Very world-leaderish of him.

JO - I heard this on Morning Edition today. Good move for Mr. O.

Indeed.

So despite Bowa's "concern", it appears Obama did exactly the right thing. He kept quiet, contacted the SecState and asked what he could do to help, then acted appropriately, only speaking out when the time was right.

Thank God for that! I was so afraid this was going to be another arugula moment for Obama. Instead, it was another arugula moment for Bowa.

Only Obama could carry the weight of the U.S. behind him vis a vis Kenya.

This guy's a winner.

Imagine when a brilliant, educated, principled, and humble man of color from humble origins visits the 'brown' crounties of the world - a good 1/2 the world. They'll see us differently than they ever have before: As a powerful, compassionate but strong country - strong enough for the son of a teenage white mother from Kansas, and a black father from Kenya, who despite of all the roadblocks in his way, was elected president of The United States of America...

Jeebus AU, I think I've got a tear in my eye....snif!

"Imagine when a brilliant, educated, principled, and humble man of color from humble origins visits the 'brown' crounties of the world - a good 1/2 the world. They'll see us differently than they ever have before: As a powerful, compassionate but strong country - strong enough for the son of a teenage white mother from Kansas, and a black father from Kenya, who despite of all the roadblocks in his way, was elected president of The United States of America...
Posted by AMERICANUNITY


I sure hope he visits Mexico and makes those guys see us differently.

Jeebus AU, I think I've got a tear in my eye....snif!

Posted by Jomama

Perhaps because you, like most of us, hunger and now have hope for an America we all have wistfully longed for most of our lives?

MRFAIR

Our next president, whoever it is, needs to help Mexico get their economy going and push them towards changing their corrupt political process which has been at the root of Mexico's poverty for generations.

Then they'll be happy living in their own country where they can get a job that pays a living wage down there. That in and of itself will do more to help our immigration problem than any fence will do - which I'm for for security against anyone who tries to sneak in.

AU - no argument here.

He seems like a nice guy. Too bad he's so damn liberal with my money.

Our next president, whoever it is, needs to help Mexico get their economy going and push them towards changing their corrupt political process which has been at the root of Mexico's poverty for generations.

Bull shit, we need to leave the country alone and stop forcing our will onto other nations.

If Mexico wants to change the direction of their economy and politics the people of Mexico need to do it.

The United States is like an alcoholic drunk, continuously pressing its will onto others and wondering why it doesn't turn out so well, but drink alittle more and try it again.

"Too bad he's so damn liberal with my money.

Posted by Sniper at 2008-01-08 07:29 PM"

Don't worry, Snipe. There is no possible way he could be more liberal with your money than George has been.

He seems like a nice guy. Too bad he's so damn liberal with my money.

Posted by Sniper

Do you realize that for what we've spent in Iraq so far we could have, for instance, paid for four years of Ivy League educations for over 3,000,000 of our citizens? Buit a million schools?

Gasp! Cut taxes for the middle class.

Instead, W borrowed enough money for China to start building their military on our dime and rack up enough new debt that it eats up the largest slice of our budgets after SS and Defense servicing that debt?

"

OK Enough on SNIPER's deflection.

Obama's making a difference in Kenya - taking the time when he's probably sleeping 2 hours a night if he's lucky.

you cant eat hope people.. what a crock of shit.

I can't eat bombs either. What's yer point?

Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2008-01-08 07:08 PM

This guy's a winner.

Imagine when a brilliant, educated, principled, and humble man of color from humble origins ...

... visits the 'brown' crounties of the world - a good 1/2 the world. They'll see us differently than they ever have before:

As a powerful, compassionate but strong country - strong enough for the son of a teenage white mother from Kansas, and a black father from Kenya ...

... who despite of all the roadblocks in his way, was elected president of The United States of America...

Only Obama could carry the weight of the U.S. behind him vis a vis Kenya.

By the way, as a Democratic Illinois politician, Mr. Obama should be quite in harmony with vote fixing. It's a way of life in Illinois. What makes you think he has an aversion to such practices?

Imagine when a brilliant, educated, principled, and humble man of color from humble origins visits the 'brown' crounties of the world - a good 1/2 the world.

Posted by AMERICANUNITY
* * * *

I think you meant to say "if".

Besides, haven't our last two Secretaries of State filled your bill?

RiR

Colin Powell lost his credibility by refusing to speak out publicly about his grave doubts over invading Iraq.

Condoleeza Rice is a shill. Don't you remember her continuous breathing spin on invading? She derided anyone questioning any aspect of the march to war like a 2nd grade teacher. All while she is now reported as having spoken up privately in the WH in opposition.

Where was their bravery when we needed it the most?

Following is Barack Obama's speech in 2002. Tell me where he was wrong. Tell me he didn't possess courage to speak up when others patriotism was called into question for saying the same thing.....

Barack Obama's 2002 speech against invading Iraq:

"I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil.

I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army.

I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

(cont.)

Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.... The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors...and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.

I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure that...we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair."

". In my book, in hindsight he was right on the money."

But, it wasn't hindsight. It was foresight, something this country desperately needs. And it took a lot of balls to oppose something everyone else was favoring. Just like he was walking the walk, not just talking the talk, when, as a top-notch Harvard Law grad, and able to write his own ticket, he instead chose a job that paid only $13,000 a year.

Or about 5% of what his classmates were making, for those playing the home game.

DANFORTH

The hindsight I was referring to was the mirror we all can see in retrospect.

That was an incredibly tough stand to take at that moment in time.

Foresight he had loads of. Something in short supply among the field of candidates. Who asked these questions besides Obama?

Of course I'm disappointed he narrowly lost. He got as many delegates but certainly Clinton got a shot back. Amazing it was 7400 votes ahead for the 2nd half of waiting for results. McCain drew a lot of independents away from Obama largely I think because New Hampshireites hate Mitt Romney, their next door neighbor who they see as phony as a three dollar bill.

SC will be the turning point. Clinton and Bush lost both Iowa and New Hampshire. However, Obama's momentum from Iowa sends a message to African American voters in SC white people will vote for an African American. His loss in NH will engage the SC electorate to show up. There isn't then same Independent situation in pracitically any other state. Msot of the others are largely Dem or Reb.

Obama's wide win among independent voters should send a message he's highly electable in the fall. They won't choose another GOP administration if it comes to Obama vs McCain - old vs new, war vs foresight and wisdom. An indicator of how much thought and judgement he'd bring to his presidency.

Everyone else got that so wrong. Experience? What good is it if you don't have good judgement? You're right. It's foresight that matters where the rubber meets the road.

"Obama's momentum from Iowa sends a message to African American voters in SC white people will vote for an African American."

But his results from NH, so widely different from the polls, suggest the American people will be PC in public, but different in the booth. I have to admit I was stunned by the wild variation between yesterday's predictions and today's results.

Still, the man impresses me like no one in over a generation.

NH has a history of telling the pundits and the conventional wisdow to fuck off.

"Live free or die"

Obama is still ahead of hillary by one delegate. They tied for delegates in NH, 9 each I believe. The MSM attmepted to make this into a percentage horserace and it blew up in their faces. Good.

DANFORTH

McCain won New Hampshire. Remember who eventually won the nomination after winning in SC? Wan't McCain :-)

This isn't over. People are really going to have to ask themselves if they want Clinton or Obama. Edwards is short on cash. I hope his voters start to understand he won't win and pick one or the other. I suspect they'd lean more Obama than 8 more years of the 90's.

I hope so. But, I'm not going to commit Hari Kari if Clinton wins LOL

I am going to laugh uproariously if Obama does NOT end up winning the Dem nomination.

I am going to laugh uproariously if Obama does NOT end up winning the Dem nomination.

Posted by JeffJ

After your man Bush has made so many tens of thousands cry? What kind of unfeeling asshole are you?

I am going to laugh uproariously if Obama does NOT end up winning the Dem nomination.

Posted by JeffJ at 2008-01-09 04:33 AM | Reply | Flag:


Why?

Hillary isn't my candidate, but she can out debate any of the right wing fucktards that will be the likely nominee.

You know what they need here? A 'mute' function you can activate on posters like online poker sites enable you to do to players of your choice. That way you could just tune out the idiots who think politics is a joke and post just here to have 'fun' like a 9th grader who's bummed he doesn't have his driver's license yet, and too old to blow up frogs with M-80's like W did well into his teen years.

AU

JeffJ is one of the more erudite posters from the right on here. If you have that ability, there would be near silence I am thinking. Laughing uproariously passes for thoughtful comment in some circles on here.

Regards,
etc.

Any DEM will kick the living shit out of whichever GOP candidate they throw up tot he American public.

McCain - 72, Bush's lapdog who ruined his reputation for being a maverick in standing up for what's right. Where was he the last 5 years asking the tough questions?

McCain won New Hampshire in 2000. Remember who the eventual nominee was? The one who hadn't won in Iowa or New Hampshire but won SC?

We've got at least a month to go before it's clear who will win.

In the fall, it won't be a Republican. I'll bet my computer on that.

TPS

I knew that LOL

Maybe I'll take that bet, AU.

That way if my country further degrades itself, I'll at least have another computer.

Positive thinking. : )

Why?


Because I've seen an awful lotta puppy-love type gushing over Obama, like a bunch of girls going out for their Junior prom. It'll be fun watching the balloon deflate.


Personally, I think Obama's lack of applicable experience will be his downfall this go-round.

Because I've seen an awful lotta puppy-love type gushing over Obama,

Well, all the reagan comparisons to thompson has made his lackluster debut rather satisfying.

But..I just want the next president of the US to be a good one.

Any DEM will kick the living shit out of whichever GOP candidate they throw up tot he American public.


Conventional wisdom would validate your assertion.

However, it's nothing more than a prediction.


Predictions are like assholes - everyone has one.


As for me, I predicted that Florida would trounce my beloved Wolverines on New Year's Day.


The general election is a long-way off. Don't get yourself too excited just yet. A lot can happen between now and then.

Well, all the reagan comparisons to thompson has made his lackluster debut rather satisfying.

I am sure it has been for you.


But..I just want the next president of the US to be a good one.

Same here.

I've never seen such gushing for a candidate with thompson, considering he can't really speak well and has no charisma.

At least Obama has THAT much going for him.

Yeah, I soured on Thompson quite a bit when I watched him stammer through some of the debate questions.

A no-brainer pre-requisite for POTUS should be having the ability to consistently articulate a coherent sentence.

"A no-brainer pre-requisite for POTUS should be having the ability to consistently articulate a coherent sentence."

Why change now?

I don't get it either, jeff. It's like Thompson lost a bet and HAS to run for president, but doesn't really want to.

A no-brainer pre-requisite for POTUS should be having the ability to consistently articulate a coherent sentence.

I'll leave the obvious retort in it's box. : D

PS- Does it piss you off to have a spoofer? It used to bug me when I had one, mostly because they were accusing me of being a pedophile.

I predict that RCADE is going to drop the hammer on a few folks here...and perhaps go overboard again. However, it has been excessively vile here the last few weeks.

I don't get it either, jeff. It's like Thompson lost a bet and HAS to run for president, but doesn't really want to.


He certainly gives the impression of a lack of energy, as if he's just going through the motions.



I'll leave the obvious retort in it's box. : D

I threw you a big, fat, slow curve. Nevertheless, it's fricking emberassing that our country's leader is that poor of a speaker.



PS- Does it piss you off to have a spoofer?

Not at all. I know exactly who my spoofer is and I think the spoofs are pretty funny. I've even commented on the nooner that I hope Rcade alows my spoofer to continue his shenanigans.


I predict that RCADE is going to drop the hammer on a few folks here...and perhaps go overboard again.

Agreed.



However, it has been excessively vile here the last few weeks.

Yes, it has.

Up until the very end of the pre-moderation days (the massive flamewars involving Rex, et al), it was vile, but a lot less personal. As the various people have hung around we've all gotten to know eachother better. We've learned eachother's hot buttons and have developed stronger likes and dislikes as the various personalities have revealed more and more. What we've seen lately isn't all that suprising, given how long this site has been up and how long some of its members have been visiting.

Why change now?

Posted by Danforth


Because it's emberassing.

Later boys - I've gotta rock on.

it was vile, but a lot less personal.

That's easy for you to say, jeff. You didn't receive self destruct emails and threats from the PWZ crowd (pre and post pwz) on a weekly basis.

You also never had your email and name pasted on here, so count your blessings and don't feed the trolls.

Jeff- I also email very few people on this site, precisely because of that "hot button" tactic.

Lisa and Hans are the only people I have any sort of correspondence with, and rarely at that.

JeffJ,

Sorry...I should have included the {snark} {/snark} tags.

Don't those post automatically every time?

Alex,

The PWZ boys got real nasty right at the end - buncha thugs.

I was referring to the really early days. It was vile, but in a more generic sense.


Really gone now.

Dan,


I got the snark - I was just funnin'


Alex,


I've had email correspondences with quite a few, but I don't do so very often.

I got self-destruct emails from PWZers, too.

Cowards. Vandals. Turds.

But, enough about their good traits....

A no-brainer pre-requisite for POTUS should be having the ability to consistently articulate a coherent sentence.

Posted by JeffJ

W taught you your lesson, eh? LOL

I also want a president who doesn't feel like he has to explain words to journalists with English degrees from top schools.

I also want a president who doesn't feel like he has to explain words to journalists with English degrees from top schools.


Especially when he gets it wrong...Remember W remarking that Al Qaeda lies under interrogation? Instead of saying "dissemble" he said "disassemble" and then proceeded to explain that it meant they lie. Moron.

JeffJ,

I realize you won't see this till tomorrow, but....

A recent exchange touched off a nerve. I'm paraphrasing, but you posted something about Bush pissing off folk like you, and I retorted, roughly, to what end?, as I hadn't seen a single iota of "uprising" by Republicans, ever, but rather a rubber-stamp mentality, even when the results were insulting. (A drug plan where 40 million can't get the volume discount 40 can get? WTF?!? )

I know a lot of the exchanges on the DR are shots, and superficial comments, but as an Independent (who's voted for more Rs than D), I'd like to get serious for a second: I'm puzzled by those Republicans who disagreed with Bush over these past 7 years. Guys like you. Obviously I wasn't as tied to the party, and I felt it ran away from me when it embraced the religious faction, abandoned any semblance of fiscal sanity, and started targeting minority groups for Constitutional punishment. How have you justified supporting a party so at odds with---based on your posts---what you believe?

I've never seen you embrace deficits. I've never seen you gush about religious laws overtaking our system. And I've never seen you try to minimalize gays.

How do you support those who do?

Danforth, It was not just the dems who voted the last congress out. There were a lot of repubs who voted against high spending. And for my part I intend on voting against the incumbent in the next few elections. We need new blood.

Man this guy is spot ON!

What adult would vote for a totally untested presidential candidate by falling in love? Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich, Senator Joe Biden, and a million other Democrats -- that's who. The New York Times stable of Leftie pundits is reliving the Decade of Love. The Washington press corps has the teenie bopper hots over Barack Obama -- such a romantic name. A real African! Almost.


What does he believe? What has he actually done? Uhmmmm... Well...


It's Son of Camelot! And he's got the youth vote! Children just know these things!


This is straight out of Dumb and Dumber. If you despaired about the media's endless love affair with Bill Clinton, the Master of Slick, because he Cares About You, you'll get to revisit those feelings now. For we have a new national idol!


The Good Parent

Children often have fantasies about a Good Parent -- one who loves you and takes care of you forever and ever, who forgives your transgressions whatever they may be, who demands nothing, and never, ever hurts your feelings. Obama is now the Good Parent of the childish Left -- a good majority of the Dems, it would seem.


In a child's mind the Good Parent is often played against a complementary fantasy, the Bad Parent -- call them Republicans in this case. The Bad Parent stands for the sterner aspects of reality. Since Leftism is basically an infantile protest against adulthood, Republicans represent what Sigmund Freud called the Reality Principle.

Reality is the part of the world we all need to come to terms with in order to earn a living, to deal with losses in our lives, and still be productive and moral adults. Interestingly, most of the GOP candidates look like adults with real records of accomplishment. But then GOP voters are also more adult.


The childish Left constantly needs someone to adore -- FDR, JFK, Bill Clinton before the Fall. Even Hillary during her New York senatorial run. But Hillary looks visibly older today, and the Good Parent can't be allowed to age. That shakes the foundations of a child's perfect world. So all that need for love has to be transferred to a younger Good Parent. It's like the new trophy wife of the aging executive. The Good Parent must be immortal.


Enter Obama. We still know almost nothing about him. But that's the point. The less you know the better you feel, because Obama is a projective figure, a human Rorshach test. The Dems don't want to know any sobering facts. They don't want to know, for example, his relationship with the Chicago Democrat machine. They don't want to know that he voted against saving the lives of infants who survive a botched abortion. They don't want to see his minimal competence in foreign affairs. This is just a mass craving for a Good Parent. You don't vet and check out your Good Parents to see if they qualify. You might do that for a new baby sitter, but never a Good Parent. You are just born into that endless cloud of love.


Hillary's fall from grace has been amazingly quick, because the Dems -- the Party of the Needy, those who Crave to be Cared For, the Emotional Victims -- they have all found a new fuzzy toy to cling to. Hillary Clinton is now yesterday's toy, lying discarded on the floor. And she knows it.


This is the candidate as Rock Idol. It is purely instinctive. The thinking part of the brain has nothing to do with it.


Meanwhile, the United States still needs a real adult to lead it through the next four or eight years.

The nation is at war -- though the infantile half of our population lives in denial. Benazir Bhutto was just assassinated in Pakistan, where the throw-back jihadists are eagerly looking for dirty bombs or worse. Ahmadi-Nejad just challenged the US Navy in the Strait of Hormuz with five suicide boats. Forty percent of the world's oil goes through the bottleneck of the strait. Europe is in decline. The United Nations is hopelessly sleazy and corrupt. Almost twenty years of jihadist genocide in the Sudan continues today, with African victims galore. Kenya just exploded in an orgy of jihadist violence. Vladimir Putin is running a KGB state in Russia, threatening oil and gas cutoffs to our feckless allies in Europe. And President Bush is making a Hail Mary pass in the Middle East, hoping to make some progress by traveling there. The terrorists have promised to try to assassinate him, too.


The media aren't interested. They're back in the Kennedy days, swaddled in the warm blankets of their second childhood.


Boy, do we need the grownups today.


James Lewis blogs at dangeroustimes.wordpress.com/

Meanwhile, the United States still needs a real adult to lead it through the next four or eight years


As opposed to a petulant sixth grader?

Lol, James Lewis talks about the 'good parent' then goes on to describe how dangerous the world is and how we need daddy to take care of us. LOL!!!

Nice post Mr Bacon, it gave me a good chuckle!

Yes, yes. A President Barry Hussein Obama would no doubt bring peace to the world, just by telling the bad guys to straighten up.

Colin Powell lost his credibility by refusing to speak out publicly about his grave doubts over invading Iraq.


No, Colin Powell lost his credibility by presenting cartoons as "evidence" of mobile WMD labs in Iraq.

As opposed to a petulant sixth grader?


You forgot off the wagon and coked up.

It's truly amazing the guy has said nothing.

Change, change, change, change.

There was a song like that.

Shame, shame, shame.

Noone should have the right to vote unitl they're at least 30. Especially now that we all live A LOT longer.

Will they ever ask any of these people what their positions on issues are and how they will fiscally accomplish them?

I'm really begining to wonder.

Last night Obama said he'd end the war in Iraq. Made it sound like real quick. Goes against his actual position in which he and Hillary would not comit to anything at least until 2013 and maybe not even then.

People of emotion hear what they want to hear, not what was actually said. To damn bad people choose to get caught up in the hype of huge crowds only to never spend the time reading transcripts of what was actually said.

Obama will have to answer soon.

Timing is everything. Let em keep talking/give em rope and they'll hang themselves.

"It's truly amazing the guy has said nothing."

About Keya? Please, seek better information.

Noone should have the right to vote unitl they're at least 30. Especially now that we all live A LOT longer.

And you should loose that right after you join AARP. LOL

Keya = Kenya

This thing go a real going over on a b.s. thread Bowa slapped up days ago. Turned out to be a canard. Sooprise.

That's why I put this up - dedicated to Bowa. Guess it got hijacked a bit along the way, Doc.

This thing go a real going over on a b.s. thread Bowa slapped up days ago. Turned out to be a canard. Sooprise.


Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Whaaaaa?

"Whaaaaa?"

Go back and read the first couple of posts on the thread if you're confuzzled.

Sorry. Thanks.

"If Mexico wants to change the direction of their economy and politics the people of Mexico need to do it.

The United States is like an alcoholic drunk..."

Posted by moneywar

Some comments:

1) The US needs oil, of which Mexico supplies 20 to 25 percent of the foreign imports. The US cannot afford to antagonize Mexico as there are other markets for Mexican crude and fewer options for the US to obtain the much needed crude.

2) The US does illicit drugs, lots of them, which implies lots of profit to be had, and consequently lots of US taxpayer supported agencies depend on the continued largess of the US Government for their very existence.

So will the US actively take a hand into changing the way Mexico operates? My opinion is no.

Other than direct and continual military intervention across Africa by the world powers, there will never be peace. Though noble in effort, Obama's words of calm will have no effect. The slaughtering by the 10s of thousands will continue unabated and will receive only sporadic mention in the MSM. How does one stop gangs of marauding "soldiers" armed with machetes from sweeping across the land hacking everybody to death? How does one resolve centuries of tribal hatred? Much of Africa is a horror beyond comprehension.

Instead, W borrowed enough money for China to start building their military on our dime and rack up enough new debt that it eats up the largest slice of our budgets after SS and Defense servicing that debt?

Posted by AMERICANUNITY

With our buying habbits that would have happened anyhow.

Yes, Bush has spent our money like a drunken sailor. It seems like they all do. They all just love to buy power with our money. The dems do it with social programs and the reps do it other places.

We need to cut the size of government in half, and then do it again next week.

I'd prefer the drunks spend their money on ME rather than bombing some foreign nation to prove someone's virilty.

-Disclaimer- this comment may have been plagerized.

Zot, the question should be how does one resolve centuries of colonial occupation and exploitation?

"centuries of colonial occupation and exploitation"

Aye, there be that, too.

1) The US needs oil, of which Mexico supplies 20 to 25 percent of the foreign imports. The US cannot afford to antagonize Mexico as there are other markets for Mexican crude and fewer options for the US to obtain the much needed crude.


Posted by ZOT at 2008-01-09 10:19 AM

There's always Canada, plus if we spent 1 trillion on alternative energy we may find a solution. Or we could spend 1 trillion in a war with little benefit to us.

"There's always Canada..."

Canada also supplies 20 to 25 percent of the foreign imports, and is in fact the Numba 1 oil exporter to the US in both raw and finished petro products.

It is to note that the 1 trillion is of great benefit to those who work in the defense industry, eh wot?

Altruism is not a profitable commodity. Aggression has a much higher pay-off.

It seems that damn near our entire culture is based on or stems from aggressive and/or violent behavior. Though our practice of this is a bit more benign than running about the countryside hacking entire villages to pieces, which seems to be the norm in various parts of Africa.

""Hillary's fall from grace has been amazingly quick, because the Dems -- the Party of the Needy, those who Crave to be Cared For, the Emotional Victims -- they have all found a new fuzzy toy to cling to. Hillary Clinton is now yesterday's toy, lying discarded on the floor. And she knows it."

Sorry to say I agree with this statement.

Posted by Mxyzptlk at 2008-01-09 09:15 AM

"just by telling the bad guys to straighten up"

Beats the hell out of starting wars because you're a pretend cowboy, failed oilman, and love to stride across the deck of a carrier scratching your oversized codpiece.

Mr. Obama is a descendant of a member of a Muslim tribe, which is involved in the conflict in Kenya. Of course, the members of the Christian tribe will appreciate his intervention.

This is a local struggle with blacks killing blacks. They don't give a tinker's dam regarding the "race" of their opponents. They only want to subdue them, and if that takes terrorization and killing, they have no compunctions with such undertakings.

Just what fantasy do you have that the Africans care that a descendant of their tribal member holds U.S. office except as it operates to confer a benefit upon them.

The arrogance of American leftists is unbelievable. Somehow, Africans are supposed to care that Americans elevate a "man of color" to office? They're pragmatic. Their question is "How does it affect me?"

Parenthetically, the idea that "brown people," "people of color," would be "pleased" if a black held American political office, discounts the reality that many "people of color," the Asians, rather than feeling allied with blacks, regard them as inferior, and other "brown people," "people of color," the Hispanics, regard the blacks (mayates), as enemeies. Stop smoking on the leftist ideological dream pipe, and move into the real world without poppy dreams.

The stupidity of the American rightists is staggering.

Amen

They fall in love then elect and reelect someone so unqualified for the job - a man who can rarely put together a cohesive sentence on his own - to the highest office in the land, and then fail to call him on anything until everyone else jumps on the bandwagon.

He seems like a nice guy. Too bad he's so damn liberal with my money.

Posted by Sniper at 2008-01-08 07:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ummmmm...the huge increase in spending by your party doesn't bother you?

I think bush and Co have been quite liberal giving 'your money' away to 'no bid' contractors.....but that's ok?

This guy is a leftist with a vision of the world that does not comport with that of many many Americans. He's been running on personality. His supporters, when questioned, acknowledge that they don't have a clue concerning his positions on actual matters.


Posted by Johnson at 2008-01-08 09:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

"He's been running on personality"

That's funny....especially coming from the party that voted for Bush because they felt they could 'have a beer with him'.

I hope it's not an imported beer, especially with the value of the dollar.