Letters to the Editor
Baldie McEagle
Published Letters: 992 Editor's Choice: 3
-
The "truth" is that they are scared
[Read the article: One of Instapundit's favorite blogs speaks on race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Folks, they are not honest. They are plain old, everyday, garden variety racists. That is all they are and that is all they have ever been and will be with regard to their views of black folks. We don't want to have a dialog or discussion with them because there is nothing really to discuss. We have no interest really in being a branch on their learning tree.
What's probably missing here for "punk" is healthy contact with actual real normal adult black people. Were he to acquire said contact, he might learn that (a) many, as has been pointed out, take an equally dim view of wannabe thugs and their behavior and (b) they aren't afraid of them. Many have actually suffered crime at their hands, but they are able to distinguish between kids and criminals.
"Punk" has every right to be annoyed. But he's just scared because he doesn't know them, and he doesn't realize that his fear colors his response. None of them do. Yet the next step for them in manly posturing and verbal aggression.
-
Does Kurtz even know what McCain's "experience" is?
[Read the article: Journalists, McCain and the false Iran/al-Qaida link]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]And would he be able to tell us? He didn't reveal any such knowledge in the reply posted upthread.
Can experience be measured as years in the Senate spent lying---er, talking about something? That's all I see. No cabinet experience, for example, which might actually count. No higher military experience than squadron commander---probably more time spent in a cell than in uniform.
Has he written a white paper detailing how our military could be more successful? Worked at a think tank?
Helped lead an invasion?
Reformed a branch of our military?
Gone toe-to-toe with the Russians?
Does he have good contacts in various governments around the globe?
Does he have an intelligence or high-tech background, which might suit him for the 21st century? Or at least nukes?
Counterintelligence/counterterrorist experience?
Didn't think so.
-
@derbig
[Read the article: Journalists, McCain and the false Iran/al-Qaida link]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]hee hee. I did not know that. Even our current pilot-in-chief doesn't have such an event in his record.
-
@klooster
[Read the article: Tactics of the right-wing noise machine]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Would you care to define "rich" in this case, i.e., Jackson and Sharpton?
Be sure to distinguish income specifically derived from said "touting" vs other income earned more honestly.
-
Evidence, please
[Read the article: Fred Kagan on Monday: "The civil war in Iraq is over"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Where is the link? Where is the video of Fred Kagan "prancing"?
I need to see this "evidence" very badly, because I have already seen all 11 episodes of Yacht Rock on Channel 101.com, and I don't know where to turn.
-
Perhaps not right away
[Read the article: Bush and McCain's shared foreign policy approach]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Choice two, Obama asks the pentagon and decides we need to keep stop-loss, to get out of the war. TNRonline, in one week will say "OBAMA IS KEEPING OUR FIGHTING MEN PRISONER" and go on to say that stop loss is no longer needed and should be abolished. And now the interview with an expert who tells us why.
I think they would tend to hold this in reserve, waiting for some sort of setback they can use to prove that Obama is losing in Iraq, wasting Bush's noble hard-won gains. Then we will smell a few leaks from the far right blogs, more like Is Obama Losing?
Once that's inserted, they can answer the question straight out: Yes.
THEN he can be accused of holding the troops hostage.
You understand, it takes a while to turn a haunted death ship around.
Essentially, I think you're right. A Democratic president will have to either Lieberman up or be totally transparently anti-war. And the illegal acts you point to will be the first test. Eisenhower did it to Kennedy, whether deliberately or not.
-
Derbig's suspicions are confirmed
[Read the article: Bush and McCain's shared foreign policy approach]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Scooter has received instructions from the mother ship and is now working hard to pretend that he wants the bases closed and war banished forever, so that in a year he can begin the campaign to frame Clinton or Obama as a warmonger.
-
Sorry for the vague reference
[Read the article: Bush and McCain's shared foreign policy approach]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I meant to refer to the Bay of Pigs. Really, a classic model we should consider:
-it was illegal
-it was corrupt
-it was stupid
-it was unnecessary
-it failed
And of course Kennedy OKed it within weeks of his presidential oath, because it was all ready to go, and the CIA wanted to go ahead so very, very badly.
Kennedy realized his mistake soon enough. He'd been sucked in. But I believe he repudiated such actions afterward, to some degree, based on the plan's abject failure.
Not sure whether it was the plan's immorality or incompetence he objected to more, however.
-
Also
[Read the article: Bush and McCain's shared foreign policy approach]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Not to split hairs, but if the Repugs, as an opposition party, are to truly hang Obama/Clinton, it must be done in the media. That means allowing him a few months' rope, even a year. There's simply no way they could convincingly hang a few weeks of going along on a Democratic president.
That said, this will be best dealt with by clear, unequivocable statements such as "I will allow X to continue while I review it" and then make sure we all see him reviewing it. From the beginning.
-
Perhaps, ondelette
[Read the article: Bush and McCain's shared foreign policy approach]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]but I believe I know scooter, and I believe he is lying.
-
Of course it is
[Read the article: Bush and McCain's shared foreign policy approach]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]it's time to abandon military adventurism.
Look at the calendar. Look at the polls.
-
Scoot, if you're not lying
[Read the article: Bush and McCain's shared foreign policy approach]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]and you REALLY DO "agree with us,"
Than go away. You have no more purpose here. No need to call us twits, etc. No function whatsoever.
If you go away, I will believe you.
I know, saying goodbye is hard. But I believe you are strong. And I believe you can do it.
Now, go.
-
Eisenhower, though,
[Read the article: Bush and McCain's shared foreign policy approach]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]may have been an exception to the rule that generals don't formulate policy. They do formulate strategy, and that blurs into policy, doesn't it? When the Allies decide what to do next after Africa, for example---their strategy decided history. That is, post-WWII history.
That said, the most a general should do is parrot the policy of his civilian boss. Assuming he has one.
It's true that many Americans in and out of uniform don't really get this.