-15, Lows Keep Getting LOWER!
Where's Ken Hoop the Dupe?
Think he's in London, spray painting synagogues?
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/st...fiti/
article.do
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/1...gin&
oref=slogin
Guess how many times Jews have been caught doing damage and blaming it on
"anti-semites"
But I do believe more relevant to Miller's pouts is Jewish writer Tom Friedman's column (disingenuous,because he tacitly supported many of the Bush policies he now criticises)of concession to Iran, which he admits is beating
Bush across the Middle East.
I heard parts of this speech and applaud the President for calling it like it is!
I didn't hear it, but it's a grand speech. To bad that attitude and forthright justice will become ichabod on the White House in January.
Great speech!
Ken Hoop, this part's for you:
Some people suggest if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it. Israel's population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you.
Bush's continuing hypocrisy.
Bush's own government has repeatedly conducted negotiations with terrorists and radicals, including:
Iran. Bush sent Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, then posted to Baghdad, to negotiate with Iran over security issues affecting Iraq. Bush's current Ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, told ABC News, "We are willing to sit down with Iran face to face for talks on Iraqi security at the invitation of the Iraqi government. We've had three rounds of those talks and we've told them we are ready to again."
Libya. Although Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi was behind the December, 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie Scotland, which killed 270 people, most of them Americans, the Bush Administration conducted months of negotiations with the terrorists, culminating in a 2003 agreement to dismantle Libyan long-range missiles and weapons of mass destruction;
North Korea. The Bush Administration, led by Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, has held numerous direct negotiations with the North Korean regime, a charter member of Mr. Bush's "axis of evil."
It should be noted that in each instance, the negotiations actually advanced America's security position. So even the Bush administration, by its actions, attests to the efficacy of negotiating with evildoers.
All this is to say George W. Bush is a hypocrite. So deep is his cynicism that he would go on foreign soil to invoke history's greatest crime to condemn conduct he himself has engaged in.
"Guess how many times Jews have been caught doing damage and blaming it on
"anti-semites""
Well, Ken, where's your proof? That link is not related to your comment.
You're full of shit, KKKen, and you know it.
Chamberlain/Hitler/Czechoslovakia/Churchill blah blah blah.
A one size fits all response from neo-cons for whom there seems to be no difference between a loose knit web of international criminals and the mightiest European industrial/military power of the mid 20th century.
The 'war on terror' wretchedly prosecuted by the incompetents running this administration actually has two goals.
A make-work project for defense contractors (Republican contributors) and a key component of Republican political campaigns.
The former works beautifully (billions and billions to such as Haliburton) while the latter may be nearing the end of its usefulness.
Awww, Arthur, art not selling well?
Shaw: You notice that President BUSH didn't go and lend the credibility of his office to any farcical propaganda exercise with those countries you cite.
True, we HAVE been talking to all those countries and it's right that we should.
The President's point is that if all you are going to do is talk, you are enabling the terrorists.
"Arthur:" The questions isn't whether Bush and co. have run the war badly. The question is whether the surrender monkeys in your party could have run it any better.
The answer is NO!
Wordsmith: We may have to ask the White House for a clarification of the President's remarks. Clearly, he can't mean to suggest that the surrender monkeys in the Democrat Party support Israel and would back them up with military force.
Talk about a ME crowd. President Bush is speaking to the Knesset, which is pretty ripe with peace at all cost idiots, about appeasement and pitfalls. And all Obama, Pelosi, and Biden can think of is: 'President Bush is talking about me! Must deflect!' Sounds like a few people have guilty conciences for their past actions.
True, we HAVE been talking to all those countries and it's right that we should.
The President's point is that if all you are going to do is talk, you are enabling the terrorists.
Agreed. That's why Obama's talking about talking AND negotiating.
You can't negotiate without talking first. See the Bush administration.
Bush was slandering Obama hoping people wouldn't notice that what Obama is suggesting is exactly what Bush has done.
Bush is one funny guy.
Atheling
Your comment is not related to Miller's post either.
"In the predominantly Jewish neighborhoods of Borough Park and Flatbush in Brooklyn, New York, rocks were thrown through windows of eight Jewish-owned shops. News media across the nation reacted with alarm, comparing the incidents to "Nazi atrocities" and calling for increased vigilance against "anti-Semitism." Jewish pressure groups demanded and got increased police patrols in their neighborhoods. The Jewish mayor of New York City at the time, Ed Koch, offered a $10,000 reward for the perpetrator. The Jewish Community Relations Council offered a $5,000 reward. Finally, the police made an arrest in the case, and charged the suspect with 14 counts of felonies and misdemeanors relating to this supposed "hate crime."
The arrestee was a 38-year-old Jew named Gary Dworkin. As in most such cases, it was alleged by the Jewish community that Dworkin was mentally ill and deserved more sympathy than punishment.
"
Merely one of many examples.
wordsmith | Homepage | 05.15.08 - 4:25 pm
If his dad's Jim Baker had only meant it, he could have bested permanently this piece of "more Amen Corner wars for Israel" as Buchanan would put it.
As a matter of fact, as Buchanan alluded, and not solitarily,in his book on the world war period, Chamberlain did not go far enough.
Among many others, I recommend British historian AJP Taylor's "Origins of the Second World War."
Atheling:
Thanks for your concern but I'm keeping quite busy.
Mike typed:
"Arthur:" The questions isn't whether Bush and co. have run the war badly.
Glad it doesn't matter any longer how much the neocons have f**ked things up. So performance no longer matters.
Great.
Ken:
One example. One. Where are the "many"?
Sorry, but I don't buy it.
http://www.savethemales.ca/001863.html
You're only exposing your naeivete'.
Lenni Brenner and Israel Shahak
two Jewish historians who present a mega-picture of self-inflicted anti-semitism accompanied by traditional Jewish anti-Gentile attitudes.
Miller if he is a Churchill maven and admirer must be aware of this document as well.
"On February 8, 1920, Winston Churchill published an article, “Zionism Versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People,” in the Illustrated Sunday Herald (London), reprinted in Lenni Brenner, ed., 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis, p. 23 (2002). Among other things, Churchill said (pp. 25-26):
There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshe-vism. . . by. . . international and for the most part atheistical Jews. . . . [I]t probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin [who had a Jewish grandfather and by some accounts a Jewish wife], the majority of leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. . . . And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism. . . has been taken by Jews. . . . The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey on the temporary prostration of the German people.
Churchill’s views, as expressed here, resemble those of the Times of London’s correspondent in Russia, Robert Wilton.
"
Hoop: You talking about your Bolshevik relatives again.
Shaw: Just what do you want to negotiate with Iran that Bush and Co. haven't thought of?
I'd say we already made it clear that before we consider any of their greivances they must stop killing Americans.
You want to toss that card away? For what end?
Arthur says:
"Thanks for your concern but I'm keeping quite busy"
Really? During a "recession", you're doing well??? Price of gas, food, etc... going up but "art" is still selling?
The rich are always with us.
Oh right... your customers. Do you vet them to ensure that none work for, say... Halliburton? Or do you take your money from anyone?
Bush never mentioned Obama's name once in his speech. It's funny how the democraks painted themselves into the postion of being seen as appeasers and cowards without mentioning their names even once. It's a case of a guilty conscience the democraks have and it's plain for all the world to see. Obama has no clothes.
You're right Jennifer. They did sort of jump off the mark a bit quick on that one didn't they?
It's almost as if they were admitting that they are appeasers and enablers of the monsters who destroy peace and murder the innocent.
Good point, Jennifer. So good, in fact, that before I came here, I finished publishing a post saying the same thing. I bet we are the only two people on Earth who noticed that!
It is true that Bush never mentioned Barack Obama in his speech.
Perhaps he was talking about Former Secretary's of State Shultz, Baker, and Powell, all Republicans, and all who believe it is in the best interests of America to talk to and negotiate with our enemies.
Even as we keep the pressure on them.
Baker's views are well known from the Iraq Study Group and Colin Powell has been quoted extensively today after Bush's speech.
In a December 2006 Op/Ed piece in the WSJ, Abraham Sofear notes ...
"President Reagan challenged Soviet behavior by supporting groups fighting communist intervention, building the military, strengthening NATO, condemning human-rights violations, commencing a missile-defense program, and conveying the message of freedom in every way possible. George Shultz supported these efforts but sought to negotiate with the Soviets in an attempt to increase stability, reduce nuclear weapons, attain freedom for oppressed groups, and enhance understanding.
If I am forced to choose which approach I will support, I think I would be happy to be counted as someone who supports the views and preferred methods of engagement of these "appeasers."
Mike, to quote Jack Nicholson a bit I think these people 'can't handle the truth.' It does not say anything good about Sen. Obama or Rep. Pelosi or Sen. Biden and their capability to put country before self in order to lease said country. President Bush was talking in a general way to a foreign parliament about the pitfalls of appeasement. And they think President Bush is calling them appeasers. What did Carley Simon sing to describe these folks, 'You so vain you probably think this speech is about you.' So they scream to deny it. Methinks they doth protest too much.
Dave: You and I both know that Shultz, Baker and Powell never meant that the President of the United States should engage in meetings without preconditions that would only serve as propaganda vehicles for the bad guys.
I would just remind you again, that I am reading Shultz's memoir where he discusses the proper balance between diplomacy and military muscle. The Democrats have sadly thrown away Teddy's Roosevelt's stick and are only speaking softly.
The Iranians are laughing their asses off.
Anna: Indigo will have to include you in that select group who instantly saw how obviously stupid it was for Democrats to jump on Bush for this.
Methinks they dost protest too much!
All these ruminations and excuses by the democraks just show they have no understanding of foreign policy and it should be left up to the grownups. Appeasement has never worked. Reagan met with Gorby to dictate to him the terms of the Soviet surrender when Gorby saw that he had lost the Cold war. That was not a negotiation or a sit down for tea and crumpets. Most of the the things I have been reading and hearing today are so laughable not even jimmah carter could beat the present day democraks for stupidity, backward thinking and appeasement.
Just WTF would Obama say to Hamas, Hezbollah or Ahmadinejad? There really was a Holocaust and you and David Duke are wrong. Maybe he could tell them that there is hope for them if we lay down our arms so they can make piece of, I mean peace with Israel. How about the Obama with no clothes just tells them we're going to cut and run, please don't hurt us.
Worthless, completely worthless. Obama really does have no clothes on and he's an embarassment for all to see.
I just posted on this as well and linked to ya. This speech put a HUGE smile on my face. Great stuff. I even found the video that had him delivering the best 2 paragraphs of the speech.
There was so much good stuff in that speech. I should have posted the whole thing. It was replayed on C-Span last night and I would recommend everyone interested in being informed on this issue should view it.
I support this troop.
US Soldier Refuses to Serve in 'Illegal Iraq War'
عدد القراء : 15
16/05/2008 "I stand before you today with the strength and clarity and resolve to declare to the military, my government and the world that this soldier will not be deploying to Iraq."
With these words, Matthis Chiroux, who was due to be deployed next month in Iraq, declared his refusal to serve in a war he considered as "illegal." He was speaking in the sun-filled rotunda of a congressional building in Washington.
Chiroux joined the US army straight out of high school nearly six years ago, and worked his way up from private to sergeant. He served in Afghanistan, Germany, Japan, and the Philippines.
"My decision is based on my desire to no longer continue violating my core values to support an illegal and unconstitutional occupation... I refuse to participate in the Iraq occupation," he said, as a dozen veterans of the five-year-old Iraq war looked on.
Minutes earlier, Chiroux had cried openly as he listened to former comrades-in-arms testify before members of Congress about the failings of the Iraq war. The testimonies were the first before Congress by Iraq veterans who have turned against the five-year-old war.
Some 300,000 of the 1.6 million US soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from the psychological traumas of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression or both, an independent study showed last month
It’s true that Bush did not actually name Senator Obama in his speech before the Knesset yesterday, but Bush suggested that Democrats want to "negotiate with terrorists" while Republicans want to fight terrorists.
When he gave that statement in front of a foreign government during an American presidential race everyone knew exactly who he was talking about. And those of you who dissemble about it are being disingenuous, and, as usual, dishonest.
There is a difference between talking and appeasement. Appeasement means giving into someone’s demands in order to achieve a goal. I challenge all of you here to give me evidence of Senator Barack Obama having conceded anything to any terrorist group in order to secure the peace.
He hasn’t.
And again, because you deal in half-truths and outright dishonesty, you will never acknowledge that you don’t understand the difference between talking and appeasement. Senator Obama has never appeased anyone to gain any concession—and you all know it.
Meanwhile, the Republican Secretary of Defense and the Republican Secretary of State are engaged in negotiating with Iran. Part of Bush's Axis of Evil. Is negotiation appeasement? If it is, then Bush is guilty of the actual deed, by your dishonest standards.
And this bit of history from your candidate, Senator McCain:
Two years ago, just after Hamas won the Palestinian parliamentary elections, a reporter interviewed McCain for the British network Sky News's "World News Tonight" program.
Here is the crucial part of the exchange:
The reporter asked: "Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?"
McCain answered: "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice…,”
Your own Republican candidate for president is on record saying of Hamas “sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them…” McCain would “deal” with a terrorist group.
Get it?
And this same candidate smeared Senator Obama as the Hamas-supported candidate when just 2 years ago McCain said the US would have to acknowledge Hamas!
The jokes just keep writing themselves.
The question isn't whether Bush and co. have run the war badly. The question is whether the surrender monkeys in your party could have run it any better.
Mike, you're right. The liberals do have a sick and bizarre propensity for intentionally losing wars!
Shaw - you can't negotiate with terrorists. They value nothing, so where's the bargaining power in that? The only thing those barbarians understand is force.
Mike, all I have to say to Obama is "If the shoe fits (and it fits perfectly) wear it!" Jennifer is right; Bush never even mentioned Obama's name, but the truth will out. It always does and Obama can't handle the truth. Too bad!
Hoop: You talking about your Bolshevik relatives again.
No, but your hero Churchill went on to serve Bolshevik interests big time with his War Party machinations.
Read David Irving for more.
Hoop the Dupe:
You're so naive.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
War makes for strange bedfellows.
When did a war ever run smoothly or perfectly? Never!
Your myopic view of history and ignorance of human nature are perfect examples of why leftards are useful idiots for the enemy.
atheling2 wondered:
Oh right... your customers. Do you vet them to ensure that none work for, say... Halliburton? Or do you take your money from anyone?
Very few Halliburton types here in Seattle.
Happily.
Mainly tech/professional/academic types. You know, well educated Democrats for the most part.
confused liberal states...…” McCain would “deal” with a terrorist group.
Yeah, though I think McCain is a complete moroon at least he knows he has to deal with them by using strength and forcing them to lay down their arms and not going to a negotiating table from a position of weakness and begging them to cooperate as the Obama with no clothes would do. Achmanutjob has to understand he will isolated or destroyed if he doesn't give up his nuclear weapons programs not have his birthday taken away. Obama with no clothes is nothing more than a prop man for George Soros I think everyone has to agree that we haven't heard a single thing out of the Obama with no clothes mouth that makes anyone think he is intelligent. His lines are worn out liberal rhetoric that has been dicreditted year after year word after word. appeasement after appeasement.
Atheling, it's a complete waste of time to discuss anything with the eunuch al qaeda ken hoop.
"...at least he knows he has to deal with them by using strength and forcing them to lay down their arms and not going to a negotiating table from a position of weakness and begging them to cooperate as the Obama with no clothes would do"
Yes. You're now guessing at what Senator Obama would do. Guessing.
You can't produce one shred of evidence for what you just wrote. Makin' stuff up now are we?
That's all you got? Then you guys got nuthin'.
And more evidence for why Americans are leaving your party in droves.
If the Republican Party were dog food, you'd have to take it off the shelf.
I'm paraphrasing one of your own people who said that--Republican Tom Davis of Virginia.
"...we haven't heard a single thing out of the Obama with no clothes mouth that makes anyone think he is intelligent."
This is laughable, and quite an excellent example of how you guys are losing elections in red districts.
82% of the American people think this country is going in the wrong direction. That's the direction the Republican Party took it in.
So you 18 percenters go right ahead and stay just where you are while the rest of the country votes for change.
I notice some of you asking why Obama and/or the Democrats are assuming it is they to whom Bush was referring...
The answer is that it is politically advantageous for Obama to position himself as the target of this overreaching and one-too-many-times-to-the-well rhetoric. Moreover, it links McCain to Bush, and that's a sure winner for the Democrats.
Make no mistake: the greatest gift George W. Bush could make to Barack Obama is to repeat this speech every day until the election.
Philip: I don't know that President Bush WAS refering to the Obamessiah. But he sure inserted himself into the debate didn't he?
Now, he's out there lecturing Bush on launching a "political attack" overseas.
How laughable is that? Carter, Clinton, Pelosi et. al. have ALL done exactly what he is criticizing Bush for and THEY have doen far worse.
Obama would NOT negotiate from a position of strength. In every way he can he is signaling the Carter approach which if you recall was a HUGE failure in dealing with Iran and we are still paying the price.
Why anyone would trust Carter II when Carter I was such a monumental failure is beyond me.
Arthur didn't answer my question.
Do you take money from anyone? Or do you vet them?
atheling harped:
Do you take money from anyone? Or do you vet them?
I don't vet anyone atheling. I would happily accept money from a Halliburton employee. War profiteers have an obligation to spread the wealth around I feel.
Really? But most of your clients are left wing profiteers.
I wasn't aware that Pioneer Square in Seattle was a hangout for neocons.
Mike typed:
Really? But most of your clients are left wing profiteers
I'll bite Mike.
What's a 'left-wing' profiteer? Sorry, 'welfare queen' is not allowed.
Actually Seattle as a whole is not a hangout for neocons. The local ones tend to the eastside suburbs.
I'd call lefties who got rich investing in the capitalist system they despise profiteers even if apologists and enablers like you do not.
82% of the American people think this country is going in the wrong direction.
Yup, right after the democraks took over congress their approval rating surged downwards as gas prices went the roof.
...This is laughable, and quite an excellent example of how you guys are losing elections in red districts.
The only reason why democraks won in the special elections was because the democraks were more conservative than the wishy washy moderates the republicans put up for the election. People want real conservatives to vote for. They don't want moderate democrak lite candidates. Conservatives are staying away from the elctions because the republican leadership has to be expunged including the louse they gave us for a presidential candidate.
...Make no mistake: the greatest gift George W. Bush could make to Barack Obama is to repeat this speech every day until the election.
Keep thinking that Phillip, us bitter people that are clinging to our guns are truly offended at the president speaking the truth.
That speech will be remembered by every single person that goes into the voting booth in November when people are deciding which maroon they will vote for; the Obama with no clothes or John McCain with little brains.
.
The terrorist monkey can not be negotiated with. The only reason to maybe talk to Ahmadamadmonkey in say maybe Switzerland is to provoke him by debating his ideology and criticizing the hatred. Force him to say lots of stupid and insane things which would be widely publicized thus educating more people to his ideology's insanity. This, I am quite sure, Obama would never do.
Ouch, Obama and the poor little Dems were hit a little too close to home by what GW said. It's one of the best things Bush has ever said. Bravo! And he didn't even have to mention the Dhimmicrats or any body's name.
So sure, then he folded in Saudi Arabia, but what he said in Israel almost makes that OK.
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
appease the appeasers
don't embarrass them
by calling them appeasers
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe said
have a sit down with Hitler
he should have been sweet-talked
he had goodness within
.
Appeasement Talk Bothers Appeasers
Help Halt Terrorism Now!
USpace
. . .
You're right Jennifer. They did sort of jump off the mark a bit quick on that one didn't they?--mike
It's almost as if they were admitting that they are appeasers and enablers of the monsters who destroy peace and murder the innocent.--jennifer
CNN's Ed Henry reported that "White House aides privately acknowledged the remarks were aimed at the presidential candidate and others in his party."
Sasha Issenberg writes for the Boston Globe: "White House officials indicated that the criticism applied to Obama."
Brian Williams reported on the NBC Nightly News that "it was clear to those listening that it was in part to make a point about Barack Obama back home."
NBC correspondent John Yang then added: "Privately, White House officials said the shoe fits the Democratic frontrunner."
Heh.
Shaw: I don't know who those "reporters" are talking about. Did they give a name?
I do know this:
http://www.examiner.com/a-
139593..._not_Obama.html
White House counselor Ed Gillespie expressed surprise at the volume and tone of the orchestrated criticism from numerous Democrats. Gillespie said Friday the White House had expected critics to interpret Bush's remarks as a rebuke to former President Jimmy Carter, who met last month with Hamas, a terrorist group.
Unfortunately, I cannot check your "news" reports as you didn't provide a link. But perhaps you can review them and see WHO went on the record.
And in another interview:
http://elections.foxnews.com/200...top/? wpcf7=json
“We did not anticipate that it would be taken that way, because it’s kind of hard to take it that way if you look at the actual words of the president’s remarks, which are consistent with what he has said in the past relative to dealing with groups like Hezbollah and Hamas and Al Qaeda,” Gillespie said.
But of course that's all water under the bridge now. Obama stuck himself right in the center of that target and Bush and McCaina are scoring bullsyes off him.
Obviously, Obama doesn't quite have the "judgement" let alone the "experience" to know when to shut up. It's all due to his massive ego, which could be his undoing.
The fact that the Democrapic ESTABLISHMENT went ballistic, is proof that Bush hit a grand slam. Look here how all the loonies appeared before the ink was dry. OBAMA said exactly what Bush said he said, that he would talk with out pre conditions. He said it more than once. So now all you detractors here Did he lie then or is he lying now, or to you does it even matter? and Arturstone how did all those Liberals compile the money to deal with a troll like you in this EVIL country that actually has some CONSERVATIVES in it.
Mike typed:
Why do you hate entrepreneurs so much Mike?
Thousands of people in this region ('investors' aside) work for firms such as Nintendo, Costco, Microsoft, Starbucks, Amazon, etc. and created wealth by their labor. You, a conservative should, of all people, understand that.
On the other hand the only employment I see mentioned in your biography is a stint at the EPA paid for in part by me, a US taxpayer.
Sorry.
Here's Mike's pearl of wisdom I failed to include:
I'd call lefties who got rich investing in the capitalist system they despise profiteers even if apologists and enablers like you do not.
I've got news for Miller. Even if McCain is elected he will have to negotiate with Iran to extricate America's beaten troops out of Iraq's quagmire.
"Arthur:" I celebrate capitalists. It's the elite neosocialists like your ilk that despise the fruits of liberty.
In your world freedom is only for the politically correct. You and Hoopie would make the rest of us your slaves.
No thanks!
Hmmmm.
Your resume shows a conspicuous lack of any remotely 'capitalist' activity.
How interesting.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/
2...in4104474.shtml
Egypt sees right through Bush, Israel's servant.
I prefer service to my country over financial gain Artie.
You should try it some time.
Hoop:
I'd rather be Israel's servant than a kuffar to Muslims, you POS.
Gee Mike, I think they whine too much. If Obama is going to go this ballistic over a speech, what will happen when a real crisis happens? NYC wont be the only nuclear meltdown it seems.
Anna: Obama does have this tendency to whine and complain if he even suspects he is being dissed. You remember that he only got upset with Rev. Wright when the Rev. said Obama's denial of Wright's words were because Obama was a "politician."
Obama claimed he was "disrespected."
And now, he jumps into this thing with Bush when a wiser man would have let it pass without drawaing attention to it.
Now, everyone knows Obama is weak on foreign policy and lacks the criticial judgement and experience to be President.
But then, whoever thought some community activist, turned State Senator, turned Senator in the span of a few short years had the right stuff for that job anyway?
Obama is too thin skinned, just like a celebrity would be.
He hasn't the character, judgment or temperament to occupy the White House.
Mike typed:
I prefer service to my country over financial gain Artie.
Heh. Heh.
Of course you do Mike.
Sadly only in Mike's America could working on Republican political campaigns be considered 'service to my country'.
You been 'redacted' yet by the good people at the Delaware County Republican Committee?
"Arthur" Since you have done NOTHING to serve your country in ANY CAPACITY, you are hardly one to be lecturing ANYONE.
The bile laced effrontery with which you chided the highly decorated Old Soldier would be another case in point.
You are a parasite on the hard won freedom and democratic gains made by others.
Mike:
Arthur is also a parasite of the rich.
People like him go to gallery walks, art show openings, drinking wine, nibbling on cheese, having artsy fartsy discussions, all pretentious and gussied up, cozying up with anyone who has the money to throw at them for the art they sell... while spewing indignation over President Bush and the "country club" Republican Party...
Yet Arthur, he who has no stones, gladly takes money from those rich fat cats, while pretending to be their friends.
What a pathetic, delusional, and cowardly existence.
Heh. Heh.
Mike, your capitalist 'street creds' are sadly lacking.
atheling
Ha. Ha. You can pick more off the mark cliches into a sentence than anyone here. Well done!
Commenting by HaloScan
