Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
wellwater
Published Letters: 99
Jamiso, excellent response. Leave it to someone with actual experience of war to put a chickenhawk in his place.
Advice to lolcait: using disparaging nicknames marks you as one or more of the following:
1. A Republican troll. I've got (too) many Republican relatives and for some reason those on that side of the aisle so to speak seem quick to resort to ad hominem attacks, name-calling, and such. Might be because they, like you are
2. Someone who doesn't have a solid argument.
3. Uneducated and/or ignorant.
If, in my experience, such people weren't severly lacking in self-knowledge, I'd ask you to satisfy my curiousity as to which of the above applies to you.
Too bad my first post here is responding to such dreck.
Let me quote the source, Dave Lindorff, an award-winning REPORTER (not opinionater) who writes on counterpunch.org (you know, one of those political websites that, unlike salon.com, manages to get by without peddling SUVs to its readers on the one hand and claiming to be progressive on the other):
"The truth is, in the course of 54 primaries, Obama won a majority of female voters—a point rarely made in media reports on this contest."
The women who don't support him--just my guess--are doing so out of racism.
"I hate the Bush tax cuts but Barry's performance in foreign policy would be of greater national consequence and irreparable."
Defend that with something besides rhetoric.
"His economic performance is an unknown but it would be a likely disaster too."
An opinion based on, let's see--your unmitigated and irrational hatred of him?
"Barry is beholden to the anti-war Move On lefty left."
Again, the derogatory nicknames must mean you must feel totally comfortable calling HRC "Billary" and GWB "chimp" or one of the many other monikers he's picked up.
By "lefty left" I assume you mean the remnants of a true anti-corporate segment of the American body politic? People outside the extreme-right-to-right-of-center-DINO spectrum of which you and the Clintons are a part? A political philosophy well-represented in other advanced democracies, but woefully weak in this Christofascist Right-wing top-shelf banana republic the economic elitists and their thoroughly propagandized patsies like yourself have turned this once-great nation into?
"and too confident in his ability to persuade lunatic dictators with words. He would fail to act against Iran or anyone else."
Since you're a foreign policy expert as well clue us in as to the "proper" course of action with such people. McCain wouldn't even accept that Ahmadinejad isn't the most powerful man in Iran, giving the laughable reason that "the average American thinks he is, so he is." So that really leaves him no alternative but to bomb rather than talk, does it? And you?
Have you never been physically threatened out on the street? If you are, and you're unarmed, you have to try bluff your way out with blusteror , fight. When people fight, everyone gets hurt unless one of them is very lucky.
If you are well-armed, you can calmly tell a potential attacker--"look, calm down, don't make me blow your f*cking head clean off." Guess what, America's packing heavy, and no county can get the drop on us. THAT's why we can afford to negotiate from a position of strength. Only cowards like those in power right now shoot first.
But I have the distinct impression I'm wasting my words.
Stupid typing fingers!
I definitely need it. lolcait's incendiary rantings got me to call America Christofascist when that really only describes a small but too-large minority of Christians. "A burgeoning theocracy" would be more accurate. And it's not really as bad as a banana republic, "'Banana Republic' republic" is more like it.
I've been reading the letters for a couple of weeks and have felt inspired to join in some intriguing discussions; instead I joined in order to take a troll's bait.
She made a point of saying "suspend." Most media outlets (and posters) are saying she's ended her bid, so I'm surprised no one has picked up on that difference yet. If "something" happened to Obama that made him unable to accept the nomination in Denver she'd have a stronger hand with the DNC this way. Don't underestimate her tenacity.
On another note, I find it interesting that so many of her female supporters think that the more corporate, hawkish, and over-all conservative of the two, namely Clinton, is the one who best represents women's interests. Would more of the same Washington policies help women going forward more than a shift from them? The answer seems obvious.
I would very much like to see a woman become President--just not her.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
