I love it how liberals try say they are not who they really are.
I have said many times that liberals think you can "talk to" and "reason" with terrorists.
Then someone comes on here and says I am talking about a cartoon liberal.
Then Hillary says last night that she will do everything in her power to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power.
What is "everything in her power"?
The one thing it is NOT is a military strike, which would be 100% effective.
She thinks Iran will not become a nuclear power through:
1. Diplomacy
2. Economic sanctions
3. negotiations
4. more liberal crap I can't remember.
There is NOTHING wrong with diplomacy and talking and reasoning with many countries. However, it is NOT okay when you are dealing with someone who says Israel will be taken off the map and that the Holocaust never happened.
For some reason, liberals still think you can talk and reason with terrorist.
Even though they will deny they are what they are...
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Hillary Clinton wants to "talk" to Iran
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
43 comments:
Game,
If the libs won't admit you are right, ban them for a while. Only let them back after an apology and and an unequivocable admission that you are correct.
I disagree,PCD,the comedic views are too amazing to stop completely.
They are enjoyable to behold.GAME is doing fine at not allowing the
obscenities and vulgarities to get
priority rather than reasonable debate.If too bizarro-world,the RIGHT ON arguments always hit the mark and upstage the buffoonery...
Ridiculous. Hillary Clinton is hardly a "liberal", any statesman with a brain understands that you talk to your enemies, and the "wipe off Israel" quote was a deliberate misinterpretation by a Jewish interpreter, and I don't happen to believe it would have been an inappropriate comment for any Iranian leader to have made, anyway.
More bullshit, Game. You just keep spewing the same old ignorant crap. All crap, all the time.
I love it how liberals try say they are not who they really are.
And I love how wingnuts say whatever comes out of their asses.
a military strike, which would be 100% effective
You can't f**king be serious, Game. Please name me one, just one military expert who can even IMAGINE that military action against Iran would be "100%" effective. This is hallucinagenic blabber. Effective at what?
Why do you consistently spew the imbicilic idea that Ahmedinijad has any power in Iran. Do you not read newspapers? Do you not know that MA is primarily a mouthpiece with little if any power?
And what proof do you have that MA is a terrorist? In no way should this be construed that I deny that Iran has given support to terrorist organizations.
Finally, a terrorist is someone who uses terror tactics toward an end. MOST of these people have motives and motives and objectives can be negotiated with. Not in all cases. There are some who use terror for no rational reason. Even if you could prove that MA is a terrorist, you could not prove that he falls into that latter category.
Jim, most of your comment was to stupid and emotional to respond to, except for how wrong you are about a military strike.
Bombing the shit out of their nuclear plants and reactors would take them back many years...fact.
Really? Where are they?
Jim, most of your comment was to stupid and emotional to respond to. Meaning you have no answer to obviously well-thought out and reasoned comments.
Game, Iran is absolutely no threat to any American...you're seeing your magic imaginary "Islamofascists" again, and you have no right to try to convince Americans that they should.
Your allegiances are simply stronger to Israel's interests then to America, and you simply do not have the wisdom or discernment to realize that you have been manipulated.
"Meaning you have no answer to obviously well-thought out and reasoned comments."
I have yet to see such a thing from game or his lackeys.
"a military strike, which would be 100% effective..."
WOW!! How long it will take you to learn the lessons from 'Iraq' blunder?
Also, there is nothing wrong in 'talking'. It should always be the first option.
Again, it's amazing how people don't learn from 'Iraq' blunder and keep going back to the same old 'tough' talk!
ANd...you may want to watch this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JCakTroF88&mode=related&search=
It's funny how the these morons argued for Iraq war!!
game--
What you said in the above post, in addition in the comments, is perfect. Your words are clear, simple, truthful, and to the point.
Our socialists clearly still want to have therapy sessions with dangerous people. Of course diplomacy is the first option. But talk will not stop dangerous people from obtaining destructive -- and in the case of fundies -- suicidal goals.
"Jim obviously wants the terrorists to win."
Well, duh! Who in their right mind honestly thinks we can talk the Mullahs out of giving a nuke or two to the Party of God? (i.e. the Hezb'Allah)
"Geez, is not the open support of the Party of God, Islamic Jihad, and Hamas proof enough?"
Nope.
Do you still support your government's cozy relationship with Saudi Arabia? How about the United Arab Emirates?
Jason, we know full well who the "enemy" is...and it isn't one of your manufactured "terrorists"...
You already turned that trick.
Now go put on a Halloween mask and hide behind trees if you still need to frighten anyone.
I see hash denied Iran, like Hash, wants to wipe Israel off the map.
Here's a little something for you BDS sufferers. Bush did know there was WMD in Iraq and Hussein wanted to leave with $1 Billion and the WMD information.
http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/
2007/09/27/bush-aznar-pre-iraq-war-
memo/
Again, returns inserted to ensure the whole url posts.
Enjoy you liberal deniers of Islamofascism war on the US.
"Do you still support your government's cozy relationship with Saudi Arabia? How about the United Arab Emirates?"
The way the Emirates was demonized over the Dubai ports deal was bigoted and completely despicable. And Saudi Arabia has some of the toughest anti-terrorism laws in the Middle East.
The left is always telling me to make a distinction between a leadership and the people of a country. The left also tells me to make a distinction between normal Muslims and the crazy Muslims.
Which is weird -- when the regime is more moderate than the people, the left sides with the people, while if the regime is crazier than the people like Iran, the left sides with the regime.
I ask you, hash, Jim, Ron, and the rest-- why does the left side with radical Islam? Is this just another case of leftists feeling obligated to oppose the good to be fair to evil? If you cannot tell the difference between the government of the Emirates and the Party of God, something is jammed in your information train.
I ask you, hash, Jim, Ron, and the rest-- why does the left side with radical Islam?
Another of your asinine straw men, Jason. None of us sides with radical Islam. That's just a bullshit assertion.
We can easily separate a government from its people. That's why we love America but despise many of the policies of the current administration.
That's why we understand the complexities of a successful foreign policy with Iran that takes into account the people, culture and trends as opposed to the actions of those in control and the ravings of the mouthpiece.
Is this just another case of leftists feeling obligated to oppose the good to be fair to evil?
More bullshit.
Fudgie, only a total moron like you would seriously cite Sister Toldjah on such an issue (the befuddled bitch actually refers to Juan Cole as a "Bush-hater", as if that was a bad thing...
Secondly, fudgeball, the only one who has "BDS"..."Bush Devotion Syndrome"...is you. The other term, coined by the cretin moneychanger Krauthammer, only illustrates what types of warped minds have influenced your thinking (if it can be called that)...
Go peddle your lies elsewhere.
hash has lost it totally. He can't address the translation therefore he calls the blog owner a nasty name.
Hash, 0, Sister Toldjah, game, set, and match.
You don't have to be brain dead not to believe it. Just rational.
"...maybe liberals are so brain damaged with liberal mental disorder..."
Game, don't you EVER get tired parroting the savage wiener's psychosis, and tired, failed cliches?
"they really believe their comments and actions don't support radical Islam..."
How could you qualify that statement when you cannot even prove you can identify who precisely "radical Islam" actually is, in the first place?
"hash has lost it totally. He can't address the translation therefore he calls the blog owner a nasty name."
Fudgie, it's not namecalling to correctly identify (yet another) wingnut internet fraud, identify e their stupidity and fraudulence simply by pointing to their spewage, and ridiculing their syncophants....there is literally no "there" there.
hash is victorious, and applies celebratory zap to fudgie's ample, dimpled posterior ("don't tase me, daddy....OWWW!! OWWW!!)
"Sister Toldjah"?
Lame, wet, snatch.
"they don't believe their failed liberal social policies don't create a permanent underclass."
Game, how come you won't, despite several requests, identify what specific liberal social policies you feel opposed to?
How come you can't identify the actual sponsors, and their actual political affiliations, of any of these programs?
How come you won't acknowledge that Republican open-borders policies have created the real new permanent underclass and undermined the sovereignity of this nation?
I talk about how liberal policies have created a permanent underclass all the time...not sure how you are unable to remember any one of the posts that explain that...I don't feel like wasting my time doing it again..
"I talk about how liberal policies have created a permanent underclass all the time..."
But you DON'T IDENTIFY AN ACTUAL LIBERAL POLICY, or any FAILED SOCIAL PROGRAMS, EVER.
And you still refuse to reveal whether or not you believe the "Head Start" program is a success, so you cannot even identify one, even when I do the work of identifying one for you...
You're just being evasive because all you want to do is bellyache about "evil lib'rulls", but you know you cannot.
Jim---
I love complexity. However, when a leftist uses a word like nuance or complexity, it is usually used to obfuscate and evade.
I'm glad you realize the Mullahs run the show in Iran, which is NOT a democracy. You are correct-- Ahmadinejad is a mouthpiece. In the last election the Ayatollahs gave the Iranians a choice between Ahmadinejad and Rafsanjani. Rafsanjani has stated that Israel is a one bomb state, and that a nuclear war with the west will eradicate the Zionist entity forever while it will only cause "damages only" in the Muslim world.
I'm sure your friend Hash will be happy.
Anyway, since when did supporting religious fanatics become a progressive value?
"I'm glad you realize the Mullahs run the show in Iran, which is NOT a democracy."
This is true...but why MUST they be a democracy??
"Ahmadinejad is a mouthpiece..."
Again, correct, but if so, why last week's ridiculous blood purge?
He came out looking, overall, WAY better than Hollinger and the vast majority of the leadership of my city. Wingnuts are always hysterical over how such statements are measured on "the Arab street" (who cares?) and it would seem you have elevated him to a cult of personality status there (except in Iran, where the people are geniunely puzzled as to why)...
"I'm sure your friend Hash will be happy."
Why would you write such a thing?
Just because I believe it is a possibility, and that the Jewish diaspora has done much to earn such an outcome, does not mean I relish the idea of that sort of death and destruction...
I've always been very upfront about my belief that this is not the world's time for peace and love, but that is a far cry from the type of monster you (I guess, by necessity) feel you must make me out to be.
"Anyway, since when did supporting religious fanatics become a progressive value?"
I've seen nothing to demonstrate that this is based in reality but it's important to point out that many progressives see your ilk as far more dangerous in the long run.
"If you think Jason Bowden is involved in some secret conspiracy of oilmen and Jooos that control the world, you're a loon."
No, I don't.
I believe you believe in PNAC, etc., IDEALOGICALLY, but only have as much power, in the PRESENT, as your one vote will afford you.
I'm also aware that, as a true believer, you are not necessarily bought and paid for, as other neocons are...but do you not bear even more malelovence toward the nations' future, then? You represent yourself fairly well, know how to write proper English, and seem very intelligent, if sometimes intentionally misleading and overly infatuated with pseudo-intellectualism in personal expression. But you have the capability to influence mens' minds, whereas I only have the ability to appeal to their hearts and souls. To a certain extent, I envy you that...
I do not hate you. I simply see you as the cheerleader of a failed ideology and a terrifying worldview that does not put the American working man first (or even second, or thirteenth).
But I am not a monster.
since when did supporting religious fanatics become a progressive value?
Another ridiculous, false straw man, Jason. It's not. It's a Bush/Rove value.
I believe it is the Democratic Party that now claims we should never act militarily, whether for security, humanitarian reasons, or both, unless the Chinese guy at the UN raises his hand.
False again.
Jim--
You remind me of Boxer from Orwell's Animal Farm.
John Kerry, the Dem candidate in 2005, signed autographs for the Ayatollahs and called the USA an international pariah. Carter stabbed the progressive (albeit corrupt) Shah in the back because the Mullahs were "men of God." Dennis Kucinich just went on Syrian state television to denounce the USA. Noam Chomsky met the Party of God, also to denounce the USA with Nasrallah. I recall Chairman Dean praying with Imam Husham Al-Husainy at the DNC -- Chairman Dean has also been seen wearing a Keffiyeh in solidarity with Palestinian terrorists. Hillary, Edwards, and Obama never shut up about their faith-- geez, what to the Dems have to do to convince you otherwise? I'd like to know.
Signing autographs and wearing a headscarf makes one a terrorist??
Jason, you are being dishonest yet again. I find it hard to believe that you don't know that Khatami was just about the ideal Iranian president, from the perspective of the U.S. He was a committed reformist, and dedicated himself to economic and social liberalism.
As far as Dean goes, you are laughably dishonest. So, therefore, I am laughing in your face. HA HA HA.
Dean not only had the support of AIPAC during his presidential bid, but his wife and children are practicing Jews.
http://www.pjvoice.com/jta.pdf
realism--
"I find it hard to believe that you don't know that Khatami was just about the ideal Iranian president."
Well, I know people like you and Hash believe this. Mohammed Khatemi has said that "Hezbollah is like a shining sun which warms up all oppressed Muslims, especially those in Palestine and Lebanon," and that Israel is a "racist, terrorist regime."
I'll grant you that Khatemi, unlike Ahmadinejad, does not have apocalyptic dreams of mass suicide, but that's setting the bar really low.
Anyway, the Republicans support democracy in Iran, while the Democrats support the Mullahs.
"the Republicans support democracy in Iran..."
Sure, they do...
Too bad the likes of you and Schlussel-Gelt can't be bothered to support democracy at home.
Anyway, the Republicans support democracy in Iran, while the Democrats support the Mullahs.
Hogwash on both counts!
Jim-as to your above comments and the wild misperceptions about liberals made in this thread I think it becomes pretty clear why the cartoon liberal phrase gets used around here. I support little of what they say I support. But still they continue to insist I do!! I have no idea how they think they are more qualified to tell me what I think than my own mind. It is quite baffling.
Understanding why many in the Moslem world maybe upset means I support the terrorists. As if all in the middle east are terrorists. Being angry at the people who take us and much of the world down a path of destruction and pointing it out means I hate America.
I am not yet convinced that there is a brain in PCDs head. I suspect he may be a robot spewing talking points and writing bumper stickers as that is all he has ever offered. Jason puts on like he is a deep thinker and occasionally maybe he is but most time he just blathers bullshit.
They seem to think that their way is the only way. I favor a different way of doing things. That does not make me a terrorist supporter nor an America hater. I want America safe and favor free elections in all countries. Unfortunately the rightists aren't happy with elections unless they turn out like they want. Hamas was elected as was Chavez. The Iran shia allies won the Iraqi elections. Of course if the fundamentalist Sunnis would have won they wouldn't like that either. They seem to have no concept of differences in culture or religion or regional alliances and think it all should turn out just like they want it to. Precisely why many in the middle east are mad at us in the first place. I wish these people would think before they speak, especially pcd.
Scorpion, glad you are enjoying it!:-) I know what you are saying. I enjoy reading the comments at Huffington Post(ya I know pcd, your enemies and stupid liberal hate monger site) primarily because of the right wingers that come in there with an imagined point.
RIGHT ON BROTHERS!
That reminds me, if you think you have such iron clad points Jason..or pcd for that matter, go comment on Huffington. At least you will get a chance to refine your argument a little..come on, it will be fun!
"I find it hard to believe that you don't know that Khatami was just about the ideal Iranian president."
Well, I know people like you and Hash believe this.
Nice job truncating my quote. The point is, he is incrementally better than any Iranian president that we've seen since. It makes sense to encourage economic and social liberalism. Khatami was the first Iranian since the revolution to acknowledge Israel by talking to the Israeli president at the funeral of the Pope.
Anyway, the Republicans support democracy in Iran, while the Democrats support the Mullahs.
That is a lie.
By taking such a hardline stance against Iran, even when they were willing to open up diplomatic channels with us after 9/11, what Bush is in fact doing is weakening the moderates and liberals in the country by giving Ahmadinejad a pretext for destroying reformers under the pretext of "national security".
I am happy to see that you decided not to pursue your lies about Howard Dean. Perhaps there's hope for you yet. Believe me, Jason, honesty really is the best policy. Using lies to win a debate really doesn't advance the interests of our country at all, assuming that you care about that at all.
Headstart is a great example of what our govt is forced to do.
Headstart takes the place of parents. It is a good program that helps out disadvantaged kids a little, more than if they went home and were watched by no-one.
The problem is that headstart shouldn't even be a program...but failed liberal social programs (welfare, the projects, or any other program that gives hand-out) have created a large group of people who believe that they have no responsiblity for anything at any time. They don't have to feed their kids, the school does it...
They don't have to watch their kids, the school does it. They don't have to teach their kids, the school does it. They don't have to get a job, the govt gives them money. They don't have to get an education or go to class, they don't have to keep their neighborhood looking nice. The list can go on and on.
It's a sad fact that headstart even needs to be a program. The problem is, that since we now have these people that are completely worthless, created by a terrible culture around them and failed liberal social programs, we need to create more liberal social programs to replace the lack of responsiblity.
"Headstart takes the place of parents."
But advantaged parents don't generally instruct in that fashion at that time of day, and, remember, we WANT the parents to be gainfully employed...
Realistically, nowadays, that's an awful lot of hours for kids to be alone, or in the care of a paid caregiver, who cannot offer the opportunities for early development or socialization with the kid's peer group....
Not only is it a successful, advantageous "program" (which I realize is a dirty word with neocons), but it must be EXPANDED, before any other government spending.
"(welfare, the projects, or any other program that gives hand-out)"
Game, welfare barely exists anymore, so that's a 70's bogeyman you're beating like a dead horse.
In addition, public housing is not free....tenants pay RENT for them.
Public housing has varied in success from city to city, and in impossible places like Newark and Chicago, they had to be dismantled, but in New York they are well-run and the city itself could not survive without them.
Push REFORM...but casting public housing away is silly, in the current market....
"They don't have to watch their kids, the school does it...."
That's bullshit...you're extrapolating from the lowest level of savages that you have had exposure to, across the entire population...
It's even worse in the charter schools....close 'em all?
"They don't have to teach their kids, the school does it."
Game, a school's FUNCTION is to teach...parents teach the practicals and should supervise homework and projects, but the academics are the school's job...
It is IDIOTIC to think that hard-working parents should sit down eight hours a night with their kids and educate them....this idiocy is exactly why all homeschooling must be forbidden.
"They don't have to get a job, the govt gives them money. They don't have to get an education or go to class, they don't have to keep their neighborhood looking nice. The list can go on and on."
Here, you're blaming the Head Start program for what are essentially unrelated law enforcement issues, and the fact that these communities are dysfunctional. This is not reasonable or sane.
:It's a sad fact that headstart even needs to be a program. The problem is, that since we now have these people that are completely worthless, created by a terrible culture around them and failed liberal social programs, we need to create more liberal social programs to replace the lack of responsiblity."
No, you are incorrect.
It is not sad that Head Start has to exist.
It is key to the nation's future, and in fact must be expanded to all schools and all socioeconomic groups, even the rich.
As finances deterioriate and parents both have to spend MORE time outside the home, working to make ends meet, it will become a lifesaver for the parents.
Kids cannot be trusted to be home alone anymore, the streets are becoming more and more depraved with savage animals who prey on them, and Americans have never been good parents anyway when it comes to education.
Head Start will meet America's needs in the future, more than it helps meet the ghettos' needs at the present.
ron,
I've already bested Huffington in person back when she was masquerading as a Republican and doing the speaking for her then husband, Michael.
Now, run along before you get replaced by a feed from Fox News.
"I've already bested Huffington in person..."
Lemme guess, fudgie.
She called Roto-Rooter but you showed up at her door and told her, "No, I can snake your pipes for less?"
Rightard fever dreams...
Thanks Ron..I really am finding bizarro-world incredible...maybe the comedy crew can join old hash for a cup of tea and help calm him down before he short circuits.....
I truly enjoy the retorts to the RIGHT ON posts listed....fudgies are certainly valid in the case of horrid Hillary and bozo Bill anytime...keep the teapot warm..old
hash....
Post a Comment