Social Sense
Just testing to see if I can comment again..lol, 
You certainly can, my friend! - ed.
Why do you assume Bush has any interest in holding down the price of oil? Zero sum game. He wins - we lose.
And more digs at Carter. The broker of Camp David should stay out of the Middle East. Would you propose instead to have Condo Rice rolling around there like a marble trying to find someone who will talk to her? I prefer Carter.
Meanwhile multiple bombings today as McCain's 100 Year War moves along with Iran probably the only winner.
One thing history has taught us: Soldiers aren't statesmen.
Ducky, there is no way you can take all that from McCain's throw-away remark about the 100 years... As if he said he wanted that to happen? You're a very smart guy (loved your six word memes at FJ's, I believe it was?, by the way)...why resort to blowing lines so out of proportion when you know he didn't mean it that way? it destroys the good arguments you infrequently make (smile)
Mustang; Sadly, Barbara Boxer represents ME !! ISn't that precious?
I just wanted to tell you I watched her and her thugs make a presentation once on CSPAN, in the Senate, and two of the three signs they held up (Pie charts, etc.) had misspellings on them. I was CRINGING! TRUE story. "Migh tax dolers at wurk"
Z, I would accept that McCain's line was out of context if we were, as a country, willing to use that holistic approach across the spectrum.
You know full well that much of what Clinton and Obama has said receives the same treatment as McCain's comment.
Myself, I get a little frustrated at the tone that has been erected by the likes of Rush "Talent on Loan from Synthetic Morphine" Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly or (m)Ann Coulter.
And on the left I don't like people like Randi Rhodes, either.
I would welcome a calmer more reasoned national dialogue. Part of the problem I see is that conservatives have been allowed to make their own definitions and talking points for so long that a lot of the errors need to be excised and despite the protestations of a "liberal media" there is no such voice for the left.
Ducky:
McCain’s statement (taken out of context) appears moot at this point. He did not suggest maintaining combat forces in Iraq for 100 years; he did say that a military presence long into the future was feasible. We have maintained military assistance groups in several countries since the end of World War II, including Japan, South Korea, and Germany. So nothing he said is a departure from the diplomacy of both Democratic and Republican administrations for a long time. The issue is moot because, as I understand the impending status of forces agreement with the Iraqi government, the US does not intend to maintain a sizeable force in Iraq, and Iraq does not intend to ask for a sizeable force. Ergo, it is a nonevent. People who argue differently engage in political spin; it is an example of the kind of intellectual dishonesty that causes frustration and disgust among many Americans.
Carter is interfering in matters that (1) do not concern him, and (2) are exceedingly dangerous. That he does not seem to care about it tells us that he is at least irresponsible, or if he does actually believe that sitting down with Hamas is responsible, then he has other serious issues well beyond incompetence. Having botched this country for four years of a horribly failed administration, he should slink off into the underbrush and stay out of the way. You might have guessed that I am not a Carter fan. No one in his right mind is . . . but I do agree with you that Dr. Rice seems confused about her role and mission as Secretary of State.
If you think that soldiers aren’t statesmen, then you literally have no clue about the role of the military. Until the recent wave of lackluster politicians (Bush/Cheney, Gore, Kerry, Obama, and Clinton), most Presidents (and many Secretaries of State), had military backgrounds. George C. Marshall served as JCS Chairman, Secretary of State, and Secretary of Defense under Harry Truman. Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson had wartime service. Carter was a nuclear squid, Gore was a dope smoking public affairs specialist, Kerry a disgrace to his uniform and his country, and Bush was a member of the air national guard (which might not count as military service). The knowledge of senior officers’ vis-à-vis matters involving regional diplomacy would shame most members of congress, and probably three-quarters of the state department. It could be that your anti-military biases are showing.
Z-Lady:
Thank you for stopping by! Boxer is piece of work, all right. I am not amazed that she was ever elected to the Senate because snakes do find their way inside the house from time to time. I am amazed that she ever won reelection. Start an anti-Boxer campaign, Z . . . I know you can do it.
We'll call it the BOXER REBELLION.
Semper Fi
Ducky II:
Your statement (above) seems to suggest that you are more moderate than you pretend as you make the rounds. In that case, we may have something in common after all.
No one with any brains will listen to Rush Limbaugh for more than three minutes. Most people who follow that twit regard him as a political genius on the order of Machiavelli. He is at best an entertainer, and not a very good one at that.
You are correct: we need a rational dialogue. This isn't possible, however, for as long as politicians and pretenders engage in that "intellectual dishonesty" I mentioned earlier. If we had honest people pursuing their political agenda, then Barack Obama wouldn't even be a contender at this point in his rather short political career. Honestly, if Clinton and Obama are the best and brightest in the Democratic Party, the DNC is in deep trouble. How Dean ever became Chairman is as hard to understand as immaculate conception.
Semper Fi
In the matter of the first part, mustang, I think Eisenhower is the only on you can really say was from the military class. Odd example he. Rather progressive administration.
He initiates the national highway program, expands Social Security, appoints Earl Warren (guess the jury is out on how much Ike know about the future Warren) and as a lasting gift to the nation warned us about the military industrial complex. Hardly hard core right.
On the foreign policy side he couldn't say no the the French and started the terror bombing of Saigon and generally let the CIA behave very poorly. Still all in all a decent president.
Then there is George Marshall. I remember someone tearing down Marshall in front of my father. I was quite young but not so young that I didn't sense dad was big time pissed. But again, Marshall was hardly a classic right winger.
Ike understood command but I certainly don't think anyone after him did. Kennedy is an interesting case. He risked the nuclear exchange. Cold War was a draw after that. All he had to do was wait for the inevitable deterioration of the command economy but he was too macho not to get sucked into Vietnam.
Kennedy really won the Cold War, not Reagan, who was a terrible naive president.
Notice you didn't mention George Bush in your list of disgraces to the uniform. Always giving the R's a pass. That's a problem with conservatives.
I admit that Kerry used his tour to advance a political career and I don't have much good to say about him. Same with McCain who also wants to parlay his POW experience, his adultery and his marriage to the beer heiress into a disastrous presidency (do you really want that guy in there with the state of this economy?)
Also despite many of your examples serving in the military it is impossible to trace a consistent ideology from them collectively.
In response to your second post, mustang.
My friends consider me the moderate, yes. I would call myself a pragmatist and I think that like many of us who get pinned with labels (yourself included) I care about my country and what my country can do in the world and try to look for what works.
My main concern and what has been a field of study for me is popular culture and alienation. I believe we a very alienated populace (not in touch with our core being). I read hard leftists because people like Marx, Gramsci, Lukacs etc. have written intelligently on this topic. I don't accept them wholesale but they must be considered.
I also try to listen to church going Christians across the spectrum. Their unity and devotions are admirable and should offer a way out of our consumerist dilemma. What frustrates me is their concentration on eschatology. I'm not interested in the end but rather how the Gospels have instructed us to live in the here and now.
To be blunt I feel the Gospels push me towards Social Democracy and away from militarism.
Oh and no kidding. The topic of pop culture and alienation. It's hard to compress in short paragraphs but I do suspect you have some interesting observations on it.
Ducky, you make such sense in some of these posts, and you complain about divisiveness; why do you sometimes come off so inflammatory and belittling, how does that help us understand each other better and be more 'tolerant' (gag, did I say that!?)? YOU DO favor the Left, you know that. And you have to know the media does, too.
WHile I don't believe the media has given either Clinton or Obama total free passes on what they've said in this campaign, I believe mcCain's comment was clearly misinterpreted, and running with it in its misinterpreted form's not fair. How can you misinterpret "White GREED" and "I misspoke on Bosnia sniper fire"? One's racist and the other's bald face lying.
By the way; her saying she ran from sniper fire in BOSNIA and her husband writing that off as "she was tired" is NUTS, don't you think? It's like I, having never had children, said "I really went through a terrible time having my child". How do you FORGET you never HAD ONE? Hill NEVER ran from ANY sniper fire in her life, right?.... THAT is lying. THAT is getting a free pass because nobody's addressing my point, just that she MISSPOKE. that's NUTS.
Commenting by HaloScan
