a nuclear weapons program? George W. Bush has already determined that they do. Matter of fact, why do we even need a CIA? George W. Bush has already determined that their analysis is faulty and his is better. It seems to me, that if I wanted to determine whether Iran or Bush has lied to me more, the answer would be easy. It's Bush.
Let's infiltrate him.
-
-- rondolce
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So my question is, Could, say, Donald Rumsfeld invoke his Fifth Amendment right if there was a chance of him being prosecuted in Germany, the World Court, or a Sadr controlled Islamic Iraq?
I cannot answer for Glenn but I believe his answer would be no, the constitutional protections afforded by the Bill of Rights do not protect us against the actions of governments other than our own.
-
-- mrkcohen
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Technically I guess you are correct about Obama not changing his position on immunity, but what has changed of course is that it appears he will be breaking his promise to filibuster any bill that includes immunity.
To be accurate, Obama said he would support a fillibuster of any bill which included immunity. He has not yet broken that promise.
-
-- ethics_professor
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I (and others) answered your flood plain question in yesterday's thread.
I saw that and to be honest, I've been feeling quite guilty about how I worded the question. It was meant to be retorical in nature, not actually a quest for real meaning.
Without going off-topic here to awfully much, I'll explain.
After Katrina, there was much rightwing bloviation regarding the value of rebuilding New Orleans (they should bulldoze the place) and caterwalling about how those stupid New Orleanians "should have known better than to build where they did, good riddance to those liberals down there".
I was wondering why we have not heard such comments from the Right when Iowans, Kanasans, and Missourians (like Limbaugh) are getting damp.
No need to answer here. I already know the answer.
-
-- mrkcohen
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]But is there really that big a difference between filibuster and support a filibuster?
Yes, indeed there is.
To fillibuster, one must be a leader. To support someone else's fillibuster, one only need follow.
Which brings us to the real question of just who Obama is following and why does he believe he cannot lead?
-
Ahoy
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Has anyone seen quickstrategy lately?
-
-- rufus11
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thank you for your attempts at contributing to the discussion here.
I have only one question for you.
What the fuck is your problem?
-
-- shooter242
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Quite so, which cements the reality that 9/11 was concieved, planned, and prepped before Bush came to office. That is to say, on Clinton's watch.
Has anyone argued otherwise, Shooter? As a matter of fact, much, if not all, of the research behind the intelligence report entitled "bin Laden wants to strike US" was done by Clinton appointees.
It's a pity Bush ignored it.
Heh.
-
-- shooter242
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What's the matter? You don't think the 70 FBI investigations mentioned in the PDB were enough? Duh.
Keep diggin, Shooter. Investigations are only as good as the action taken as a result of them.
Bush took none.
-
-- Retired Military Patriot
[Read the article: The baseless, and failed, "move to the center" cliche]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In this election cycle, Independents think- “With so many advantages, will the stupid Democrats find a way to clutch defeat from victory?”
GMTA. Not 2 hours ago I was speaking to a friend and mentioned that Democrats need to learn how to win. We're so used to losing, that even when victory is in sight, that victory won't be enough to satisfy some people.
In baseball, if you win by one run or twenty runs, it still counts the same. You still must go out and play the game the next day and win again, and again, and again, in order to get to the World Series....and then you have to win some more.
Politics is very similar. Unless one wins, even if it's only by a single run, one cannot advance to the World Series.
The machine that currently runs Washington wasn't built in a day and it damned sure won't be replaced in a day. Fact is, it will probably take longer than most of us here on this board will live to see.
It will happen, however, and the only thing that can stop it from happening is that people give up. Moses never made it to the Promised Land either.