BBC BLOGS - Justin Webb's America
« Previous | Main | Next »

Republicans' lack of leaders

Justin Webb | 07:45 UK time, Thursday, 25 June 2009

Mark Sanford let me down too. I was hoping a day spent with him recently in the rural idyll that is South Carolina might have been an investment in a relationship with a
future GOP presidential candidate.

Now the day comes down to a visit to a gun shop (we've run out of ammo since Obama took over!) and a nice lunch in Beaufort. But as ever we should overlook individual disappointment to survey the bigger picture: the Republicans have a catastrophic lack of young able leaders who can take on Obama in 2012 as noted here and here.

I hereby challenge someone to come up with a serious name for 2012. First person to post the correct result gets a prize (in 2012). Tempted to offer a free holiday to Argentina but it might have to be something less tangible; respect perhaps.

Comments

  • 1. At 08:26am on 25 Jun 2009, U14047833 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 2. At 08:40am on 25 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    "First person to post the correct result gets a prize (in 2012). "

    We could all be dead by then! One radio commentator opined that it would be best for any potential candidate not to have his or her name mentioned at all for fear of some potential scandal.

    Incidentally, why did Sanford think he could fly in and out of the country unrecognised? Surely he realised that someone would see him and, as my mother would remind me, that "truth will out". With common sense like his (or lack of it), definitely not presidential material. The Republicans found out well in time.

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 09:06am on 25 Jun 2009, U14047833 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 4. At 09:07am on 25 Jun 2009, Adz2812 wrote:

    I've got three names, in the following order:

    1) Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota
    2) Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia
    3) Senator John Thune of South Dakota.

    I would also like Florida Governor Charlie Crist, but he's running for Senate so he's out for 2012, but could come in 2016, as could Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.

    Ideally you would have someone like Connectict Governor Jodi Rell who is overwhelmingly popular in a blue state but far too liberal for Republicans

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 09:09am on 25 Jun 2009, U14047833 wrote:

    I herby claim the first prize for the Catchy Phrase and free trip

    "The Living Prophecy"

    "The Time of Trial on Earth"

    "Judgement Day"

    "The Time of Great Purification"

    "The End of this Creation"

    "The Quickening"

    "The End of Time as We Know It"

    "The Shift of the Ages"

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 09:26am on 25 Jun 2009, U14047833 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 7. At 09:47am on 25 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    Justin: What is your criteria?

    Some who could beat Obama in 2012 or someone who could do a better job?

    If the latter: Romney, Gingrich, Guiliani McCain(age) Jindhal, Crist all would be doing a far better job than Obama.

    If the former we would have to see how they performed on the debate and if the media would be more balanced than they were last time.

    Romney and Gingrich would wipe the floor with Obama in a non telepromter/NBC debate

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 09:55am on 25 Jun 2009, Young-Mr-Grace wrote:

    The 2012 election will be for Obama to lose not the republicans to win. Obama has the advantage of incumbency and the election will be in large part a referendum on his performance. It's too early to say whether or not he will be defeatable in 3.5 years time and remember there are always Harold MacMillan's famous "events, dear boy, events" waiting out there.
    I suspect that the Republicans might give Mike Huckabee a run. He's presentable, and will appeal to the conservatives without being as scary to moderates as Sarah Palin. A Huckabee run would give the party the opportunity to say to the conservatives "you had your chance" while Huckabee could be persuaded to choose a younger moderate VP and so present an "heir apparent" for 2016 to the nation and give him/her national exposure. Jindal could be a long term bet if he can put his disasterous "state of the nation" response behind him.

    You're all doing very well !!

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 09:55am on 25 Jun 2009, SaintOne wrote:

    #6

    I would love to see Arny as a presidential candidate! Even though it is not possible, hypothetically the reaction it would have on MAII would be utterly hiliarous. A European running for the republican party. He would be torn in two!

    I might start campaigning to get the laws changed just to see this happen :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 10:38am on 25 Jun 2009, SaintOne wrote:

    #7

    "If the latter: Romney, Gingrich, Guiliani McCain(age) Jindhal, Crist all would be doing a far better job than Obama."

    You left out "in my opinion" at the end.

    Either way, at least wait for a couple of years of his presidency to have past before you get carried away, he still has plenty of time to impress you (although I suspect you are stuck in your view).

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 10:38am on 25 Jun 2009, lockforward5 wrote:

    The same candidate as before Sanford blew it: Mitt Romney, who will go on to be beaten by President Obama, but will make it a closer run thing than McCain did. The GOP will skip the William Hague period of conservative comeback, and go straight to Michael Howard.

    Who's their David Cameron? Why, Bobby Jindal, in 2016!

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 10:39am on 25 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #8

    Even though I watch Fox, there is a liabilty going from a Fox or another cable news show into a political run. Note to Chris Mathews.


    Besides Huckabee has made some enemies in the party by his trashing of Romeny and his antiMorman statements. Romney is much more important in terms of fund raising and has a better record.
    He gave Kennedy the greatest scare ever in a Senatoe election and Ted had to call in the Union thugs and lie about Romney

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 10:44am on 25 Jun 2009, L A Odicean wrote:

    Rick Perry

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 11:24am on 25 Jun 2009, sirisedblvd wrote:

    I put the name of Justin Webb

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 12:10pm on 25 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    I will say this. Mark Sanford will not lose his job for having an extra marital affair. If that were the case, we would have no body left to run this country. What will cost him his job, in my constitutionally protected opinion, is the fact that Sanford abandoned his post for nearly a week. Under South Carolina's State Constitution only the Govenor can actitivate the National Guard in times of emergency. Imagine what would have happened had been hit by a catagory five Hurricane and people were made homeless as a result. What would be South Carolina's reponse? Govenor Sanford put the people of South Carolina in danger and left them vulnerable. For that, he should be impeached.

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 12:13pm on 25 Jun 2009, madigaf wrote:

    The Limbaugh et al brigade will ensure that Palin or Gingrich feature prominently. At the expense of the probably more electable Charlie Crist

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 12:27pm on 25 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    What really annoys me, about these Republicans who have gotten themselves embrioled in sex scandals, is the fact that many of these same people were quick to criticize President Clinton and call for his impeachment, for the exact same thing they have done. This in my mind is the hight of hypocracy on the part of the Republican Party.

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 12:40pm on 25 Jun 2009, Kiwika wrote:

    I got three names for 1212

    Kay Bailey Hutchinson (Senator from Texas)
    Richard Burr (Senator from North Carolina)
    Mitch Daniels (Governor of Indiana)

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 12:47pm on 25 Jun 2009, Pete wrote:

    I've been reading your blogs for a while now, and ok, I get it, so you are a republican! You obviously don't like Obama and feel hell bent on talking about the next Presidential election already! But this is a BBC hosted site, paid for by licence payers, I feel you are not providing balanced or even noteworthy comment.

    It's fine to comment on some republican's affair in a blog, but to turn that into an excuse to discuss who can beat Obama in the next election is just absurd. It's plain cheap.

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 1:05pm on 25 Jun 2009, alanskillcole wrote:


    Surely a teleprompter is only the techy version of reading a piece of paper?
    We see families reading off written statements, what they want to say, at press conferences/outside on steps of a courthouse, etc. It's in their own words, possibly a need to ensure they have things clear in front of the baying press...no slipups.

    Can't remember if Reagan and others did use teleprompters...he would have been accustomed to that having been an actor.
    All those chats (fireside and othewise) that politicians do while looking into the camera / or news announcers...isn't a teleprompter involved?

    With a president (law professor, british book award winner, etc, wouldn't have thought words a problem for President Obama. He seems more erudite that his "this sucker's going down" predecessor.
    So not sure what the problem with using a teleprompter is.

    Maybe he is aware he needs to make even less gaffes than anybody else - just because of who he is. He can't afford to be as good as - he has to be better - just because of how the world is.

    In spite of all that, can't see why his critics bang on about it - it's not as if a teleprompter would work in a live debate? surely? Unless they're saying his words/the ways he uses words are being ferreted to him by Rahm? through some earpiece? wirelessly? Anybody seen the paranoia over the bizzare claims in Topalov-Kramnik match? Seems similar.

    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 1:14pm on 25 Jun 2009, arclightt wrote:

    From the standpoint of political strategy, it seems to me that the Rs should seriously consider taking a pass in 2012, and instead zero in on the Congressional elections in 2014 and the Presidential election in 2016, keeping a VERY low profile until then. Obviously O would win re-election in 2012, but it's highly likely he will anyway. In the meantime, if the Ds are left essentially without opposition for 8 years they will do what every political party does in that situation: seriously overreach, leave behind a documented track record of abuse, and generally soil themselves thoroughly.

    By waiting till 2014 / 2016 the Rs will have had time to recover, build the necessary financial resources, and obtain the proper training and equipping to take office and thoroughly repudiate the inevitable excesses that the D party will create. The American people will also (we hope) finally be disabused of the insane notions that (a) any entity, whether a political party, any government structure, or any non-government structure (including the free market), deserves inherent trust, and (b) the country can function without their active, ongoing commitment and participation as citizens.

    If the R party did a proper job of maintaining a low profile, the American people could see and experience (albiet, we hope, in hazy and outline form!) what a single-party state here in the US would really look and act like. I imagine (I hope at least) they would react with great revulsion. Then again, they may prefer having a single-party system here now, having grown tired of the hard work necessary to really maintain a free society. If that's the case, it would be better to know this sooner rather than later. For those of you who shudder at single-party rule, I'm right there with you; however, it may be time for this generation of Americans to have their faces rubbed really hard in it, so they may receive fresh understanding of what the Revolution was all about, and we can all see clearly just what the current generations of Americans are really made of.

    The Rs don't have the discipline to do this, but it's interesting to contemplate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 1:20pm on 25 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #10

    Justin was asking for oppinions. Did the liberal media give Bush any time before trashing him?

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 1:43pm on 25 Jun 2009, mars_central wrote:

    It doesn't matter who the Republicans put forward in 2012 if they can't reign in the Daily Show fodder that seems to have taken over. While they pander to the loudest noises in their party, they will have a hard time convincing people in the centre that they present an alternative to Obama.

    Personally, I like Huckabee (I was hoping for McCain/Huckabee in '08, but alas he picked Palin) and he could go along way with the right VP choice as he can talk to those in the centre and on the left without ranting. He can (and does) talk to the likes of Jon Stewart and Bill Maher and is rarely in their sights even if they don't agree with him.

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 1:57pm on 25 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 19 fierceteapot2 wrote:

    "I've been reading your blogs for a while now, and ok, I get it, so you are a republican!"

    Rather ironically, when I read Justin's posting, I predicted that we'd probably see one or more rightwingers saying that this was further proof of his "liberal bias".

    How wrong I was...

    So - just to be clear - J Webb says "the Republicans have a catastrophic lack of young able leaders who can take on Obama in 2012...". And just to demonstrate that this isn't purely his opinion, he links to a couple of other articles saying something similar. And this proves that he's a Republican?

    Yeah, right...

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 1:57pm on 25 Jun 2009, alanskillcole wrote:

    Palin/Jon Voight?/Romney in 2012?
    Someone as yet unknown...as was Obama

    final word on teleprompter....

    "Let me repeat: He read his prepared remarks to open his hour-long question-and-answer.
    ---------
    And it's not odd to use a teleprompter as opposed to pieces of paper on the podium.
    If he starts reading off a teleprompter when answering questions, that would be news-worthy (and worrying). But until then the "teleprompter issue" is more interesting for what it says about those who keep raising it than about Barack Obama. "
    http://www.usnews.com/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2009/03/25/obama-used-a-teleprompter-to-read-his-press-conference-opening-statement-so-.html

    "The teleprompter was no help during the question-and-answer session (reporters don't signal their intentions), but Obama was no less careful during that give and take.

    Asked why people should trust government with the regulatory authority to take over failing financial companies such as troubled insurer American International Group Inc., Obama passed on the chance to demonize Washington.

    "Keep in mind, it is precisely because of the lack of this authority that the AIG situation has gotten worse," Obama said. He then gave a scholarly explanation of how the proposal would work."
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/25/analysis-giant-teleprompter-telegraphs-obama-caution/

    "With a teleprompter, Obama can be ambitiously eloquent; without it, he tends to be soberly professorial. Ronald Reagan with a script was masterful; during news conferences he caused much wincing and cringing. It is the rare politician, such as Tony Blair, who speaks off the cuff in beautifully crafted paragraphs.

    But it is a mistake to argue that the uncrafted is somehow more authentic. Those writers and commentators who prefer the unscripted, who use "rhetoric" as an epithet, who see the teleprompter as a linguistic push-up bra, do not understand the nature of presidential leadership or the importance of writing to the process of thought.

    Governing is a craft, not merely a talent. It involves the careful sorting of ideas and priorities. And the discipline of writing -- expressing ideas clearly and putting them in proper order -- is essential to governing. For this reason, the greatest leaders have taken great pains with rhetoric. Lincoln continually edited and revised his speeches. Churchill practiced to the point of memorization. Such leaders would not have been improved by being "unplugged." When it comes to rhetoric, winging it is often shoddy and self-indulgent -- practiced by politicians who hear Mozart in their own voices while others perceive random cymbals and kazoos. Leaders who prefer to speak from the top of their heads are not more authentic, they are often more shallow -- not more "real," but more undisciplined.
    ------
    Struggling over the precise formulations of a text clarifies a president's own thinking.
    -----------
    Obama's goal at his recent news conference was less elevated -- to express his thoughts on the economy with precision, as he faces a crisis in which a stray word could have a tremendous cost.

    During a wobbly first two months, Obama has had many problems. But using an autocue isn't one of them. A teleprompter speech represents the elevation of writing in politics. And good writing has an authenticity of its own. "
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/26/AR2009032603114.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 2:03pm on 25 Jun 2009, PARRISIA_GREECE wrote:

    Sorry to hear that Sanford let you down because of his affair. I only wish that US politics and their commentators rised above the personal lives of politicians.

    I am also sorry to hear that you own a gun. Are you a proud member of the NRS or they don't take in foreigners?...sorry.. legal aliens

    2012 is along way ahead, so please don't hold your breath. The gravest danger for Obama is not what the Reps will do but the leakage at his own support base. Liberal americans are not very happy with O's "pragmtic" flip-flops on various issues most notably on the trial of GITMO detainees

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 2:17pm on 25 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 7 MagicKirin wrote:

    "Justin: What is your criteria?/Some who could beat Obama in 2012 or someone who could do a better job?/If the latter: Romney, Gingrich, Guiliani McCain(age) Jindhal, Crist all would be doing a far better job than Obama./If the former we would have to see how they performed on the debate and if the media would be more balanced than they were last time./
    Romney and Gingrich would wipe the floor with Obama in a non telepromter/NBC debate"

    [a] As should be obvious, MK hates Obama, and indeed, as far as one can see, all Dems except Joe Liebermann. His heroes appear to be, apart from JL, GW Bush and Dick Cheney. So his view isn't entirely objective, to put it mildly. [Eg that pretty well any Rep would be better than Obama - because of course they did such a helluva job from 2000-2008....]

    [b] As to who could beat Obama in 2012 - I don't know. Will v much depend on what happens in the interim. But as for Romney, Magic's special favourite - well, McCain beat him fairly easily in the Primaries - and Obama beat McCain fairly easily in the General Election...

    [c] Even though he looks good on paper, AFAIK he was damaged in the Primaries [a] because at least some of the Evangelical wing of the Republicans don't trust Mormons and [b] because of his flip-flopping - eg his position on issues like abortion and gay rights was much different when he was running in relatively liberal Massachusetts.

    [d] "Romney and Gingrich would wipe the floor with Obama in a non telepromter/NBC debate" Again, McCain beat Romney easily enough in the Primaries - and most pundits and voters appeared to believe that Obama won all three pre-election debates quite handily. And has anyone any idea what a "telepromter [sic]" debate is? Has anyone ever seen Presidential candidates debating while using teleprompters? or indeed anyone else?

    [e] I somehow doubt that Obama will be shaking in his boots at the prospect of running against that thrice-wed charmer Gingrich...

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 2:23pm on 25 Jun 2009, carolinalady wrote:

    And Justin's point? There are none. This is maybe the single silliest thread I've seen in Webb's webfiles. The GOP has to name someone with appeal to Independent/Center voters, who would theoretically help the candidate to WIN the election. If you only mention the Palins and Jindals and Gingrichs of the world, you're right back in your echo chamber, pandering to your base. Oh, and we in NC, pretty much think Senator Burr is a non-starter...we're working on dis-electing him next time he's up, the idiot.

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 2:24pm on 25 Jun 2009, SaintOne wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 30. At 2:38pm on 25 Jun 2009, GEOPOLITICONOMIST wrote:

    What we like to know is whether or not the person he admitted to having an affair with admits to having an affair with him. Or was it just a quick fling and he was lousy at it?

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 2:43pm on 25 Jun 2009, verycynicalskeptic wrote:

    how about somebody who encapsulates everything about the USA, who is a true representative of the common man, a man almost the stereotype of the pure american? I mean of course Rusty Cheeseburger or Rush limbaugh to you lot.

    Complain about this comment

  • 32. At 2:57pm on 25 Jun 2009, sblmnl wrote:

    Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana is a serious contender...he's actually surprisingly smart for a republican. Can I have my prize now?

    Complain about this comment

  • 33. At 3:03pm on 25 Jun 2009, toughdirtyjoe wrote:

    Obama is going to tax us into a deep depression. Americans better hope they beat Obama if not our country will be destroyed.

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 3:33pm on 25 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    Having followed this story, I have to say that it is truly Bizzare. From what I have heard, the govenor told his staff that he was going hiking on the Appalachin Trail, which runs up and down the Eastern United States from Maine to Florida. Apparently, the Appalachin trail now extends all the way to Buenos Aries, as somebody found out that he decided to go to Argentina instead. Govenor Stanford then told his staff that he was a lone. Instead he was with a woman named Maria. I don't know how it the world he could have avioded getting caught. Once the found him coming back from Argentina, it was pretty obvious that he was there to see a woman.

    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 3:34pm on 25 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    Re 31

    I would rather have Ronald McDonald or the Burger King run for president than El Rush-bo.

    Complain about this comment

  • 36. At 3:37pm on 25 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 37. At 3:41pm on 25 Jun 2009, GEOPOLITICONOMIST wrote:

    What we want to know is whether or not the person he said he had an affair with knew that she was having an affair, or was it just a quick fling and he was lousy at it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 3:47pm on 25 Jun 2009, Joao Coelho wrote:

    Mitt Romney.

    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 3:48pm on 25 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    With the GOP self-destructing last year, it will be a toss up of who is available to run. The picking are not too good. The fact the whole GOP sideshow have exposed themselves as to who they truly are and belong to (the rich, themselves, their corrupted business partners, religious intolerance that exists, biases, and the ever present war mongering corporates), their outlook is not to favorable. Not only in the USA, but throughout the world as well. With a Party ticket of "it's either my way or the highway" or "you are either for me or against me", the GOP has no place to go except accuse, finger point, lie and more lies, all the the expense of "GOD" himself. Sad, but true.

    Hopefully, Mr. Obama will wake up from the glory given him by the American people, a glory that surprises even him, and began to answer back to the Neo-cons and all who wish to see him fail. He does have the majority of the people behind him but it seem he still doesn't realizes it yet. Perhaps he should listen to the American people who voted him in and reserves action on the ones he selected to assist him in his endeavors.

    The next four years will tell the story.



    Complain about this comment

  • 40. At 3:57pm on 25 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #30

    The fact that American women go after the ugliest of the ugliest American menfolks only attest that illicit drugs is rampant in the USA.

    Or perhaps American women feel they can't compete with European or Asian females and grab whatever they can.

    After all, America was not meant for children or women. Just look at the homeless in the USA. Women and children is a not a priority with the GOP.

    Complain about this comment

  • 41. At 3:59pm on 25 Jun 2009, Joao Coelho wrote:

    I strongly doubt that the Republicans will get their act together by 2012. First they have to get rid of all the hypocrits who always claim the moral higher ground than the rest of us but then do drugs, cheat on their wives, or have sex with the same gender.
    Secondly, their pseudo political philosophy is totally bankrupt: their ideology is lower taxes and that's not an ideology but a desire. Everybody likes to lower taxes, but we need taxes to run societies. Moreover, they promote a dumbing down of American society and are mean spirited, a perfect example is their animosity towards Obama, he can do nothing right only the morally correct Republicans can.
    Finally, they are just nay sayers without an pinch of a good idea to run a modern society. Just look at how McCain ran his campaign, like a drunkard sailor. And none of them have the courage to stand up to a phony Rush Limbaugh who never did anything for his country.
    Therefore, until we see a total collapse of the party and a renewal with incoming of new blood with good qualities, like brains, or like Senator Lugar one of the few good Republicans, i don't see the Republican party coming up with a decent candidate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 4:07pm on 25 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #3. U14047833: "Incidentally who complained about my post Could it be the only other person who has blogged this blog What time zone is David_Cunard in"

    Despite the implication, it was not me. I'm in Pacific (summer) Time and your short post was there when I wrote mine, which was well after midnight. You forget that the Moderators actually do read posts and remove them without anyone else complaining. An apology would be in order. And incidentally, I hope that the spelling of the name of the Governor of California was a mistake since, if deliberate, it could well be worthy of complaint.

    #19. fierceteapot2: "I've been reading your blogs for a while now, and ok, I get it, so you are a republican!"

    Justin's not even an American so he can't be a Republican, and if "republican", so far he hasn't demonstrated any anti-monarchial leaning. Although it may be considered abhorrent, America tends to consider candidates for her next President as soon as a new one is sworn in.

    Complain about this comment

  • 43. At 4:14pm on 25 Jun 2009, Quillan wrote:

    The Republicans will in time offer up name(s) to be considered as leader(s) of the GOP. However, there are growing numbers in United States who have seen two presidents back-to-back providing similar policies where in the end, revealing the two major parties different only in regards to the private/public sectors they want to favor, subsidize, regulate, etc. That is, both represent big government; policies of centralism, interventionism, and expansionism. During the last election, Congressman Dr. Ron Pauls numbers were marginal compared to the attention that has mounted since that time, yet not so much him but the free market/sound money ideologies promoted and his references to Austrian economists/writers. Many Americans are seeing the current state of affairs with 20/20 vision while considering alternatives to Washingtons business as usual extravagant behavior and to the surprise of some, alternatives rooted in early Americana paralleling the rare British and French free market thinkers as well. It may very well be another third man that will frustrate the two major parties once again during the next presidential elections, perhaps with greater impact. However, when all is considered, government is merely a mirror, reflecting the face and will of the people. In the words of Shakespeare, The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.

    Complain about this comment

  • 44. At 4:14pm on 25 Jun 2009, Pancha Chandra wrote:

    Senator McCain was a worthy challenger but age was not on his side. Sarah Palin did not and does not have the necessary Presidential qualities to lead the country. So her efforts were and are clearly a thorough waste of time. The Republicans will need to go through a vetting process where Presidential hopefuls will have to prove their worth. Unfortunately for the Republicans, the pool of worthy candidates seems to be dry! They need a great communicator with facts at his or her finger-tips.

    Complain about this comment

  • 45. At 4:21pm on 25 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #27

    I dont hate Obama I just don't think he is qualified to be President. I hate Al Sharpton, Chris Dodd and a few other Dems just as I have contempt for the head of AIG.

    Obama lost the debates to Hillary and McCain did not beat Romney in substance.

    As far as Gingrich mariages how about sweetheat loan from Tony Resko

    Richard

    Complain about this comment

  • 46. At 4:30pm on 25 Jun 2009, priva4221 wrote:

    Jeb can't run. There's a scandal there waiting (they have the photos, had them ready way back in 1999).
    The "handout squad" as some AM radio stations are calling them can't run (Rep. governors and the like).
    That leaves the "dumb just like me but with pretty eyes and poitrine" candidate Sarah P.
    Aw gawd.....

    Complain about this comment

  • 47. At 4:31pm on 25 Jun 2009, verycynicalskeptic wrote:

    re 35
    Rusty Cheeseburger is Mr America, everytime I think of the USA I think Rush Limbaugh, Mike Savage, O'Reilly, Dick Cheney, Newt Gangrene and all those perfect examples of American values, and we wouldnt want to lose sight of what the Republican party is all about would we?

    Complain about this comment

  • 48. At 4:33pm on 25 Jun 2009, iheartthebeeb wrote:

    Justin, come to Minnesota. There you will find a safely bland Governor with the 'aw shucks' approachability of a Sarah Palin, but also a vocabulary and ability to make complete sentences. If I win, could I get access to BBC video without having to watch a commercial every 15 seconds?

    Complain about this comment

  • 49. At 4:34pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048685 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 50. At 4:44pm on 25 Jun 2009, gunsandreligion wrote:

    It's not such a bad idea to weed out the Republican party of incompetents and
    the depraved. If this was done on a continual basis to both parties, we
    could move the Congress to a downsized venue and rent out the capitol building
    for weddings and bar mitzvahs for some additional revenue.

    Just how ethical and competent do we expect a bunch of lawyers to be, anyway?
    Judging by the national debt, they're not too good at math. That's just for
    starters.

    Complain about this comment

  • 51. At 4:50pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048685 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 52. At 4:51pm on 25 Jun 2009, Gary_A_Hill wrote:

    I don't see the lack of "young able leaders" in the Republican Party today as a catastrophe, I see it as a hope for resurrection of the party. Not in 2012, or even 2016, but much later. That is because any Republican leader coming up now could not help but be controlled by the fringe element that dominates the party today.

    The best thing that could happen for Republicans is that their party get thrashed in 2010, and in 2012, and in 2014, and in 2016, and so on, until the people who have controlled the party since the 1980s are out of the picture for good. Then a new generation can take over and bring the Republican Party back into the mainstream.

    It is impossible to predict who will be the Republican nominee for president so early in the game. I just hope it is someone who will lose big.

    Complain about this comment

  • 53. At 4:53pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048685 wrote:

    It's obvious by the way. it will be Olympia Snowe.

    but keep guessing

    Complain about this comment

  • 54. At 4:55pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048685 wrote:

    Though Pat Roberts might get a say . After all there are probably enough "700 club "members that will get confused and vote for him.

    Complain about this comment

  • 55. At 4:58pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048685 wrote:

    I said Olympia snowe because by the time Obama has done well enough that most are over their problems with him. (those that say he has no skill or aptitude) she may be the only one that has not talked so bad about him that the moderates would consider her a decent person.

    Complain about this comment

  • 56. At 5:02pm on 25 Jun 2009, tpapp157 wrote:

    Romney is an old dog with absolutely no new tricks. He failed last time for that reason and if he decides to run again then he'll fail again. It's not he'll suddenly magically become appealing and in touch with the people in the next three years.

    Jindal is still too young. Watching his response to the state of the union was excruciatingly painful. I hadn't seen a public address that poor in quite a while. Jindal has about eight or twelve years to step up his game and learn to stop patronizing the people and then maybe he'll have a chance. Otherwise he'll just be forgotten.

    Huckabee is a nice guy but as a religious fundamentalist he has a very small base of support. The vast majority of Americans thankfully recoil at the thought of having such a blatantly theocratic man as president. The fact that he did so well in the primaries is more of a testament to the lack of quality in his competition than to his own qualities.

    I will not grace Palin with a serious response.

    What the Republicans need is a bloodletting. They need to cut the bloat from their party like Limbaugh if they want to have any hope of moving their party to a more responsive and respectable stature. Limbaugh is just a giant unmovable lump that's stuck in the eighties and holding the party back. I was very impressed when Steele spoke out against Limbaugh but unfortunately (and unsurprisingly) he then rescinded his comments which shows just how much Limbaugh personally hinders the healthy growth of the party by mindlessly lambasting anyone who has a more moderate view than he does. The Republicans just can't hope to be seriously competitive in the new century when they're still carrying around baggage from the 1900's.

    Complain about this comment

  • 57. At 5:05pm on 25 Jun 2009, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    Sometimes it takes years in the wilderness to find the right person. Here is my prediction:

    Obama wins a second term in 2012 against Mitt Romney.

    Complain about this comment

  • 58. At 5:29pm on 25 Jun 2009, watermanaquarius wrote:

    Difficult question Justin especially after all the Republican scandals.
    Somebody good on health care who can relate to the masses of disappointed people including the poor and womens rights, but more important will knock that prince of darkness Obama into a cocked hat.
    One of the people from humble beginnings. Worked his way up from the shop floor at his stepfather's business. A charismatic, heroic man of action without being a warmonger in fact the opposite and can relate to enemy regimes.
    The minor drawbacks of the candidate I had in mind are he seems to like his food and drink a lot and this results in almost a constant diet, and he is not averse to being over friendly with the moneymen at the top.
    Rumours of undue attention to a member of the opposite sex have been proved unfounded. [The usual use of dirty politic tricks here.] The man is and remains a devout christian and yet respected by other beliefs.
    Unfortunately for me he has already been mentioned by Magic # 7, the candidate after Jindhal..
    As usual despite trying, Magic gets the spelling wrong.- There is an " h " in his name Magic. I realise this will be difficult for many to swallow perhaps,[even by Magic himself] but he looks like the GOP's only chance.
    Now to find him a running mate. Someone exhibiting the opposite traits to counterbalance this clean-cut man of the people. There is always Jack Forge I suppose, if one can get him to switch allegiances.
    I notice your name was mentioned too, but then I know from your recent experiences you will be holding out for a Supreme Court nomination. They need a big hitter on the bench.

    Complain about this comment

  • 59. At 5:37pm on 25 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    Justin, I really don't think the Republicans will be able to field a viable candidate for 2012. I just don't see it. In my opinion, a third party such as the Libertarians or the Whigs will field a candidate that will out perform the Republicans at the polls next year. I think the Republicans are on their way to disapearing from the American Political Scene.

    Complain about this comment

  • 60. At 5:44pm on 25 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    Bobby Jindal - not a chance. Although he converted to Catholicism, he was raised a Hindu, and the difference between that and being Muslim will be lost on many voters. However brilliant, would America warm to a man who would be required to say "I, Piyush Amrit Jindal, do solemnly swear . . ."? Mr Obama's middle name caused much debate with certain elements and it is quite likely that "Bobby"'s full name would do the same. Not to mention his appearance, which is unlikely to appeal to a broad spectrum of the electorate. Unfair of course, but that's the reality of life and politics in America.

    U14048685 - reference your suggestion at #3; I'm still waiting for the apology.

    Complain about this comment

  • 61. At 6:10pm on 25 Jun 2009, illustriouspreceptor wrote:

    The major problem with the Republican party in the U.S. Is not so much they lack leadership is that they lack ideas. They claimed to be the party of small government, yet W. Bush launched the largest growth in government size in history. They claimed to be for fiscal responsibility, yet Bush spent more than all former presidents combined. All they scream about is "tax cuts". For whom? Answer: the rich. Bush's tax cuts helped destroy the American middle class and now the top 5 percent controls over 95 percent of the wealth in America. The other thing they have to offer is ideas from Milton Freedman and the Chicago School of Economics. If we let the free market prevail and prioritize everything then all will be good in the end. Let Charter Schools replace the public ones, let Blackwater or XE replace the US Armed Forces and the local fire and police. Let Wall Street do just about all they want to with no regulation. As far as health care is concerned, let the big drug and health insurance make obscene profits by denying coverage to sick Americans. Well, I can tell you. If this is all the Republican party has to offer, then they will continue to become extinct. Oh, how I hope they nominate Sara Palen as their candidate in 2012.

    Complain about this comment

  • 62. At 6:15pm on 25 Jun 2009, dceilar wrote:

    It seems to me that the Republicans have driven into an ideological dead-end street. They are going to have to do an ideological u-turn to get out of there. I'm not sure they can with the religious zealots in the party - they are like a political party within a political party. I'm enjoying watching their pain ha ha.

    Complain about this comment

  • 63. At 6:37pm on 25 Jun 2009, ladycm wrote:

    Sanford made an idiotic mistake as many politicians have before him but, in a way I feel bad for him. If its true he used tax dollars to pay for the trips that is inexcusable. I just can't believe these guys (and I'm pretty sure they have all been men) just don't use their heads at all. I am sure Sanford's job is extremely exhausting much of which he caused by trying to butt heads with everyone around him. I am sure his job is extremely stressful; stress can lead people to seek and do things they wouldn't normally do. It was stupid, he has children and he was being extremely selfish; just as he was when he tried to refuse the stimulus cash. Pretty soon, there won't be any republicans left and I think I will be okay with that. The republicans better get it together and quick. Megan McCain was right, it's going to come down to old vs. new ideas. The reason these republicans are dropping like flies is because they tote family values then don't even bother to live they way they dictate the rest of us should live. The republicans need a new person who is a realist and they need to stop living in this fantasy land in which they pretend every aspect of their life is perfect.

    Complain about this comment

  • 64. At 6:38pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048863 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 65. At 6:49pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048863 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 66. At 6:53pm on 25 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    Wow! What a selection of GOP potentials mentioned above. It's very depressing, really. Obama has already won! Bobby Jindal? He has the personality of a Indian tomb cobra (my very own opinion, of course). Looking at him closely, he only needs fangs and he is in business.

    On the another side of the spectrum is the newly exposed republican governor of South Carolina, Mark Sanford, who is about to replace the Argentine song of "Don't cry for me, Argentina" to "Please don't cry for me, Maria."

    Those Latin women. Every time they meet prominent "Americans" who are looking for affection, love or understanding away from home, it's Adam and Eve all over again, without the fig leaf! It wouldn't so bad, but these lonely looking for affection gentlemen are the one lecturing everyone on family values, moral issues and the bible.

    I would suggest to Latin America (without stirring up the ant hill or initiating a pre-moderate action) to please advise their strikingly beautiful women to keep their feet on the ground. There are too many Republicans looking for love, affection or understanding.

    Complain about this comment

  • 67. At 7:01pm on 25 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #60, David_Cunard.

    Thank you, David, for the honest comment. At least you are one who admits there is racism in America in regards to color, religion, creed and nationality. Most "Americans" won't admit it even if was starring them in the face.

    Now, if only we can get Obama to pardon Jack Johnson for going to prison because his only crime was to date a white woman.

    Complain about this comment

  • 68. At 7:24pm on 25 Jun 2009, Honestly_speaking wrote:

    #7, MagicKirin wrote:

    "Romney and Gingrich would wipe the floor with Obama in a non telepromter/NBC debate"


    Well, I hope someone wipe the floor with you!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 69. At 7:28pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048863 wrote:

    I could have been
    one of the most notorious

    I could have been
    one of the most devastating

    (overcome the wicked with just a smile)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYn--5onIXo

    Complain about this comment

  • 70. At 7:51pm on 25 Jun 2009, squirrelist wrote:


    Mark Sanford let me down too. I was hoping a day spent with him recently in the rural idyll that is South Carolina might have been an investment in a relationship with a
    future GOP presidential candidate.


    Well, there you are. That's what comes of asking the wrong questions of a man on a tractor. Should have asked how he was getting along with Mrs Governor these days, how the house sale was doing, how many mistresses he had, and was he planning a long weekend break anywhere, and if so with which one? And then you don't take no for an answer. Really, some journalists are just too polite . . .

    Complain about this comment

  • 71. At 7:52pm on 25 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #64. childofpoetry: "DC 60 No Apology"

    Why? I don't like to be accused of complaining when I didn't do so. Are you now also 'U14048685'? The reference to me as DC is amazingly similar to that which a resident of Oregon called me, Jacksforge, et al.

    Complain about this comment

  • 72. At 8:05pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048863 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 73. At 8:06pm on 25 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #60 and 67

    There is a racism everywhere but there are few places where is is less prevelant than in the U.S. Becuase the KKK and Rev Wright do not represent anyone except a miiniscue fringe.

    America as in many areas is the progressive leader

    Complain about this comment

  • 74. At 8:10pm on 25 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Sorry about Sanford but, quite frankly, he didn't have a chance even before he decided to tango in Argentina. The GOP does have several strong candidates such as Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, and Mike Huckabee. Fortunately for the Dems, they are being overshadowed by the old guard (McCain, Gingrich, Limbaugh, Coulter) and their incendiary partisan rhetoric. Judging by the enthusiastic receptions given to Romney and Palin, and the amount of donations they have been raising, the GOP is not dead and it is in fact well positioned to gain seats in 2010, particularly if the economy does not recover after all the spending in recent months.

    I expect things to be very different by this time next year, and it would not surprise me if a pragmatic and well disciplined GOP leadership emerges focused on traditional conservative values and fiscal discipline that appeal to large segments of our population.

    President Obama remains very popular, but he is vulnerable on spending and the charges of "appeasement" by those who prefer a more aggressive foreign policy are resonating in the heartland.

    Complain about this comment

  • 75. At 8:27pm on 25 Jun 2009, deamon138 wrote:

    "Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana is a serious contender...he's actually surprisingly smart for a republican."

    I hope this was sarcasm. You know about his volcano moment don't you?

    Complain about this comment

  • 76. At 8:35pm on 25 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    Re 74


    Romney, Palin and Huckabee? Ha! Don't make me laugh. They're almost as conservative as Limbaugh, Ginrich, and Coultergiest.

    Complain about this comment

  • 77. At 8:36pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048863 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 78. At 8:36pm on 25 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #74

    Regarding the old guard. I don't see McCain going through it again, 2008 was his last shot.

    Dont confuse Limbaugh or Coulter as part of the Republican leadership anymore than Keith Obermann or Michael moore are part of the Democratic leadership.

    Complain about this comment

  • 79. At 8:37pm on 25 Jun 2009, Bishop Hill wrote:

    Justin

    I just thought you'd like to know that someone has just visited my blog using the search phrase "Is Justin Webb gay".

    Joys of being in the public eye eh?

    Complain about this comment

  • 80. At 8:51pm on 25 Jun 2009, U13817236 wrote:

    The obvious choice is, of course, Obama himself, since he's continued virtually unchanged most of his predecessors' corporate imperial policies. He could just as well run as a Republican - or they can simply invent someone depressingly like him during the next four years, since no one had ever heard of cardboard Barack fours years ago either, until the party spin machines went into high-gear. It really makes little difference who the nominal figurehead in the elities' government is, the System goes on exactly as before. It just comes down to a matter of who the best liar is during the frivilous campaign. No prizes for that. But anyway, such trivial games are at least a flippant distraction from addressing real issues - something which the corporate media is devoted to doing - especially certain foreign correspondents!

    Complain about this comment

  • 81. At 8:53pm on 25 Jun 2009, faeyth wrote:

    Should wait until after 2010 elections to try to find GOP's nominees the moderate ones are laying low for now.We have plenty in Michigan the problem is Independents don't register with a party so the moderate GOP loose in the selection process to extreme religious conservatives who then loose in the Election like Dick Devos in our last election for Gov. of Michigan.What's funny is our longest serving Governor was Milliken a Pro-life,environmental,fiscal conservative but some how GOP doesn't have a clue as to what people want and scary over zealous Christians scare other people who lean conservative away from the party so they are going to parties like Libertarians and others fiscal conservative parties which are growing in numbers with younger voters but have too many without one voice and can't agree on the social issues.

    Complain about this comment

  • 82. At 9:02pm on 25 Jun 2009, bfoulkrod1 wrote:

    The question is irrelevant. Forgetting that "conservative" by definition means not being extremist, doing nothing that is over the top, middle of the road, etc., the Republican party has turned so hard to the right, that former party loyalists (like myself) are stuck on the sidelines waiting for a third party or either party to work from the "conservative middle", instead of just staking a claim to the middle in bumper sticker campaign slogans.

    The extreme wing of the party has shown an unwillingness to allow (and ability to block) any candidate they disagree with. The problem is, the majority of the party (and Americans at large) have no appetite for the extremist wing, so their "favorite choice" will lose in any general election (as was proven by McCain's drop in the polls the minute he chose a running mate that appeased the right wing, but ticked off the general rank and file).

    Complain about this comment

  • 83. At 9:14pm on 25 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    Re 78

    Kieth Olberman is part of the Democratic Leadership? I thought he was a retired sportscaster. LOL.Still I love his nightly WORST Persons in the World Segmant on Countdown.

    Complain about this comment

  • 84. At 9:26pm on 25 Jun 2009, faeyth wrote:

    #40 what are u talking about American women going after ugly men there are plenty of handsome American men of all ethnic backgrounds chased by attractive American women.These men are politicians and politicians are not there for looks but for their job skills.And European and Asian women can have Euro and Asian men.Beside Britain most Euro men aren't attractive in a sense of style or attitude(immature)why still living with mom.Same with Asian men.I don't like my man owning more clothes and shoes than me.Or lip gloss(Asia).And I know that I just stereotyped billions of people and it's ignorant just like your comments.Come to US there are plenty of attractive men that are with attractive US women.What do you think we ship them to other continents.Ridiculous.As far as drugs goes we use them because they are sold here to get money who is going to sell them to poor countries that can't afford them.Your just jealous because you can't afford drugs.HAHA

    Complain about this comment

  • 85. At 9:37pm on 25 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 45 MagicKirin wrote:

    "I dont hate Obama I just don't think he is qualified to be President."

    Sure. Fortunately for him, c 70,000,000 voters last November disagreed. [The second highest percentage vote for a Democrat - apart from the '64 Johnson landslide - in some 64 years.] Get over it.

    "Obama lost the debates to Hillary and McCain did not beat Romney in substance."

    You think Hillary won the debates - but she lost the campaign. You think Romney was better than McCain - he not only lost to him, he came third, losing to Huckabee in terms of delegates.

    I'm only going to start worrying when you start backing Obama.

    "As far as Gingrich mariages [sic] how about sweetheat loan [sic] from Tony Resko [sic]"

    Yeah, that tactic worked really well for McCain.

    Complain about this comment

  • 86. At 9:39pm on 25 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 78 MagicKirin wrote:

    "Dont confuse Limbaugh or Coulter as part of the Republican leadership..."

    We've been through this before.

    It would be easier to take seriously if leading Reps who dared to question Limbaugh hadn't been forced into grovelling apologies...

    Complain about this comment

  • 87. At 9:41pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048863 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 88. At 9:48pm on 25 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 78, Magic

    "Dont confuse Limbaugh or Coulter as part of the Republican leadership anymore than Keith Obermann or Michael moore are part of the Democratic leadership."

    The day the GOP invited Limbaugh and Coulter to speak during fundraisers and gave them positions of prominence at Republican venues, they became part of the leadership. Most importantly, their opinions are highly regarded by a large number of Republicans, which makes them an important factor in the party's strategy.

    Personally, I would not vote for Sarah Palin to fill a dog catcher's position, but people should not dismiss her appeal to religious and social conservatives. Then again, the Argentinian kid also enjoyed the support of the "family values" crowd so, why not a woman who is very charismatic, attractive and whose views are shared by so many Americans. Since when has education and experience been an absolute requirement for the office, and when it comes to character and integrity, well, Sanford was supposed to have lots of that.

    I think the man to watch is Romney. He has the education and experience necessary for the job, and an executive track record to boot.

    Complain about this comment

  • 89. At 9:54pm on 25 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 60 David_Cunard wrote:

    "Bobby Jindal - not a chance. Although he converted to Catholicism, he was raised a Hindu, and the difference between that and being Muslim will be lost on many voters. However brilliant, would America warm to a man who would be required to say "I, Piyush Amrit Jindal, do solemnly swear . . ."? Mr Obama's middle name caused much debate with certain elements and it is quite likely that "Bobby"'s full name would do the same. Not to mention his appearance, which is unlikely to appeal to a broad spectrum of the electorate. Unfair of course, but that's the reality of life and politics in America."

    I really don't see it. If the US can elect a black [or half black] President with the middle name Hussein whose father was a Muslim, I think they could elect this guy - if he were good enough.

    Having said that, one of the fave criticisms the Right loved to throw at Obama was that he was only good at oratory and making speeches. As I understand it, based on his famous/notorious response to that Obama speech, Jindal hasn't even got that.

    I would hope his extreme views - including apparently supporting the teaching of "intelligent design" in public schools - would help preclude his being elected President - but I wouldn't bank on it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 90. At 9:57pm on 25 Jun 2009, thundertraveler wrote:

    The Republican Stable is running out of good Horses to win the new race.
    To many Hypocrates messed up the Game.

    Complain about this comment

  • 91. At 10:11pm on 25 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    Re 88

    Your absolutely right abou this. What is frieghtening about the Bill O'Reilleys, Rush Limbaughs, and Ann Coulters of the World is how extreme their worldview actually is. Coulter's maybe the most extreme of all. She herself has gone on the record as saying that Women should not have the right to vote, because it would allow Republicans the chnce to win more elections.

    Complain about this comment

  • 92. At 10:21pm on 25 Jun 2009, U14048863 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 93. At 10:35pm on 25 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #89. john-In-Dublin: "If the US can elect a black [or half black] President with the middle name Hussein whose father was a Muslim, I think they could elect (Jindal) - if he were good enough."

    You forget that what propelled Mr Obama into office was the enormous dissatisfaction with a Republican president coupled with a very strong Black vote. Unless President Obama does something dreadfully wrong, there won't be enormous antipathy towards him (as there was with Bush) and I don't think we have a large Indian vote which can help him.

    Complain about this comment

  • 94. At 11:03pm on 25 Jun 2009, Pass Torian wrote:

    Ugh, tough challenge. If I were only a seer.
    Recent events fortify my belief that another Palin may emerge two weeks before the first primary, so being an effective visonary would help secure the top price. I am not one though so I will only give my neys to few names already mentioned by others.

    Newt Gingrich - the failed husband and failed Contract with America pusher
    Rudy Guiliani - ex-prosecutor who sees in every citizen a potential criminal. In New York he designated major portion of New York budget toward drastic expansion of the prison system. Pretender. Disliked by many in New York he dropped his contest with Hillary Clinton due to " health problemss" only to run for another public office short while after and - surprisingly healthy. Used 9/11 event as a forum to prop up his national popularity as an ispiring leader and "Hero" with written by others speeches.
    Sarah Palin - an attractive ignoramus
    John McCain - is anyone seriously thinking of him as a future candidate?
    Mark Sanford - another bygone
    What's-his-name Massachussetts Mormon - might run and again wiggle ineffectively
    Coulter and Limbaugh - Two headed presidency? Mythological Hydra would be more plausible
    Dick Cheeney - if he is born anew
    Ronnie Reagan - if he resurrects

    Who else? Hardly anyone on the horizon. One thing is sure, a Republican may get a chance only when public recollection of the first eight years of the XXI century governance of USA fades away. The hope is there, for the public memory span is quite short.

    Complain about this comment

  • 95. At 11:07pm on 25 Jun 2009, Mike Mullen wrote:

    7. At 09:47am on 25 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    Justin: What is your criteria?

    Some who could beat Obama in 2012 or someone who could do a better job?

    If the latter: Romney, Gingrich, Guiliani McCain(age) Jindhal, Crist all would be doing a far better job than Obama.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Gingrich? Oh Please. If he runs in 2012 Obama won't even break a sweat winning a second term. I think your suggestions reflect the Republicans problems; candidates who might appeal to the GOP don't go over with the uncommitted middle ground they need to win over to win the election. And remember an incumbent needs to do something pretty disastrous to lose, polls seem to indicate that so far the voters feel otherwise.

    Complain about this comment

  • 96. At 11:47pm on 25 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 93 David_Cunard wrote:

    "You forget that what propelled Mr Obama into office was the enormous dissatisfaction with a Republican president coupled with a very strong Black vote. Unless President Obama does something dreadfully wrong, there won't be enormous antipathy towards him (as there was with Bush) and I don't think we have a large Indian vote which can help him."

    To be clear, I'm not saying he's especially likely to be the nominee in 2012, assuming he even runs, let alone that he would be likely to win. All I'm saying is I don't think a funny foreign name, starting life as a Hindu or a dark skin are enough on their own to keep him out of the job, which is what you appeared to be arguing.

    And yes he had a v strong black vote - but so does practically every other Dem. I don't think that alone swung it.

    As for predicting the future - Obama was tipped from 04 as a rising star. I'm sure v good odds could have been obtained in 06 or even 07 if someone had wanted to bet on him.

    Anyone here make a fortune on that one?

    Complain about this comment

  • 97. At 00:26am on 26 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 94, Passtorian

    Who else?

    Boehner, Snowe, Collins, Corker, Gregg, Bradley Byrne...

    Complain about this comment

  • 98. At 00:48am on 26 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #96. john-In-Dublin: "And yes (Obama) had a v strong black vote - but so does practically every other Dem."

    But not as previously - this was a unique occasion, the African-American vote was far, far larger than in the past.

    "I don't think a funny foreign name, starting life as a Hindu or a dark skin are enough on their own to keep him out of the job."

    We'll have to disagree; I think a funny foreign name and looking like the Indian he is (by family background) would be more than sufficient to keep him even running, let alone his record and opinions. Such a lot in American politics depends upon appearance - think Kennedy and Nixon.

    Complain about this comment

  • 99. At 01:08am on 26 Jun 2009, Reuben wrote:

    Who cares if liberals don't have a warm and fuzzy feeling for the republican candidate in 2012? It's not the democrats or the RiNOs that are going to elect another Republican President, because they will vote to re-elect obama just like they voted to re-elect Clinton.

    Start aving up for my Argentina Vacation Justin because, Former speaker of the house, Newt Gingrich, is my pick for 2012. Gingrich can get support from genuinely conservative republicans, independants and a few blue-collar democrats.

    Complain about this comment

  • 100. At 01:16am on 26 Jun 2009, Reuben wrote:

    This may be off topic but is the current event in Justin's Area:

    I knew when I was a kind in the early 80's when everyone else was moon walking and wearing one shiney glove, that Michael Jackson was the kind of sick freak that mom warned me not to get into a van with.

    Complain about this comment

  • 101. At 01:27am on 26 Jun 2009, Reuben wrote:

    Michael jackson is the third dead celebrity of the week.

    Michael Jackson left Bahrain in a hurry because he no longer had the hospitality of the Prince.

    Here you have a man who is powerful enough, and maybe even rutheless enough, to have Michael Jackson mysteriously die in his own home.

    What would Michael Jackson have done that would anger the Prince of Bahrain that much?

    Complain about this comment

  • 102. At 01:30am on 26 Jun 2009, Reuben wrote:

    Correction to 100: substitute "Kind" with "Kid".

    Complain about this comment

  • 103. At 01:34am on 26 Jun 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    Asa, J-i-D, DC

    The election is still 3 years and 4 months away. Not that I'm superstitious, but isn't it a bit early to be declaring him re-elected? Sort of like saying "no-hitter" while the game is still in the 8th inning? Or, in this case, the first inning.

    63 Ladycm

    I can't wait until the Republicans pick a leader who takes a lover publicly, and tells anybody who doesn't like it they can shove it.
    Long overdue.

    The idea that there are rich, powerful men (or, indeed, women: Catherine the Great, Cleopatra, Clara Bow) who enjoy the company of more than one woman (or man, the horse being apparently a myth) doesn't bother me half as much as the puritanical nonsense we have now, where the careers of good and talented people are ruined because ... they have an affair? ... they hire a prostitute? Oh, please.

    It sticks in my mind that something like 30% - 40% of people who marry eventually have one or more affairs. Maybe someone else here has data. Are all those people automatically to be disqualified from public office on that basis? Which would you rather: John Kennedy or Bill Clinton in the oval office, with as many interns as may be; or George W Bush in the oval office holding prayer meetings? It's like Lincoln's comments on US Grant's brand of whisky.

    Some people are abstemious. Some people are monogamous. And some people aren't. So long as it isn't coercive or abusive, so long as it involves consenting mature adults (not 70 year olds and teenagers, how embarrassing) it really isn't anybody else's business other than the existing spouse.

    Complain about this comment

  • 104. At 01:44am on 26 Jun 2009, Pass Torian wrote:

    ref#97 saintDominick

    How could I omit the woman from Maine, indeed!

    There is a chance Republican Party can be saved and provide valuable candidate for the US presidency in 2012. She would have an enormous, if not impossible task in front of her. Handling white(who else), male Republicans in line to project sensibility of Republican thinking to the electorate won't be easy. Handling a pack of beagles on fresh tracks of a fox could be easier.

    Complain about this comment

  • 105. At 01:51am on 26 Jun 2009, Reuben wrote:

    There's only one woman I can think of who can garner enough support to beat Obama despite his advantages: Condileeza Rice. She may be saying "No" now, but she can do it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 106. At 02:00am on 26 Jun 2009, rodidog wrote:

    Over confidence and a poor strategy lost the election for Hillary. Democrats are increasingly over estimating their support and are confident that Obama's popularity for 2012 will equal that from 2008. IMO it will all come down to that there letter word, jobs.

    Right now I would put Mitt Romney at top with Paul Ryan as his possible VP.

    My dark horse candidate is Jeb Bush.

    Complain about this comment

  • 107. At 02:03am on 26 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 103, IF

    "...doesn't bother me half as much as the puritanical nonsense we have now, where the careers of good and talented people are ruined because ... they have an affair? ... they hire a prostitute? Oh, please."

    The problem is that Republicans often run on a platform of family values, morality, and condemnation os the very things they so often do themselves. At times like this the "moral majority" is viewed by many as the "immoral minority".

    Complain about this comment

  • 108. At 02:05am on 26 Jun 2009, Reuben wrote:

    Condi's experience growing up under the opporession of segregation in the South, her eloquent and intelligent support of the conservative movement's ideals, and her experience in the Executive would attract support from people who voted for Obama but did not vote for Gore or Kerry.

    Gingrich's common sense aproach and thouroughly thoughtful explainations of conservative ideas would be very helpful to any Republican candidate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 109. At 02:52am on 26 Jun 2009, Orville Eastland wrote:

    One person who is trying to appeal to the Fiscal Conservatives and Religious Right is Jim DeMint. He's extremely opposed to many Obama policies. I think he's positioning himself in a run for the Republican nomination in 2012. (Hey, out of all the three potential SC candidates, he's the one most likely to win his home state.) However, despite being from my hometown and going to a church that's a few miles from me, I won't vote for him...

    (And nobody mentioned him yet!)

    Complain about this comment

  • 110. At 03:16am on 26 Jun 2009, frayedcat wrote:

    Hedley Lamarr

    http://www.imdb.com/media/rm465409792/tt0071230

    Complain about this comment

  • 111. At 03:23am on 26 Jun 2009, frayedcat wrote:

    I like the idea of Condoleeza Rice. The GOP base would implode. This is the perfect time to start The Third Party.

    Complain about this comment

  • 112. At 04:15am on 26 Jun 2009, gunsandreligion wrote:

    Condi won't do it. She wants to have a life.

    Complain about this comment

  • 113. At 04:51am on 26 Jun 2009, Stan wrote:

    Over confidence and a poor strategy lost the election for Hillary.

    Not to mention good old smoky backroom arm twisting, betrayal by pledged delegates and misconduct by Obama groupies in some primaries (especially Texas).

    If the media had checkout out Obama like they're supposed to do he wouldn't have got the nod. His CV wouldn't get him an interview in the corporate world, it's full of holes but no one cared and now we're stuck with someone who has quadrupled the deficit in less than six months, is trying to pass a so-called environment bill that will hugely increase one's utility bills etc etc. Not to mention running around the world apologising to all and sundry.

    We can't even think of the consequences of his getting a second term.

    Complain about this comment

  • 114. At 05:05am on 26 Jun 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    The Republicans have been picking through the ruins looking for those few blocks that may be sound enough to use again; some are trying to clear the rubble until they can find a solid footing, but most don't even want to begin the heavy work. They complain and groan and show each other their wounds, and blame the guys in the other tower - the house Obama built. No one has drawn plans or agreed on a new design. There are no plans but 'build it back'.

    There is hope, however - wind and rain and much shuffling about will level the rubble, sand and grit and dust will blow in, birds will build their nests and small animals will dig their holes in it. They will build again on this base.

    I don't see any hero or heroine rising up to give them meaning and lead them to victory, to put spring in their steps and confidence in their eyes. Maybe there is a Barak Obama for them in the shadows of the trees somewhere - but there doesn't need to be. They will take their opportunity and hope from their enemy's mistakes - right now they are working tirelessly to show the world his mistakes, to try every chink looking for a weakness they can point to. In four years' time they will show the world several fatal flaws they have found, and go to work with those.

    Then a leader or leaders will come forth, the faithful remnant will gather, and attract the disenchanted to them. If the Obamites haven't brought prosperity as promised there will be many. For this kind of battle, no leader of particular charisma is needed, and the skills required are very common.

    The question is, have they learned anything from their recent near-destruction? Have they learned who the voters are? Do they understand their needs and interests any better than they did in 2008, 2004, 2000? Ronald Reagan was the last one who could even speak that language convincingly. Do they have a clue to how, say, 40 million voters think, when their base, at best is less than 20 million? Will they get that necessary bit of information in time for 2012?

    More important, how will they get us to forget the principles with which they built the last great edifice built on their principles, the one that crashed so spectacularly last September and injured us all? Can they divert us from that memory by drawing out blame and hatred to some other face?

    KScurmudgeon
    republican at heart

    Complain about this comment

  • 115. At 05:27am on 26 Jun 2009, BraunSA wrote:

    Justin, I'm in the middle of your book and keenly fascinated of your perception of the "Good Ol' USA"! I would suggest all to read "Have a nice Day", and this is certainly unsolicited from the author. So I read this blog with a new understanding of a true correspondant, and not the usual line up of patsy's and mouthpieces'. I agree, the GOP is currently void of leaders with the character and integrity in the forefront that is required of the smokefiled rooms of politics. But, they do exist! However; as this is politics, the true conservatives, whom are loathe to bend principle, are left out of the room. Look West! Mike Crapo, Senator from Idaho, certainly is the poster child of what the GOP "says" it represents. But he stands in contrast to the leaders of the party. Men like him from several staunchly conservative states represent the base, but not the head table... The only person whom talks openly about such things is Newt Gingrich. But as an icon from the past, he is not the future! The GOP must spend some time at the woodshed and reflect on who they are, how they got to this predicament, and who will truly "lead" them out of the wilderness... Which will in my view, save this Great Country from the mediocrity of socialism, "best of the worst, worst of the best..."!

    Complain about this comment

  • 116. At 05:41am on 26 Jun 2009, BraunSA wrote:

    KScurmudgeon 114 has a great point "More important, how will they get us to forget the principles with which they built the last great edifice built on their principles, the one that crashed so spectacularly last September and injured us all?"
    Why should we trust the GOP, if the recent past is the result of their leadership?

    I say, they were wolves in sheeps clothing! Globalist, money chasers, above the true nature of the GOP! What is the end game, if the business model implodes? Integrity First, as the USAF teaches!
    Libertarian blood runs through the veins of the true conservative! Somehow this conjoined with the business leaders, and "Voila!", a revolution leading to the people thinking that the government will save them from this opression, and of course keep paying them... Alas!, The government is limited by an historical document, therefore, that individual, whom chose to bet the farm on Joe's buggy whip factory, is now left witha worthless investment and dwindling income... What to do, what to do..??..

    Complain about this comment

  • 117. At 06:08am on 26 Jun 2009, BraunSA wrote:

    So in modern day 2009, the saviour of the economy steps in and provides more $$$ to the very individuals whom proved inept in the first place! I still don't understand that! And would never buy or invest in such a company that was forced to such extremes! I have many choices, some overseas, to provide myself with transportation from point A to point B... Bottom line of investment included the goverment intervention, at what point of this theory professor?...

    Complain about this comment

  • 118. At 06:32am on 26 Jun 2009, ladycm wrote:

    103. At 01:34am on 26 Jun 2009, Interestedforeigner:

    "I can't wait until the Republicans pick a leader who takes a lover publicly, and tells anybody who doesn't like it they can shove it.
    Long overdue".

    Those are pretty much my thoughts exactly. Some people won't cheat and that's fine; some people compulsively cheat and some people make mistakes. I can understand all of these situations; I don't agree with them all, but I understand they do happen. What I don't understand is why people like Mark Sanford and Larry Craig think they can keep their shenanigans under wraps in the day and age when I can find out that Michael Jackson died the second it happened by text message. Let me clarify, these men have a grossly underestimated technology and word of mouth; also how advances in the past few years can help tarnish a dirt-bags reputation in literally the length of time it takes to make some sappy speech on TV after we find out you went to Argentina and not hiking (yes it was a run on sentence). Another thing, after all of the media attention he drew to himself about not taking the stimulus and he going to do this and expect to get away with it. If this was my governor, no one would care. He has made himself a national figure and a household name, what a buffoon. P.S. according to Fox news he's a (D) or a democrat. Are they even a news network anymore, or ever? What is the deal over there? If ANYONE can explain to me why people take Fox seriously besides the fact that those people might be delusional... please explain. Fox is like the TMZ of news except... TMZ get's it right. I mean my, God Karl Rove is a Fox News Correspondent, he is irrelevant and he is an idiot.

    Complain about this comment

  • 119. At 06:37am on 26 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #100. GreySquirrel1867: "This may be off topic but (Michael Jackson's death) is the current event in Justin's Area"

    Justin's "area" doesn't encompass much beyond the Atlantic seaboard - a death three thousand miles from Washington (DC) is unlikely to interest him. It's a pretty long stretch to suggest that Jackson's end was engineered by a member of the Bahraini royal family and I would guess that the Los Angeles County Coroner will conduct an autopsy (post-mortem) to determine the cause of death. As far as is known, he has been in failing health for some time, hence the delay in his scheduled concerts. As an aside though, I suppose the concerts could continue as a memorial - tens of thousands might pay for the "Diana effect"!

    Complain about this comment

  • 120. At 06:50am on 26 Jun 2009, U14048863 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 121. At 06:50am on 26 Jun 2009, ladycm wrote:

    In reference to my own post #118, I do believe in question marks but they aren't there. I know I put them there... where are they?

    Complain about this comment

  • 122. At 07:45am on 26 Jun 2009, Granten wrote:

    I've said this many times on other sites, but it bears repeating. The Democratic party is not the Republican party's worst enemy, the Republican party is the Republican party's worst enemy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 123. At 07:49am on 26 Jun 2009, Ahiagbah wrote:

    These claims are politically inaccurate; because structurally the congressional leadership is, suppose to lead the partys charge in opposition. The state of the GOP, I believe is one of loss of touch with the people and the issues relevant to the people. What the party lacks is a credible message to the people, and the message is coined the messenger will surface. Presently the party is in disarray running over itself in a pursuit to demonize the Obama administration, instead of finding its message and offering them to the American people as a credible alternative. This is where problem lies-the republican platform requires rebuilding.

    Complain about this comment

  • 124. At 10:23am on 26 Jun 2009, squirrelist wrote:

    101. At 01:27am on 26 Jun 2009, GreySquirrel1867 wrote:

    "Michael jackson is the third dead celebrity of the week.
    Michael Jackson left Bahrain in a hurry because he no longer had the hospitality of the Prince.
    Here you have a man who is powerful enough, and maybe even rutheless enough, to have Michael Jackson mysteriously die in his own home.
    What would Michael Jackson have done that would anger the Prince of Bahrain that much?"

    Er, well, give him back his 4.7 million pounds? Why not pick on another Arab country name as the evil one? Jordan, for example?

    Complain about this comment

  • 125. At 10:46am on 26 Jun 2009, SaintOne wrote:

    I think it's a shame (at least for the republicans) that McCain missed his chance last year. If he were younger and selected a better VP I think he would have been the best option for winning in 2012.

    Complain about this comment

  • 126. At 10:56am on 26 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #88

    Well we agree on Romney.

    But I would point out that Michael Moore in 2004 was in the VIP box with Jimmy Carter at the convention.

    One thing few want to mention untill the Oct economic collapse the election polls had it as a toss up.

    Complain about this comment

  • 127. At 11:33am on 26 Jun 2009, unpossibleme wrote:

    It is a big shame when journalists use their privileged journalistic position to promote their personal agendas as in the case of Justin Webb. It is obvious Justin, going by this and previous blogs that you are anti Obama administration. The Obama administration is not even a year old and already you and your likes are asking who would be a better republican replacement. What i find extremely astonishing is the ease and convenience with which republican supporters and yourself forget that the current unprecedented negative global economic and inter state situation was in no small part created by the 8yrs Bush administration. What is most insulting and would be a tragedy for the American nation is the choice of candidates the republican party is fielding, Palin, Jindhal etc. Would you honestly want Palin running the country? or Jindhal who during his ill timed, ill prepared television address came across to most viewers as creepy and insincere? Justin I think what you and other republicans really want is not someone that can do a better job than Obama but for anyone other than Obama to be the next American president.

    Complain about this comment

  • 128. At 12:10pm on 26 Jun 2009, SaintOne wrote:

    #127

    I think you are reading far too much into Mr.Webbs blogs. Sometimes he can come across as a republican, other times a democrat. I think here he is simply trying to stimulate a debate on what will become a big issue over the years

    Complain about this comment

  • 129. At 12:31pm on 26 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 127, Unpossibleme

    "The Obama administration is not even a year old and already you and your likes are asking who would be a better republican replacement."

    The fact that Justin raised this topic, and that many of us have offered names of politicians who could easily seek the Republican nomination in 2012, does not mean we have written off President Obama. We live in a democracy, and regardless of how popular Obama is when he runs for re-election there will be an opposition and it is fair to speculate on who they may be.

    I am a Democrat, I voted for Obama, and I support most of his policies. I am very concerned with our deteriorating fiscal situation, but understand that the alternative would have been to let our economy collapse and possibly the end of our capitalist system. I also think he is being too timid on the Guantanamo prison issue, getting out of Iraq, and would have preferred the use of spies and special forces to deal with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, Pakistan and wherever else they may be hiding...and do the same with their Wahhabists supporters and financiers in our beloved Saudi Arabia.

    Overall, he is doing an excellent job under very difficult circumstances and I wish him well.

    Complain about this comment

  • 130. At 12:40pm on 26 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 106, Rodidog

    "My dark horse candidate is Jeb Bush"

    Jeb was a very effective and popular governor of Florida, but I doubt the American people will have the stomach to vote for a third Bush. The problem is not Jeb, who is more qualified, intelligent, and charismatic than his Dad and brother, but the perception of a dynasty and the family track record. His Mexican wife may be a problem for many...

    Complain about this comment

  • 131. At 12:41pm on 26 Jun 2009, RomeStu wrote:

    127 & 128

    To expand on SaintOne's point, the whole raison d'etre of a free and independent media is to hold government to account andto ask difficult questions which would not be answered by government press releases.

    The BBC (and Justin Webb) were often held to be anti-Bush up to Nov 2008. Now just 7 months later they are anti-Obama!!!! Or perhaps they are just doing their job.

    Another example, this time from the UK. Until the 1997 New Labour victory the Conservatives were constantly complaining that the BBC was biased towards Labour. Just a few weeks after Tony Blair won the election in 1997 the first Labour complaint went in suggesting the BBC was now biased towards the Conservatives.

    Is the BBC biased, confused .... or just asking difficult questions, as it should? Compared to the blatantly partisan media in the USA I see the BBC as a beacon of mixed opinions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 132. At 1:24pm on 26 Jun 2009, unpossibleme wrote:

    Ref 129 and 131
    I do not have a problem with democracy and honestly although i supported Obama i strongly believe that McCain lost the election not because of his age but his/party's abysmal choice of VP. The issue for me is that a lot of people including Obama's supporters think change can be made using the same old formula, hence SanintDominic's

    'I also think he is being too timid on the Guantanamo prison issue, getting out of Iraq, and would have preferred the use of spies and special forces to deal with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, Pakistan and wherever else they may be hiding...and do the same with their Wahhabists supporters and financiers in our beloved Saudi Arabia.'

    This is an old formula which has failed and will fail in the current democratic process of every government action being called into question via inquries, commissions, legal actions to force disclosures etc. Nothing would stay secret for long and the Obama administration has cottoned on to this fact by having as much of their operations out in the open as possible. Lest you forget the Abu Graib prisoners abuse scandal. Obama is not timid, Bush's cowboy, guns blazing, 'we will smoke em out of their holes' approach does not work. I would rather have a leader that is discerning, slow to anger, thinks before he speaks and gets the job done by building positive relationships with friends and enemies.

    Complain about this comment

  • 133. At 1:26pm on 26 Jun 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    126 MK

    You know from previous posts on this blog that I liked (and still like) McCain. I certainly have no axe to grind against him. But even I woke up in the morning on US election day, with the sun streaming in the window, the air fresh and clear and knew that the day belonged to Senator Obama. It just didn't make sense any other way.

    On the surface it looked close for a brief time, but it really wasn't. That impression was only a few Angstroms deep. There was no way a Republican was going to win last year. The legacy of GWB was just way, way too heavy a millstone.

    Complain about this comment

  • 134. At 1:42pm on 26 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 103 Interestedforeigner wrote:

    "Asa, J-i-D, DC/The election is still 3 years and 4 months away. Not that I'm superstitious, but isn't it a bit early to be declaring him re-elected? Sort of like saying "no-hitter" while the game is still in the 8th inning? Or, in this case, the first inning."

    Whatever about anyone else, I certainly didn't declare him a 'shoo-in'. Au contraire - I've repeatedly pointed out that the future is unknowable, and the classic example is Pres Obama, whom few would have predicted as little as 2 years ago. As former UK PM Harold Wilson famously observed, 'a week is a long time in politics'.

    There are plenty of examples of political fortunes turning quickly

    - In 94 the Dems were hammered in Congressional elections and Clinton looked like a 1-term President. He won easily 2 years later

    - When Obama entered the Democratic race he was way behind Hillary. He still won

    - Bush I recovered from a large poll deficit to beat Dukakis. [I think GW Bush also had a strong lead over Gore and ended up getting 0.5m votes less too.]

    - I believe Ford was 20-30% behind Carter in the polls, and ended up almost beating him.

    - In the UK it's not long since it looked like Brown would call a snap election and Cameron would be finished

    I think it's in 'The Princess Bride' that someone says 'Life is pain - anyone who tells you otherwise is trying to sell you something'. I'd say the same of anyone who tells you they can foresee the future.

    [I remember a classic example of so-called psychics being shown up. I think it was in "The Book of Lists" which came out c 79-80. Some 'psychics' predicted the next president. The choice was between Carter and Reagan. They had a 50% chance of being right. Many if not most went for Carter....]

    Complain about this comment

  • 135. At 1:47pm on 26 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    While I've no idea who the Reps will go with in 2012, or what their chances will be, for the record Wikipedia have names here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012#Potential_Republican_Party_candidates

    Thye have about 17 people who have expressed an interest or at least haven't totally ruled out running.

    Personally I think they need someone articulate, passionate and experienced.

    Cheney in 2012!

    Complain about this comment

  • 136. At 2:28pm on 26 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #135, John-In-Dublin

    You are joking of course, but if you really want something more humorous than that, I suggest (without malice or ill contention) the Republican Party should dig up the "luv'ble" mischievous Irish Leprechaun, Ronnie Reagan, let him run again for president since that's all they got. Than at the end of four year, hang him!

    That would be "American" politics at it's best.

    No hate mail, please. Anything not written in Gaelic(?) will be "pre-moderated."

    Complain about this comment

  • 137. At 3:55pm on 26 Jun 2009, Speedoo99 wrote:

    Handicapping the runners and riders...

    1. The Republicans are not ready to, and will not, nominate anyone other than a white Protestant male for the presidency. The VP is another matter. That automatically removes all women, Roman Catholics, Mormons, Jews and non-whites from consideration.

    2. The money required for a successful run can realistically only be raised by senators, governors and the occasional zillionaire, and the last tend not to have the political contacts necessary. So no need to consider anyone other than a current senator or governor.

    3. The bias against north and northeast politicians (which is why Bush had to represent that he was a Texas boy, for example) means we can eliminate more possibles.

    4. And the candidate has to be reasonably youthful or at least, energetic and photogenic. No chubbies.

    5. No obvious scandal material nor past appearance of criminality (no speeding tickets, DUI, Abramoff links, etc.)

    (6. Denials of interest are meaningless: "I was persuaded that my country needs me...")

    7. That leaves us with:

    Sen. John Thune SD
    Sen. Richard Burr NC
    Gov. Tim Pawlenty Mn
    Gov. Charlie Crist Fl.

    Crist will be outed if he tries to run, so strike him. Burr - well, see comments above - though being an idiot has not obviously been a handicap in the past, and he is good at raising money. Pawlenty seems to me to have become too visible too soon - and he'll be in no position to raise major funds.

    So I'd guess it's Thune.

    Complain about this comment

  • 138. At 3:59pm on 26 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 130 saintDominick wrote:

    "Jeb was a very effective and popular governor of Florida, but I doubt the American people will have the stomach to vote for a third Bush. The problem is not Jeb, who is more qualified, intelligent, and charismatic than his Dad and brother, but the perception of a dynasty and the family track record. His Mexican wife may be a problem for many..."

    Most of that seems sensible, but I'm rather surprised at the last bit

    My view is somewhat similar to what I said about Jindal - ie if the US is ready for an African-American called Obama, middle name Hussein, with a Muslim father, I think they're ready for most things. [OK - maybe not an openly gay atheist - but certainly a Mexican wife.]

    I suspect you'd get a similar effect to what I suspect happened with Obama - ie some people voted for him purely because he was black, some people voted against him him purely because he was black, and most based their decision on rather more important issues than skin colour.

    Complain about this comment

  • 139. At 4:09pm on 26 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 132, Unpossibleme

    "This is an old formula which has failed and will fail in the current democratic process of every government action being called into question via inquries, commissions, legal actions to force disclosures etc."

    The "timidity" I was referring to refers to his inability to pull out of Iraq, his reluctance to close the Guantanamo prison camp, and the escalation of the Afghan conflict. As far as I am concerned we should not risk another "coalition" life in Iraq, and we should not spend an additional dollar in that country. It is time for the Iraqis to solve their internal problems and decide what's best for them. On the Gitmo issue, if the countries where we captured inmates against whom we have no evidence of wrongdoing don't want them back, that's too bad. We didn't ask them for permission to take them to Gitmo and should not ask them whether or not they want them back. We should try those who are truly guilty or terrorism and put them in a maximum security prison for the rest of their lives. Our focus in Afghanistan should be strictly on Al Qaeda, the organization responsible for 9/11. What the Afghans decide to do with their lives is their business.

    The change I had in mind when I voted for Obama did not include an endorsement or continuation of Bush's foreign policy which, with the exception of opening the door for dialogue with former enemies, is what he has been doing since he was elected. He needs to be more assertive, and his actions must reflect his rhetoric, or his honeymoon is going to be short lived.

    Complain about this comment

  • 140. At 5:07pm on 26 Jun 2009, yiannakis wrote:

    There is a large number of able Republicans that can run and do a better job than the current administration.
    The question is,who wants to be smeared by the liberal press?

    Complain about this comment

  • 141. At 5:20pm on 26 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 140, Ylannakis

    "The question is,who wants to be smeared by the liberal press?"

    The same kind of people that doen't mind being smeared by the right wing press.

    Complain about this comment

  • 142. At 5:39pm on 26 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 138, John

    "...most based their decision on rather more important issues than skin colour."

    I suspect that African-American voters were influenced, to some extent, by the unprecedented circumstance of a black man running for President of the United States; but at the risk of sounding naive, I think most of us did it because we felt he was the most qualified for the job. Obviously, he was helped by the dismal performance and incoherence of his predecessor, but the fact that two thirds of Americans still have a favorable impression of him suggests that he is, indeed, an intelligent pragmatist, very composed and deliberate, and a very charismatic politician.

    On the issue of Jeb Bush's wife ethnicity, I believe opposition to Hispanics is more intense in some quarters than prejudice against African Americans. Racial profiling and overt hatred often goes well beyond rhetoric and policy, it often involves violence such as what happened last week when a group of vigilantes went to the house of a Mexican-American killed him and his 10 year daughter, and wounded his wife. Coverage of this and other hate crimes perpetrated against Hispnanics rarely make the national news.

    Speedoo99 - I would not discount Charlie Crist. He may be too moderate for the average Republican, but that is precisely what they need to get the White House back. Huckabee and Palin appeal to the evangelicals, but I doubt they will make inroads with mainstream America. I still think Romney is the man to beat when it comes to the GOP nomination. Whether or not he can defeat Obama in 2012 depends on the state of the economy, and on the effectiviness of the healthcare and energy reform policies. World affairs are also important, but they play second fiddle to domestic policies.

    Complain about this comment

  • 143. At 7:53pm on 26 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #113. Stan_Expat: "We can't even think of the consequences of (Obama) getting a second term."

    Then you're not thinking hard enough! I don't see how you can judge the performance of a president who has only been in office for barely six months, an eighth of his term. Perhaps in three years passing judgment will be reasonable, but not until then.

    I am curious as to whether "Expat" means you're an American living abroad or a Briton living in the USA.

    Complain about this comment

  • 144. At 9:06pm on 26 Jun 2009, Richard_SM wrote:


    Whilst all this speculation seems somewhat premature, I guess there are ambitious 'hopefuls' who need to be at the early planning stage, given that campaigns get more and more sophisticated and expensive. Bush took over the driving seat of a car cruising in the middle lane and left it in the swamp for his successor, cheered on by his Republican friends. That fact alone will surely not be forgotten easily, even after four years, and will handicap any Republican candidate in 2012. As for 'serious names,' I can only predict it will be a young 'unknown' who has no connection with the Bush Administration and who seen as a 'clean break' from the past. A new or revised party name is not out of the question either: Republi-CANS; Grand New Party; or Right4USA are my suggestions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 145. At 9:19pm on 26 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #142, Saint Dominick.

    "on the issue of Jeb Bush's wife Mexican ethnicity, I believe opposition to Hispanics is more intense in some quarters than prejudice against African Americans."

    Very true. But it also has a reverse affect. There is no love lost between Mexicans, Mexican Americans, Western Hemisphere's Hispanics with the Anglos (North Americans of European extractions). The dislike is more visible now than ever before as was revealed during the recent Organization of American States meeting in Latin America where Cuba was unanimous favored over the USA. Yet, Cuba rejected the offer because the USA was is still a member of the OAS.

    Apart from the hidden group of vigilantes, which most Hispanics views are being approved by Neo-Conservatives, the ever present corporate right wing news media and the police, Hispanics still take it with a grain of salt. The judicial, police, penal and jury systems are no help in helping America in race relations. Most hate crimes on blacks and Hispanics are put aside or flatly ignored by the police. But perhaps the real reason why white hate groups don't pick on African American more often is because they know black communities will return the favor in one way or another.

    Besides, Hispanics in the USA are contended to have voted for Barack Obama in droves. Voting for a white republican, regardless if he is married to a white or not is no longer an option for them! Most Mexican-American or Hispanics consider Republicans and the GOP as a hate group against minorities. Why there are many blacks in the GOP baffles many. It reminds one of Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914) who said: "Politeness, the most acceptable hypocrisy."

    Sums up the GOP, doesn't it!






    Complain about this comment

  • 146. At 9:36pm on 26 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #108 Grey Squirrel.

    Perhaps what can be said about Condoleeza Rice is that her whole family sat in the sidelines during the 1960's civil rights struggles only to emerge later to take all the advantages, opportunities offered after those who died, were torn apart by police dogs and brutally murdered.

    Condoleeza Rice is just that. An opportunist at the highest level of government. It's no surprise why she is a Republican. That she is now regarded a member of an Administration who is reviled by almost every country in the world is not a surprise to many.

    Complain about this comment

  • 147. At 10:04pm on 26 Jun 2009, toughdirtyjoe wrote:

    If Republicans do not regain power then Obama will tax us to death. He is pushing through legislation fast so he con america. He never takes a stand he only give vague safe answers.

    Complain about this comment

  • 148. At 10:43pm on 26 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #146

    Unlike Michelle Obama Condoleeza Rice earned her positin.

    She is not a parasite who was given a 300K no show job.

    Complain about this comment

  • 149. At 11:20pm on 26 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    "I am a Democrat, I voted for Obama, and I support most of his policies. I am very concerned with our deteriorating fiscal situation, but understand that the alternative would have been to let our economy collapse and possibly the end of our capitalist system." Saint Dom

    "If Republicans do not regain power then Obama will tax us to death. He is pushing through legislation fast so he con america. He never takes a stand he only give vague safe answers." toughdirtyjoe

    Interesting observation. Obama began ending the capitalist system upon his first days. Obama only makes concensus calls! IE the American people are outraged over AIG bonuses, deny it, be outraged too (even though Obama either lied or is inept.) Air Force one does a photo op, costing roughly $350,000, fighter planes tailing, panics New York, deny everything, blame someone else, fall guy takes the rap. Takes credit for Iranian mini uprising When one of two approved leaders chosen by the true ruling Mullahs (really didn't matter who won, puppet). Obama watchs world opinion, US opinion for a few weeks then decides he too is outraged like the US citizens who show that in the first days.
    Well Sarkozy, stands up an says burkas not acceptable in France (Bravo). Merkel in Germany says no to more German support in Afghanistan, also says no to stimulus plan (German Central Bank)as it would possibly cause hyper, or runaway inflation (look at the stimulus plan of Obama and company, they don't even know what was in IT!). Lastly healthcare as if car companys, insurance companys, banks, Obama and CO drive the final nail, go to ludicrous speed, no not ludicrous speed, yes ludicrous speed.
    Well as Europe swings center/right, America, and the journalists swing hard left. Myself, keep cutting firewood, joined a new gun range to practice more. Watching deer tracks, holding out on my job by working harder than others. Buying more ammo, and guns stimulate the economy US made. Flipping off the lefties, righties, hacks of all parties, refusing to cooperate with lies.
    Waiting to see how close North Korea's missles travel, watching them tweak the paper tiger (Obama). My opinion, just sink the ships, why board, what would they do? Sink all ships everyone as it comes out of North Korea. Or do nothing! Obama needs your opinion, because he is an elected official (politician) Obama can't decide a course of action with out public opinion, even if it means a Clear and Present Danger. The only way he will make a decision is when it is a Clearly, Done, Danger. No leader, JKF must be spinning in his grave.


    Complain about this comment

  • 150. At 11:35pm on 26 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 149, AmericanGrizzly

    Please stay tuned to the Rush Limbaugh radio show, we wouldn't want you to go into withdrawals and join the 2/3 of Americans who support our President. Besides, Rush is bound to provide evidence linking Obama to the H1N1 virus, and the likelihood of extra terrestrials coming from far away galaxies to join Obama in his "socialist" quest. Have you considered reviving the nuclear attack rehearsals we practiced when we were in school decades ago in preparation for a Soviet Armageddon?

    Complain about this comment

  • 151. At 11:45pm on 26 Jun 2009, Reuben wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 152. At 11:55pm on 26 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 148, Magic

    Comparing the performance of a First Lady to a former Secretary of State does not make a lot of sense. The former participates in pomp and ceremony and embraces traditional altruistic causes, the latter us responsible for her Department and is accountable not only to her boss, the POTUS, but to Congress as well.

    Yes, Michelle Obama made a lot of money as a corporate lawyer and corporate board member, that's what happens when you have a good education and business acumen. The fact that board members only show up a couple of times a year is the price stockholders and CEOs are willing to pay to seek and get the advice of talented individuals.

    Ref 147, ToughDirtyJoe

    The only thing we have seen thus far are tax breaks and, in the case of retirees, a desperately needed stimulus check.

    Complain about this comment

  • 153. At 00:36am on 27 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    "I am a Democrat, I voted for Obama, and I support most of his policies." Saint Dom
    Well a choice of catastrophes. Naw I don't listen to Rush, nor to I belong to a party, unless it has alcohol, alot if it is an Air America broadcast. Fundamentally what is better a party that screws you with taxes, both have done it. A party that limits your choice, bingo, again both do it. So both stink, as well as the drones that buy into it blindly, so your a yellow dog Democrat. Myself, I prefer to be Ursu Horribilis, buy my guns, flip off both parties, and tell politicans what I think, an ask the questions others, the drones, and see, hear, speak no evil puppets won't. Thank you for your words, though they don't apply, but when grasping at straws, any attack like a bee sting the bear, my lips still taste the honey dispite the pain. Have a nice day. Get the US out of Afghanistan OBama's War of Moral Ineptitude, as if war can be moral, what doublespeak.
    Read Johnny Get Your Gun by Dalton Trumbo

    Complain about this comment

  • 154. At 00:51am on 27 Jun 2009, Reuben wrote:

    As long as we are finding humor in Republican names for 2012, how about Michael Reagan.

    Complain about this comment

  • 155. At 00:55am on 27 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    Hitler had high ratings among Germans when he first took power. But there were always Germans who opposed him, though outnumbered. Operation Valkyrie got some killed. So after serving 22 years in the armed forces, I hung up my rifle, but never gave up the vow to support the US Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic.
    Russia/Soviet Union had more ethnic minorites and still does than the US.
    Joe Biden and Obama support a dictator in Georgia, thieves in Kosovo taking land that had always been Serbian. Well thank the Obamanation 60% faithful, just like the Nazi faithfuls. When will you come for me, so I may as well say something. Because they also get those who say nothing. Was that a Gallup Poll? Ha.

    Complain about this comment

  • 156. At 00:59am on 27 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 157. At 01:04am on 27 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    Joe there were no increases in Social Security...... But don't worry Obama has no plan, just words to balance the budget. Maybe we can put that on a bumpersticker, Obama hope, change, balance, tax, spend, broke, inflation.....jobs saved (Love is War)not in Iraq, but okay in Afghanistan. Send more guns to Georgia, have Joe Biden tell them how to use them. None are so blind......as party hacks.

    Complain about this comment

  • 158. At 01:17am on 27 Jun 2009, mary gravitt wrote:

    I am sorry you were dissapointed by Sanford, but he is just like any Right-wing Republican is, a phony. Puss Limbaugh and Newt Head Gingrich, and John Juan McCain included. All that have had wives cheated on them. Gingrich served his wife with devorce papers on her kimo cancer bed. John Juan McCain did not want his first wife after her body was disfired in a near death auto accident, so he left her for Cindy, a millionairess that suited his new lifestyle of American Hero.

    Those Right-wing Bible thumpers talk of Jesus while at the same time steal money out of the collection plate and flirt with the deacon's wife.
    Sanford ain't no worst than the rest of those phonies.

    Complain about this comment

  • 159. At 01:23am on 27 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    News Flash Hawaii reinstitues duck and cover. Unlike Obama administration accountability, responsiblity for decisive action. Duck meaning Obama plays Mickey the dope, cover blame someone else, or a past administration. Poor Hawaii, after Pearl Harbor. My Father was in the Seabees, he arrived in 1943 the US was still pulling wreakage, and poor souls from that indecisive move. But at what cost. I stood for 22 years with a rifle, during the Cold War, we have become them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 160. At 01:43am on 27 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    Republican lack leaders, hm, how about AMERICA LACKS LEADERS! Plenty of politicians, poor Britain after dredging the moat with taxpayers money. Can Obama use that one for a jobs stimulus program?
    Or Obama's civilian police force, (when he first won election across the whole country,) guess that is A Hitler called them Gestapo. Obama calls them ACORN. Read the state listing below........

    NV 2009 Nevada authorities indicted ACORN on 26 counts of voter registration fraud and 13 counts of illegally compensating canvassers. ACORN provided a bonus compensation program called Blackjack or 21+ for any canvasser who registered more than 20 voters per shift, which is illegal under Nevada law.
    2008 Nevada state authorities raided ACORN's Las Vegas headquarters as part of a task force investigation of election fraud. Fraudulent registrations included players from the Dallas Cowboys.
    OH 2008 ACORN activists gave Ohio residents cash and cigarettes in exchange for filling out voter registration card, according to the New York Post. Some voters claim to have registered dozens of times, and one man says he signed up on 72 cards.
    2007 A man in Reynoldsburg was indicted on two felony counts of illegal voting and false registration, after being registered by ACORN to vote in two separate counties.
    2004 A grand jury indicted a Columbus ACORN worker for submitting a false signature and false voter registration form. In Franklin County, two ACORN workers submitted what the director of the board of election supervisors called blatantly false forms. In Cuyahoga County, ACORN and its affiliate Project Vote submitted registration cards that had the highest rate of errors for any voter registration group.
    PA 2009 Seven ACORN workers in the Pittsburgh area were indicted for submitting falsified voter registration forms. Six of the seven were also indicted for registering voters under an illegal quota system.
    2008 State election officials have thrown out 57,435 voter registrations, the majority of which were submitted by ACORN. The registrations were thrown out after officials found "clearly fraudulent" signatures, vacant lots listed as addresses, and other signs of fraud.
    2008 An ACORN employee in West Reading, PA, was sentenced to up to 23 months in prison for identity theft and tampering with records. A second ACORN worker pleaded not guilty to the same charges and is free on $10,000 bail.
    2004 Readings Director of Elections received calls from numerous individuals complaining that ACORN employees deliberately put inaccurate information on their voter registration forms. The Berks County director of elections said voter fraud was absolutely out of hand, and added: Not only do we have unintentional duplication of voter registration but we have blatant duplicate voter registrations. The Berks County deputy director of elections added that ACORN was under investigation by the Department of Justice.
    TX 2008 In Harris County, nearly 10,000 ACORN-submitted registrations were found to be invalid, including many with clearly fraudulent addresses or other personal information.
    2008 ACORN turned in the voter registration form of David Young, who told reporters The signature is not my signature. Its not even close. His social security number and date of birth were also incorrect.

    Hmm. Guess Ursus Horribilis my party of choice.

    Complain about this comment

  • 161. At 01:49am on 27 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 162. At 02:12am on 27 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #148. MagicKirin: "Unlike Michelle Obama Condoleeza Rice earned her positin. She is not a parasite who was given a 300K no show job."

    We might then ask what good it does America to fund Israel; I don't see that the US gets anything back. Perhaps nations should be regarded as parasitical, feeding off others.

    Complain about this comment

  • 163. At 02:17am on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    Ref #162

    You must have a real problem with a nation who heroicly defends itself against racists and terrorists.

    Israel is one of the most entrepenurial nations in the world.

    And should be celebrated for it progresive nature and it's courage against the Nazi and genocidal haters of this century. Which are represented by the leaders of Gaza and Lebanon.

    Complain about this comment

  • 164. At 02:20am on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #152

    Then by your theory the Michelle the Parasite is entitled to a 300K and what acumen(she is a very ignorant woman) than so are the Wall Street and GM exec who also got their bonus voted by the board.

    Complain about this comment

  • 165. At 03:48am on 27 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    Now that Sanford is seeming out of the Republican party's plans for 2012. Who's next? I just heard on Countdown that the Next candidate being pushed for a run at the Whitehouse is current Mississippi Govenor and former Republican National Committee Chairman Haley Barber. I hope that is the case, because if he runs I don't think he'll get more than five votes in the electoral college.

    Complain about this comment

  • 166. At 05:22am on 27 Jun 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    164. At 02:20am on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    'Then by your theory the Michelle the Parasite is entitled to a 300K and what acumen(she is a very ignorant woman) -'

    Magic -
    Can you defend that statement? Without getting too personal, how do your accomplishments stack up against hers? Education, professional accomplishments, personal advancement, poise, taste, style, income?

    Just who have you been listening to? The same folks who inspired that guy who shot up the Holocaust museum? Who have you been watching and thinking she was Mrs. Obama - the governor of Alaska? Maybe it is what you meant by 'intelligence' that sets you at odds with reality.

    I generally enjoy your posts, but that one's utter incongruity set me off -

    Yours,
    KScurmudgeon


    Complain about this comment

  • 167. At 05:31am on 27 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #163. MagicKirin: "Ref #162 You must have a real problem with a nation who heroicly defends itself against racists and terrorists. Israel is one of the most entrepenurial nations in the world."

    I didn't dispute that but asked why it should be funded by American taxpayers. A parasite is one "who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return." I don't see what Israel gives in return for the vast sums of money America provides. Answer that if you can; I'd be interested to know what the USA gets out of the deal.

    Complain about this comment

  • 168. At 11:21am on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #166

    Here is one of many links you can find to Michele no show job
    http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2009/01/michelle-obamas-300k-job-at-hospital.html

    Rice on the other hand worked her way up through different jobs to become the first African American female Sec of State.

    She is more well read, talented and frankly better looking than the community orginizer's wife.

    Complain about this comment

  • 169. At 11:23am on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #167

    How about Israeli being our allie against this centuries Nazis the Palestinians and other Islamic facists. Please dont give me the line that not all Palestinians are not terrorists. They have made no attempt to get rid of Hamas and have an honest peace dialouge which would include reperation to Israel for 50+ years of terrorism.

    A true parasite we give money and other resources to is the U.N

    Complain about this comment

  • 170. At 11:39am on 27 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    "I didn't dispute that but asked why it should be funded by American taxpayers. A parasite is one "who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return." David Cunard wrote.

    So lets complete the list, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mexico, Honduras, Gutemala, Bosnia, Kosovo, Georgia, Ukraine, the list goes on for numerous others, don't forget Bermuda, Palau a bargin at only 12 million a head, and can't help wonder what Portugal got $$$$$$. Yeah we fault Iran, but we have two approved canditates. Manufactured from our failed two party system that consistantly fails to produce leaders. Just whipped up by two dysfuctional corrupt party systems that stack the electorate with Game Show hosts. Ted lets show them whats behind door number one, yes your going to take home these wonderful gifts now that you pick this door. A politician that will say all kinds of wonderful things, but in the end will probably make matters worse. That we can wait to fire him and elect a newly constituted model, aesthetically defined to please the populace no matter the cost.

    Complain about this comment

  • 171. At 11:52am on 27 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    Yes sinking ships has worked for Israel when waterborne terrorists (man made disater intendees, for the PC Obama drones). An exclusionary zone was established. Sort of like the no fly zone. It worked quite well as all terrorist (sigh: man made disaster) activity ceased. It was also suggest this be done to North Korea, by MSNBC military advisor.

    Complain about this comment

  • 172. At 11:56am on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    The following excerpt was extracted from an article published in the Chicago Tribune. If this is your idea of an ignorant woman, where does that leave the likes of George W. Bush and John McCain who managed to graduate from college as average and below average students thanks to the influence of their Daddys?

    "First Lady Michelle Robinson Obama was born in Chicago in 1964. After finishing high school, she graduated from Princeton in 1985 with a B.A. in sociology. She graduated from Harvard Law School in 1988, and began her law career at Sidley and Austin, a Chicago firm where she met her husband Barack Obama. Michelle Obama served as associate dean of students at the University of Chicago starting in 1996. In 2002, she took the position of executive director for community affairs at the University of Chicago Hospitals. She was named Vice President for Community and External Affairs in 2005."

    BTW, I don't have a problem with Condi Rice's educational and professional credentials, and believe that she and Colin Powell were a moderating force in an administration run amock by radical neocons.

    Complain about this comment

  • 173. At 12:00pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 167, David

    "Answer that if you can; I'd be interested to know what the USA gets out of the deal."

    Sorry for butting in but I couldn't resist. The only things we get back in exchange for the billions of dollars we give to the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid in the world are free intelligence services from Mossad and free "counseling" from AIPAC.


    Complain about this comment

  • 174. At 12:13pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 157, American Grizzly

    "Joe there were no increases in Social Security"

    I don't know how old you are but this retiree can assure you that I received a $250 stimulus check from Social Security last month. Doesn't sound like much but it helped pay the co-pays for the medication I need.

    Complain about this comment

  • 175. At 12:15pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 176. At 12:20pm on 27 Jun 2009, U14050352 wrote:

    monster baby has potential electoral presidential credential

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LHsSfSNyyM


    Complain about this comment

  • 177. At 12:46pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 169, Magic

    "How about Israeli being our allie against this centuries Nazis the Palestinians and other Islamic facists."

    The Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP), commonly known in English as the Nazi Party was created in Germany around 1920. It was originally called the German Workers' Party (DAP).

    There is simply no similarity or linkage between Islam and the Nazi ultra right wing national socialist movement; and when it comes to racial and cultural prejudice I am afraid you are directing your ire at the wrong people.

    Just because W engaged in immature Chavez-like rhetoric, does not mean people should continue to use absurd terms such as "Islamo-fascists". Grow up and stand on your own two feet instead of repeating the garbage spewed by our "misunderestimated" President. Then again, there is hope for redemption, now that he is writing a book for pre-schoolers we are bound to get a better insight into that erudite President. I wonder how much editors faced with unsurmountable challenges make in Texas?

    Complain about this comment

  • 178. At 1:24pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    The following is the posting that the Moderators rejected at #175. I have censored it by removing the description of MagicKirin at [b].

    Apparently he can call the First Lady a very ignorant parasite, but I can't call him...well, I'll leave that to your imaginations.

    "# 164 MagicKirin

    Magic advises for the second time that Michelle Obama is a parasite, and adds for good measure that "she is a very ignorant woman"

    Let us look at the issue of ignorance.

    According to Wikipedia, Michelle graduated cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts in 1985 from Princeton University, and she obtained her Juris Doctor (J.D.) degree from Harvard Law School in 1988.

    As for "Magic", over just the last 14 hours or so

    allie (sic)
    facists (sic)
    dialouge (sic)
    reperation (sic)
    orginizer's (sic)[when referring to the President of the USA as "the community orginizer" and the First Lady as "the community orginizer's wife"]
    heroicly (sic)
    entrepenurial (sic)
    it's (sic) [meaning "its"]
    progresive (sic)

    So, the choice is between [a] someone educated at the US' top universities, who worked her way up from very humble circumstances and is widely admired, in the US and throughout the world and [b] MagicKirin

    That's a tough one

    Complain about this comment

  • 179. At 1:28pm on 27 Jun 2009, Satheesan Kochicheril wrote:

    Most of the people in the country are victims of the commercialization of all walks of life, it does not exclude any category. Priests, Presidents, and the common people are its victims. Sensuality is given the highest place in all media expressions. This has affected the structure of the family. The greatest victims are women as they are the gate keepers of sex. Even grannies try to look sexy- a ridiculous sight often.
    The sumtotal of this is the erosion of love for it can be had only when we respect human relationship. Presently what has taken its place is fancy. In Yahoo discussion one wrote some time back to this effect- go to a shopping mall when it is about to close, meet some sales girl there and take her to dinner. Since experiments with sex starts at a younger age most cannot have sexual fidelity in life. When important people do that it strikes the media reports.
    All rules must be for enriching life, not the traders, not for criminalising the people. Recently a housewife was fined $20 thousand for every song she downloaded without permission from the internet. In other countries such a case would make the lay pay the costwith some warning. Traders make money, a lot than such people make in other countries, because people are there.
    No country can remain sane without the basic emotion of love.

    Complain about this comment

  • 180. At 1:43pm on 27 Jun 2009, U14050352 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 181. At 2:32pm on 27 Jun 2009, RomeStu wrote:

    177 SaintD

    I hadn't heard that Dubya was writing a pre-school book. Will it have to be read upside-down, or will all pre-schoolers be issued with reflective mirror systems .... no doubt supplied by a company connected to the Bush family!

    Complain about this comment

  • 182. At 3:09pm on 27 Jun 2009, watermanaquarius wrote:

    john-In-Dublin # 178
    You are being very unfair.
    In 4 postings here since 2.17 am. he has only badmouthed Michelle in 2 of them, and might be suffering, missing other colleagues to push the boat out with him on his usual subject.
    So far, in the other 2 postings he has managed to squeeze in -Israel x 2, Israeli, Palestinian x 2, Islamic, racist, nazi x 2, terrorist/ism x 3, Hamas, Gaza, Lebanon and the UN, [some in a favouable light] and this in a discussion about Republican leaders.
    I am looking forward to how he fits all these and other thought provoking words into the new thread about the climate expected monday.

    Complain about this comment

  • 183. At 3:11pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 181, RomeStu

    Dubya is writing a book...I juiced it up by adding the pre-school comment. As to who and how it is going to be read, I suspect it all depends on the person that is putting W's incoherent diatribes and linguistic barbarisms into words. Epigraphers must be in high demand in the Dallas area...

    Complain about this comment

  • 184. At 3:20pm on 27 Jun 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Had Sanford simply told just one trusted aide on his staff in confidence that he was going to Argentine to personally break off an illicit love affair and how to reach him in an emergency, waited until just after Farah Fawcett and Michael Jackson died to return and make an unapologetic announcement of his whereabouts, he just might have skated by. The fact that he was too incompetent to figure out a successful strategy to cover up his indiscretion and neutralize its political effects proves he is not qualified to be President. His timing could also have hardly been worse. He'll be lucky to hold on to his governorship...or even his marriage for that matter. What a genius.

    Complain about this comment

  • 185. At 3:24pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 180, Love

    "Should the Republican party be allowed to die?"

    The Republican party remains as strong as ever. What they need is a qualified, reputable, and charismatic leader capable of articulating the values of the party. I think it is unfair to characterize the entire party by the excesses of the far right, which is a critical part of the party, but does not represent all of its members. As I have indicated in previous posts, my two best friends are Republican, one is a social conservative, the other is a fiscal conservative. Neither endorse the excesses of the last 8 years and do, in fact, deplore many of the things done by the Bush administration. They didn't vote for Obama, in fact, one did not vote at all for the first time in his life. That's one of the reasons Barack Obama was elected President.

    Complain about this comment

  • 186. At 3:26pm on 27 Jun 2009, NoRashDecisions wrote:

    Now that yet another "family values" hypocrit has bitten the dust, how about (in order to make a real splash) a Muslum head the Republican ticket in 2012, or a gay person, or better yet, a gay Muslum? That certainly would make people sit up and take notice and insure the Republicans best chances of victory over Obama, not to mention it would be one more giant step toward creating that "more perfect union" that Obama likes to wax lyricly about all the time! O but wait, I forgot. The Republicans only welcome born again Christians into their party and strictly deny all others. How could I be so stupid!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 187. At 3:41pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    The worst thing that Sanford did was use taxpayers money to pay for his trip to Argentina. The fact that he returned the money after the news broke does not excuse his action, which is tantamount to a bank robber asking for mercy because he returned the money after being arrested.

    In all fairness, the GOP has several highly qualified and honorable congressmen, senators, and governors who would be excellent candidates for the presidency. The problem is that the rank and file seems to be more impressed with the likes of Limbaugh, Coulter, McCain, Gingrich and the rest of the old gang than with the progressives that could restore the credibility of the party and lead them to victory. In a nutshell, the party is self-destructing by insisting on the preservation of extremism that contributed to their defeat last year. They need new leadership and a coherent message, and the USA needs a viable third party.

    Complain about this comment

  • 188. At 4:05pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #178

    John my spelling is being altered by one of the moderators I did a copy check on that.

    If you want to talk about college degrees than you have to admidt George Bush is smarter than John Kerry due to GPA.

    Michelle Obama's hate filled comments speak for themselves.

    You do not get a pass because you happen to be a minority.

    But I gave a link that proved her job was a no show

    Case rested.

    Complain about this comment

  • 189. At 4:09pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 190. At 4:13pm on 27 Jun 2009, NoRashDecisions wrote:

    #187 Saint Dominick: '"the USA needs a viable third party."

    Don't hold your breath on that. Unfortunately, since we're not a parlamentary democracy, Independents will never, I'm afraid, enjoy the same status and creddability here as, say, the Liberal Democrats do in the UK. As far as the Republicans goes, one can only hope they'll see the error of their ways, but of all the people to see and correct their wrongs, the Republicans are the least likely. So I wouldn't hang too many hopes on that either if I were you.



    Complain about this comment

  • 191. At 4:14pm on 27 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #178. john-In-Dublin: Ref your entire post - Way to go!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 192. At 4:30pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 189, Magic

    "Why can't you admidt that he is a thug who the Venezuela people would get rid of if there ever was an honest election."

    Because I spent 12 years in Venezuela, understand the problems facing the people as well as the potential of that wealthy nation, and have several relatives and friends living in that country who tell me that Chavez remains very popular among the masses. The opposition is limited to the upper middle class and the elite.

    The fact that he has been elected and re-elected by sizable majorities and that he has put his agenda on a referendum negates the claim of dictatorship. His rhetoric, like Bush's, is immature and he is a megalomaniac politician competing with Bolivar for a place in history by paying off the national debt of countries such as Argentina and Nicaragua, and giving lavish donations to Cuba in exchange for doctors and college professors, instead of using the money to further improve the standard of living of his people.

    You comparison of George W. Bush to Barack Obama is the kind of stuff we hear in comedy shows.

    Complain about this comment

  • 193. At 4:49pm on 27 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #178, John-In-Dublin

    "let us look at the issue of ignorance."

    Only in the US and then it's largely confined to the Bible Belt where all the bible thumping, flag waving wanna-be super patriots re-born "Christians" is the arrogance, hatred and hypocrisy possible. And on a huge scale, I might add. It's a region where the term "God" is used loosely for political, profit (and forgiveness, of course) and full scale hypocrisy exists. These individuals come very close to proving there is no God to speak of.

    But the truth might be that not only "ignorance" but also arrogance, hatred, bigotry or racism is a double edge sword. It poisons the mind of everything it comes in contact with. Take the example of a Mexican when I ask him as why he hated "gringos" so intensely. He replied in somewhat of a sarcastic voice: "I am like a parrot and only repeat what I hear." Reminds one of Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and the likes, doesn't it? Neo-cons, including the entire GOP, only repeat what those employed by Fox News say, and woe to any republicans that questions them!

    The problem with Obama I feel is that he is trying too hard to be a "nice" guy with the ignorance, arrogance and downright bigotry hurled at him and his wife by the likes some of those in these posts. I learned long ago to treat people like they treated me. It bothers me to witness many have to come down to their level of nastiness, but sometimes it does create respect. After all, these "American" neo-conservatives will never like, much less love you, but they sure in hell will respect you if one treats them the way they treat others!

    Democrats still have to learn how to talk back and not be intimidated by the neo-conservatives around them. Where is Truman or LB Johnson when one need them.





    Complain about this comment

  • 194. At 4:55pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #192

    First the first relection there was voting discrepancies from relliable sources(Jimmy Carter is not an honest observor)

    Second explain why he is charging his main election opponent on trumpred up charges and shutting down any media that does not praise the fraud of his Bolivarian revolution. He is legitimate as Mugabe or the President of Iran.

    The uquivilent in this counry would have been for Bush to take control of the media and do informercials for McCain. Not allow any rallies or speeches for Obama. That is why Hugo is a thug and dictator. I might add he inteferes in other countries internal affairs far more than we do: supporting the FARC, trying to influence elections in Mexico etc.

    Rise up Venezuela arrest the socialist dictator!

    Obama's olive branch and groveling in Cairo did well in Iran. Where was the Arab league in joining in denouncing the fraud and violence.

    Complain about this comment

  • 195. At 5:10pm on 27 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #180 and 185

    The Republican Party died back in November, 2008. The problem is, it wasn't buried properly and the stench is still with us. It looks more like it's trying to dig up Ronald Reagan and use it resuscitate the Party from decaying further.

    Complain about this comment

  • 196. At 5:24pm on 27 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    194. At 4:55pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #192

    First the first relection there was voting discrepancies from relliable sources(Jimmy Carter is not an honest observor)"

    He is more honest than you who beleives the complicit war criminal (findings of the Knesset) Ariel Sharon is a "hero

    "Second explain why he is charging his main election opponent on trumpred up charges and shutting down any media that does not praise the fraud of his Bolivarian revolution. He is legitimate as Mugabe or the President of Iran."


    Or he is correct. Interesting like the Palestinians, he is a native Bolivian.

    And of course we know what you think about native peoples don't we?


    "The uquivilent in this counry would have been for Bush to take control of the media and do informercials for McCain. Not allow any rallies or speeches for Obama."



    If Obama had been threatening to overthrow the government he would have done.

    " That is why Hugo is a thug and dictator. I might add he inteferes in other countries internal affairs far more than we do: supporting the FARC, trying to influence elections in Mexico etc."


    He doesn't send guns to assist the killing in Somalia, give the IDF phosphorus bombs to use on civilians or cluster bombs for teh IDF to use on civilian areas.


    Compared to these atrocities Chavez is not in the same leaguie.

    Sorry you cannot be an unquestioning supporter of the Israeli far right and talk about human rights and democracy. Interfering in other countries wrong, stealing land and water - fine. What weird morality is this?

    "Rise up Venezuela arrest the socialist dictator!"

    Yeh well that isn't going to happen, anymore than the Palestinians are going to agree they do not exist.

    "Obama's olive branch and groveling in Cairo did well in Iran. Where was the Arab league in joining in denouncing the fraud and violence."


    Iran is not a member of the Arab league. Not a member of Seato either.

    What a howler.



    Complain about this comment

  • 197. At 5:28pm on 27 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    192. At 4:30pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:
    Ref 189, Magic

    "Why can't you admidt that he is a thug who the Venezuela people would get rid of if there ever was an honest election."

    Because I spent 12 years in Venezuela, understand the problems facing the people as well as the potential of that wealthy nation, and have several relatives and friends living in that country who tell me that Chavez remains very popular among the masses. The opposition is limited to the upper middle class and the elite. "

    Yes this is what I hear.

    "You comparison of George W. Bush to Barack Obama is the kind of stuff we hear in comedy shows. "

    Remember this poster, if he is actually real, I sometimes suspect he is part of the BBC's attempts to stir things up, has a big "problem" with native people's or the powerless.

    He is on the extreme right so would see any regard for the poor as dangerous.

    Complain about this comment

  • 198. At 5:33pm on 27 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    189. At 4:09pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #177

    Of course the Palestinian groups like Hamas and Hezbollah are like the Nazis they advocate the genocide of another ethnic group."

    Theya re nothing like the Nazi's as compared to some in the Israeli government who advocate ethnic cleansing.

    Who is forcing women to give birth at checkpoints? Who is stealing land and water on "ethnic" ground? Who supports the idea of "settlements".

    Explain the idea of lebensraum again.

    Complain about this comment

  • 199. At 5:36pm on 27 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    177. At 12:46pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:
    Ref 169, Magic

    "How about Israeli being our allie against this centuries Nazis the Palestinians and other Islamic facists."

    The Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP), commonly known in English as the Nazi Party was created in Germany around 1920. It was originally called the German Workers' Party (DAP).

    There is simply no similarity or linkage between Islam and the Nazi ultra right wing national socialist movement; and when it comes to racial and cultural prejudice I am afraid you are directing your ire at the wrong people.

    Just because W engaged in immature Chavez-like rhetoric, does not mean people should continue to use absurd terms such as "Islamo-fascists". Grow up and stand on your own two feet instead of repeating the garbage spewed by our "misunderestimated" President."



    Why this antisemitic slur is allowed to stand is amazing. It is pure rascism and nothing else.

    Islam is a religion, the nazis if anything were christian or non-religious.

    Nazism was a western invention.

    Complain about this comment

  • 200. At 5:40pm on 27 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    184. At 3:20pm on 27 Jun 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
    Had Sanford simply told just one trusted aide on his staff in confidence that he was going to Argentine to personally break off an illicit love affair and how to reach him in an emergency, waited until just after Farah Fawcett and Michael Jackson died to return and make an unapologetic announcement of his whereabouts, he just might have skated by. The fact that he was too incompetent to figure out a successful strategy to cover up his indiscretion and neutralize its political effects proves he is not qualified to be President. His timing could also have hardly been worse. He'll be lucky to hold on to his governorship...or even his marriage for that matter. What a genius. "

    Why should he have had to indulge in these antics?

    In a more mature country this would not have mattered.

    However in the US, which has the biggest porn industry in the world (and one of its few internationally successful) apparently extra marital affairs between consenting adults are beyond the pale.

    Just imagine if his lover had been a man!

    The whole thing is ridiculous

    Complain about this comment

  • 201. At 5:49pm on 27 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #184

    The old saying "there is a sucker born every minute" very much applies here with the Mark Sanford incident. As any late night comedy show will admit these "suckers" are their bread and butter, they best employers, so to speak. It provides them with all the jokes they need to make a living and look forward to them in doing so. It's a struggle for me to stay awake until 10:30 (Mountain Standard Time) to see their shows, but wait I do.

    Yep, just like you, Markus. The name came up very coincidental, didn't it?

    Complain about this comment

  • 202. At 5:56pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 188 MagicKirin wrote:

    "John my spelling is being altered by one of the moderators I did a copy check on that."

    Jeez Louise.

    I have previously pointed out that Magic resides in Magicland, where the rules of the real world don't apply. I hadn't expected such concrete proof.

    Just to be clear, Magic - is it that

    [a] One of the Moderators has been going through each of your postings for months, inserting misspellings, poor punctuation, grammatical howlers and outrageously bizarre right wing observations in pretty much every sentence? OR

    [b] The BBC has been beaming these things into your head, cos you forgot to put on your tinfoil hat?

    Presumably either way they are in the pay of those evil Palestinians, and/or Michelle Obama, both of whom are desperately trying to discredit you?

    I'll respond to the rest of your posting separately, as I have a feeling the moderators will block this. You can accuse them of falsifying postings, but I suspect you cannot refer to someone who makes such an accusation.

    Complain about this comment

  • 203. At 6:15pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 188 MagicKirin wrote:

    If you want to talk about college degrees than you have to admidt (sic) George Bush is smarter than John Kerry due to GPA.

    I have to admidt (sic), or even admit, nothing. Provide proof you may need to look up that word that George Bush got better marks than John Kerry in college, and that will prove....nothing, except that George Bush got better marks than John Kerry in college.

    I have never claimed that W was all that dumb just massively incurious, intellectually lazy, and a lousy President. I saw all of his debates against Kerry I know who was the smarter.

    Michelle Obama's hate filled comments speak for themselves. You do not get a pass because you happen to be a minority.

    No, MagicKirins hate-filled comments speak for themselves. You do not get a pass because you happen to be a minority.

    Your postings are a barrage of hatred, against Obama, his wife, Mandela, Tutu, unions, the UN, all Arabs, all Palestinians, various media outlets, Jimmy Carter, all Democrats except Joe Lieberman, and anyone who ever dares question any action or policy of Israel. [To mention just a few....]

    But I gave a link that proved her job was a no show

    As above - look up the word 'proof'.

    No you didn't - you gave a link to an extreme right wing website, full of rantings against Obama, which claimed this. A site which includes, among its 'must reads', links to raving right wing fruit loops like Ann Coulter, John Bolton, Michelle Malkin and Mark Steyn.

    Complain about this comment

  • 204. At 6:21pm on 27 Jun 2009, U14050352 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 205. At 6:26pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 206. At 6:31pm on 27 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #184. MarcusAureliusII: "Had Sanford . . . waited until just after Farah Fawcett and Michael Jackson died to return and make an unapologetic announcement of his whereabouts, he just might have skated by. . . What a genius."

    If he had known when they were going to die, he really would have been a genius!!


    Complain about this comment

  • 207. At 6:38pm on 27 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #194, MagicK

    The only Democratic president I have issues with is Jimmy Carter. Not so much for his policies, but for the fact he was a born and bred southern boy with southern fundamental dogma upbringing. I remember him speaking of equality and togetherness (which was fine) but at the same time his mom, Lillian or lilly, was attending KKK rallies because it "was interesting" to her. And who can forget the "slow" Billy Carter which was perhaps was the only likable one in the entire family.

    But I will never forget an incident that happen in Mexico City that will forever remind me of Jimmy. He had been by the Mexican President to speak and the first thing he came out of his mouth with was "the Montezuma revenge." I was there at the time and witness (as all who saw it in world wide television), the hush and "Americans" sliding down their chairs or bowing down and covering their heads in perhaps was embarrassment. But what later erupted was even worse when the Mexican president spoke directing it to Jimmy without mentioning names.

    The fact is, far too "Americans" perhaps lack the required intelligence to conduct themselves properly in foreign countries or it's just plain ignorance of the world around them. Just because the practice of ignorance is accepted in the USA doesn't mean it's accepted worldwide.

    That is why President Obama is so important. If only he had the cojones to do so.

    Complain about this comment

  • 208. At 7:00pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    For some reason my #203 came out without quotation marks - possibly because I typed it in Word - so it isn't clear what I'm writing as opposed to what I am quoting. The following is the correct version.

    And I keep getting referred to the Mods, apparently because I referred to Magic's assertion at #188, that his "spelling is being altered by one of the moderators".


    "# 188 MagicKirin wrote:

    "If you want to talk about college degrees than you have to admidt (sic) George Bush is smarter than John Kerry due to GPA."

    I have to admidt (sic), or even admit, nothing. Provide proof you may need to look up that word that George Bush got better marks than John Kerry in college, and that will prove....nothing, except that George Bush got better marks than John Kerry in college.

    I have never claimed that W was all that dumb just massively incurious, intellectually lazy, and a lousy President. I saw all of his debates against Kerry I know who was the smarter.

    "Michelle Obama's hate filled comments speak for themselves. You do not get a pass because you happen to be a minority."

    No, MagicKirins hate-filled comments speak for themselves. You do not get a pass because you happen to be a minority.

    Your postings are a barrage of hatred, against Obama, his wife, Mandela, Tutu, unions, the UN, all Arabs, all Palestinians, various media outlets, Jimmy Carter, all Democrats except Joe Lieberman, and anyone who ever dares question any action or policy of Israel. [To mention just a few....]

    "But I gave a link that proved her job was a no show"

    As above - look up the word 'proof'.

    No you didn't - you gave a link to an extreme right wing website, full of rantings against Obama, which claimed this. A site which includes, among its 'must reads', links to raving right wing fruit loops like Ann Coulter, John Bolton, Michelle Malkin and Mark Steyn."

    Complain about this comment

  • 209. At 7:26pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #208

    Jhonny Boy:

    To quote Jack Nicholoson " You can't handle the truth!" I suggest you get a job in the liberal arts dept of Duke University. You would be welcomed by theother intolerant haters in the Duke 88.

    Complain about this comment

  • 210. At 7:29pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #207

    Where do these ideas come from that Americans are not sophisticated on the world stage. Plain talk is far more useful that faux nuance. Which Obama demonstrated in the Iran crisis, since when do we have to learn from a French leader on taking a moral stand?

    Give me Ronald Regean and his straight talk over Carter weakness and appeasment or Chirac's chamberlen's and Obamas.

    Complain about this comment

  • 211. At 7:34pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 194, Magic

    The Venezuelan Treasury and Justice departments ordered the arrest of Carlos Giménez, the deposed governor of Yaracuy state, for accepting $30M in bribes from companies engaged in repairing flood damages in his state between 2004-07. Gimenez was a staunch supporter of Chavez until he decided to run against him for the presidency of Venezuela. Accepting bribes has been a trademark for Latin American politicians since the earliest days of the colonization of the Americas. I know, I used to pay them in a small scale (cartons of cigarrete, bottles of Johnny Walker, etc.) when I filled in for my Dad during brief absences from work. We could have unloaded African elephants without papers without a problem if we wanted to.

    Regarding your call for a revolution, it was tried a few years ago, with our full support and advice. It didn't work. The result of Chavez' populist programs and military modernization is that he enjoys the full support of the masses and the armed forces. He is also highly regarded throughout Latin America since he paid off loans that countries like Argentina and Nicaragua owed to US banks. It doesn't take a genius to understand why poor nations prefer someone who pays off their debt and gives them free oil, asking for nothing in return, and abhor those who lend them money and demand high interest on the debt.

    Your obsession with native Americans, minorities, and the poor is second only to the ignorance you show on many of the topics you address. Do a bit of research before you post to avoid making a fool of yourself. Then again, like Simon said, you may be a BBC plant used to stimulate debate when things are getting dull. Your posts are consistently ultra right wing, but I have noticed significant differences in diction and style in your messages which suggest there may be more than one person writing them.

    How would you feel of foreigners started calling for a revolution in the USA or incite violence? If you want people to respect us, you may want to do the same when you voice your opinion about others.


    Complain about this comment

  • 212. At 7:45pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 207, Foxtrottango

    I remember the Montezuma revenge fiasco well. That was, indeed, a gaffe of major proportions and an example of the lack of sensitivity we exhibit when talking to foreigners. George H. W. Bush vomiting on the Japanese PM lap was another embarrassing episode at the highest levels, and who could forget W laughing and chatting with the Chinese leadership during the last Olympics weeks after the atrocities in Tibet.

    I am impressed with the way Obama, Albright, Clinton, Kissinger, Powell and Rice handled themselves during their appearances overseas. It is unfortunate that Powell and Rice were used by Cheney the way they did and had no choice but to support policies they knew were detrimental to our country, but they handled themselves well under the circumstances. To his credit, Powell did the right thing and resigned, Condi should have done the same...

    Complain about this comment

  • 213. At 8:32pm on 27 Jun 2009, watermanaquarius wrote:

    St D # 211,
    Only just spotting the changes Dominic. Very good but a little slow for a smart guy like you.
    Did you notice another suddenly appear in an attempt to take the flak. No name calling either. Hope this genuine? one stays and his doppelganger doesn't turn up spouting 'pomes' again.
    194, 209, 210 Excellent attempt at imitating the real Magic with limiting spelling mistakes.
    Please bring back the old one. He is much more entertaining.

    Complain about this comment

  • 214. At 8:40pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 209 MagicKirin wrote:

    "ref #208

    Jhonny (sic) Boy:

    To quote Jack Nicholoson (sic) " You can't handle the truth!" I suggest you get a job in the liberal arts dept of Duke University. You would be welcomed by theother (sic) intolerant haters in the Duke 88."

    Dear oh dear. Where to start. And why do I bother?

    [a] Since you libellously accuse me of being an 'intolerant hater', without, as usual, anything in the way of evidence, and without being moderated, I assume the moderators will grant me the right of reply. The bizarre irony, as I have repeatedly demonstrated, is that you yourself are consumed by an intolerant hatred. As I pointed out at # 203, just a few of the targets of your hatred and intolerance on this blog - I have limited the list, for reasons of space - include "Obama, his wife, Mandela, Tutu, unions, the UN, all Arabs, all Palestinians, various media outlets, Jimmy Carter, all Democrats except Joe Lieberman, and anyone who ever dares question any action or policy of Israel. [To mention just a few....]". And one of your favourite tricks, when not libelling those who disagree with you as anti-Semitic, is to accuse them of being 'haters'. It's almost amusing, if it wasn't so ridiculous.

    [b] Interestingly enough, your quote is from a character played by Jack Nicholson, Col. Nathan R. Jessep, a rude, arrogant, obnoxious, extreme right-winger, who lies under oath to cover up a murder in which he is implicated. As I recall, one of his comrades is so disgusted by his own complicity in this cover up that he shoots himself. And Col. Nathan R. Jessep ends the play/film under arrest and on his way to jail. Interesting that.

    [c] I can handle the truth. You just can't tell it.

    [d] I suggest you don't seek a job in any university, or indeed any other organisation, where an ability to spell is required

    Complain about this comment

  • 215. At 8:54pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 210 MagicKirin wrote:

    "Where do these ideas come from that Americans are not sophisticated on the world stage."

    From postings such as yours, for a start.

    "Plain talk is far more useful that faux nuance. Which Obama demonstrated in the Iran crisis, since when do we have to learn from a French leader on taking a moral stand? Give me Ronald Regean [sic] and his straight talk over Carter weakness and appeasment [sic] or Chirac's chamberlen's [sic] and Obamas [sic] ."

    I don't know of any Ronald Regean [sic]. There was however a US President called Ronald Reagan. But since he illegally and covertly negotiated with the Iranian regime, and indeed agreed to the illegal sale of arms to them, he's obviously not the 'straight talker' you're referring to.

    We had another 'straight talker' from 2000-2008. GWB - one of your heroes, along with Cheney. His 'straight talk' was an enormous success in frightening N Korea, Iran and Al Qaeda, deterring them from any behaviour the US didn't like, and increasing US prestige throughout the world. [Perhaps in Magicworld - not in the real one.]

    Mind you, his talk wasn't so straight when it came to minor issues like WMD or torture...

    For the record, your current President has been highly critical of the Iranian regime and their violent suppression of dissent.

    Sorry to confuse you with the facts there.

    Complain about this comment

  • 216. At 9:29pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #214 and 215

    Jhonny Boy you obious can't make a constructive argument, so you resort to insults.

    But you address any criticsm of a minority as racism.

    Your god Mandela has supported terrorism. I give you a link that Michelle's job was a no show, but you can't accept it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 217. At 9:35pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #211

    First I listen or ead from the BBC, Fox , NYT, the Economist and other sources unlike you on Jhonny Boy I don't disparage a source due to it's editorial policy.

    You and other quote Wikipedia which is a cabal of Wales lackies with no intergrity who censor worse than the moderators on this web sight

    You are very trusting that the arrest is legitimate. We did not support the revolution against Hugo the Dictator we just hoped that it would suceed.
    Just as we should support the people in Bolivia who are being treated as second class citizens by Morales.

    The problem you have is that a few of us don't subscribe to political correctness. So when I compare Hamas and Hezbollah to the Nazis in term of racial intolerance you can't accept it.

    sorry but it is true.

    Just as you can't accept any criticsm of Obama

    Complain about this comment

  • 218. At 10:19pm on 27 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 217, Magic

    When it comes to Latin America, I don't need reports from the media to understand the circumstances that exist in that part of the world, its history, and aspirations. I lived there for many years and have relatives and friends with whom I stay in touch.

    My cousins, who do not support Chavez, admit he has won elections by overwhelming margins which they attribute, correctly, to his populist policies and the attraction they have to the lower middle class and the poor who have endured so much misery in that part of the world for so long.

    We were involved in the coup to overthrow Chavez, have been involved in regime change in Latin America the past couple of centuries, and have been on the wrong side of events for a very long time. That is the reason they hate our government and corporations while, unlike people like you, they admire the American people and our way of life.

    Morales' policies, while controversial by US standards, are designed to improve the standard of living of its native population, who constitute the majority and who have lived in absolute poverty for centuries. Yes, the oligarchy is being adversely affected, but I am not among those who is going to shed a tear for the morons that have abused so many for decades with absolute impunity.

    As for criticisms of Obama, I actually disagree with his timidity on healthcare reform, reneging his original plan to withdraw from Iraq immidiately, the escalation of the Afghanistan conflict, his reluctance to close the Guantanamo prison camp immidiately, and his decision to support the faith based initiative. Criticism of politicians don't botherm, falsehoods, distortion, and unfounded allegations do. I also despise those who attack the wives and families of politicians. I never said anything against Laura or Barbara Bush or anyone else and while I understand why Republicans attacked Hillary when she got involved in healthcare reform, I find their cowardly attacks against Michelle Obama symptomatic of the lack of principle of right wing zealots.

    Concerning Hezbollah and Hamas, would you care to explain how two Palestinian organizations whose members are semitic be engaged against their semitic Jewish cousins?

    Complain about this comment

  • 219. At 10:30pm on 27 Jun 2009, Mike Mullen wrote:

    217. At 9:35pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ...The problem you have is that a few of us don't subscribe to political correctness. So when I compare Hamas and Hezbollah to the Nazis in term of racial intolerance you can't accept it.

    sorry but it is true.

    Just as you can't accept any criticsm of Obama
    ----------------------------------------------------

    And you won't tolerate any criticism of Israel however mild or reasoned, so I guess you're about even.

    As to potential 2012 candidates I can see a number of the big hitters hanging back largely because of the economy. If it shows signs of a upturn then Obama is practically a dead cert. If it doesn't then he can still blame the Republicans and is still a good bet. This assumes that the Republican party can bridge the gap betweens candidates who appeal to the moral conservatives and those who might appeal to the country at large.

    Complain about this comment

  • 220. At 11:00pm on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #218

    It is accepted the term anti-semetic refers to Jews.

    Morales methods are only a step away from Mugabes in terms of stealing land.

    So you approve that he gives special privilidges to his ethnic group?



    Complain about this comment

  • 221. At 11:09pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 216 MagicKirin Boy wrote:

    "Jhonny [sic] Boy you obious [sic] can't make a constructive argument, so you resort to insults."

    If you're going to use my name, try learning to spell it. J-o-h-n. 4 letters. It's not difficult. Since you call Michelle Obama 'very ignorant', how about some evidence that you're not?

    While you libel me as a hater, I am in fact a lover - of the English language, amongst other things. What has it ever done to you that you treat it with such contempt?

    You are in no position to lecture others re making a constructive argument. I discredited your arguments re Reagan and Obama you ignore this. You ignore anything that doesnt fit in with your prejudices. Your posts are invariably 99% prejudice and a minuscule amount of fact. Any 'evidence' is invariably a link to someone as extreme and right wing as yourself. Any factual argument against you is invariably ignored.

    Not insults, just the truth. I recall that when the crowds yelled 'Give 'em hell, Harry' to President Truman, he replied [of the Republicans] 'I give them the truth. It just seems like Hell to them.'

    "But you address any criticsm (sic) of a minority as racism."

    Another baseless, libellous lie - without proof, as there is none. I have never called you a racist. You appear happy to hate people of every race, creed and colour, if they disagree with you in any way.

    "Your god Mandela has supported terrorism."

    He is not my god. He clearly hates far less than you do, although he has much more reason to do so. And since nothing Israel does is ever wrong in your eyes, you have supported terrorism too.

    "I give you a link that Michelle's job was a no show, but you can't accept it."

    You give a link to [another] ranting rightwinger. In the real world, that doesn't constitute proof.

    Complain about this comment

  • 222. At 11:12pm on 27 Jun 2009, American Sport Fan wrote:

    Re 193

    I believe your right about the hypocricy that exists in the Bible Belt, but I don't think that it is limited to the South. In recent years conservatives have found themselves in numerous sex scandels. Let's not forget the Reverand Ted Hagard who was caught seeing a male prostitute, or Senator Larry Craig who was arrested for soliciting sex in a mens room at the Minnesaopolis Airport. Both Hagard and Craig were outspoken opponents of Gay Rights in this country and both continued to deny that they were gay even after they were discovered.

    Complain about this comment

  • 223. At 11:22pm on 27 Jun 2009, ticatica wrote:

    I would highly suggest the BBC or amy other reputable press organization visit Louisiana and make a thorough investigation of Bobby Jindal. He has proven to be woefully inept at managing and decision making, while being driven by an orthodox conservatism that is narrow in scope and breadth. I hope more people, other than us in Louisiana, will come to realize this charlatan for what he is.

    Complain about this comment

  • 224. At 11:22pm on 27 Jun 2009, seanspa wrote:

    Magic may not enjoy this story, but most should appreciate this on Mandela.

    Complain about this comment

  • 225. At 11:30pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 224 seanspa

    Stop trying to confuse Magic with the facts!

    No doubt he'll find it proof that the Daily Telegraph are liberal, pinko, terrorist-loving appeasers......

    Complain about this comment

  • 226. At 11:38pm on 27 Jun 2009, seanspa wrote:

    John you mean they are not? But why else would they publish such a story?

    Complain about this comment

  • 227. At 11:41pm on 27 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    Since this posting is actually about who the Reps will pick in 2012, a rather coruscating insight into Romney [magic's friend] from Andrew Sullivan here - http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06/last-man-standing.html

    The 'money quote', as it were - "I think Romney's a hologram of pure cynicism and borderline nuts. Remember that convention speech? One pandering vacuity after another. And he must know he will never be his party's pick, because the very people he panders to are the very bigots who would never vote for him."

    Complain about this comment

  • 228. At 01:05am on 28 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #220. MagicKirin: "It is accepted the term anti-semetic refers to Jews."

    If it is, which I doubt, it should at least be spelt properly. Fortunately your attitudes and those mainstream members of the Jewish faith do not run parallel. I wonder if your household keeps Kosher and follows all the proscriptions of the Torah; if not, then why not? Other than being an ally, one of many, you couldn't explain what good Israel does for the United States and I very much doubt if you will answer this very straightforward question. I hope I am proved wrong.

    Complain about this comment

  • 229. At 01:21am on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 220, Magic

    "So you approve that he gives special privilidges to his ethnic group?"

    Several Latin American countries have been governed by a small oligarchy that controls all facets of life and owns most of the land since the conquest, while large segments of the population live in absolute poverty and without hope of ever achieving what most of us take for granted: putting food on the table, having a roof over our heads, educating our children, having access to medical care, and having a decent job.

    The worst examples of abuse against the indigenous population can be found in countries like Bolivia, Ecuador, Honduras and Guatemala. Evo Morales is the first 100% native American to be elected president of a country in the Americas and, not surprisingly, he is trying to solve the problems that have afflicted his people, who happen to be the majority of the population in Bolivia, by taking land from the wealthiest oligarchs and distributing it among the disposessed. Bear in mind that much of that land was not farmed or used in any productive way. It was simply inherited by members of a few families who denied others the opportunity to subsist.

    I understand his land distribution policy is offensive to most Americans, but that is only because we see his actions through the prism of our history, society, and the opportunities we all enjoy. There are simply no parallels between the problems endured by the impoverished masses in the countries I cited and life in the USA. Supporting the "rights" of despots is not something we should be proud of.

    Complain about this comment

  • 230. At 01:35am on 28 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 231. At 01:43am on 28 Jun 2009, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    223:
    So youre from Louisiana, nice to see someone else from our state posting on the BBC. However, I'm curious about your anti-Jindal stance. I see that you call him woefully inept, etc. Perhaps it would be prudent to give examples, so as to inform all those who don't get the Advocate or the Times-Picayune.

    I would also like to take the opportunity to offer a counter position.
    Since Jindal came into office, he has had a few stumbles-mainly with the Legislature acting more independent than usual-as well as his poor response to the President's address, and his frequent out of state traveling. However, he responds fabulously to crisis situations such as during the hurricanes that hit the state last year. He also successfully pushed the legislature to pass an ethics reform bill that made Louisiana jump from rank 44 to #1 in ethics. The state deficit is under control and the economy of the state has performed remarkably well compared to the rest of the nation with unemployment resting at several percentage points below the nation average: LA-6.3 US-10. He has made deals that saved jobs from going elsewhere and delayed the closer of the Shreveport Hummer plant until 2012. Many road projects have been started such as the widening of I-12 and a new bridge crossing the Mississippi River.

    I suspect that you are angry at Jindal over the new budget that he just signed into law because it includes tuition increases for higher education and cuts to the Health and Education Depts. I am angry about those cuts as well, but you must understand the reason for them, so that you know what needs to be changed.

    The 1972 state constitution, written during the Edwards years, created two separate budget areas called mandatory and discretionary spending. Most state agencies were placed under mandatory spending to ensure that their budgets were stable, while a few agencies, including Health and Education, were placed under discretionary spending so that their budgets could ebb and flow with state revenue. Do you see the problem this creates during recessions? So what we need is a constitutional amendment to place health and education under mandatory spending, and maybe move other less necessary agencies into discretional spending.

    I say give Jindal a chance to govern for a term.
    So long as the state continues to do reasonably well and he doesn't make any special trips to Argentina, he'll be a fine governor worthy of re-election.

    Complain about this comment

  • 232. At 01:44am on 28 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #220

    first I dispute it was not being used. So some references for that, please.

    Second what about special courts and judicial authorities.

    Is Morales going to compensate the non Indians. they do produce the wealth and contribute.

    but by your theory since Jews have been persecuted by millenia any land they won in a war should remain theirs because of centuries of persecution from arab nations.

    Complain about this comment

  • 233. At 01:45am on 28 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #227, John-In-Dublin.

    Heh, heh. You had me going there, John in the comments: I think Romney's a "hologram" of pure cynicism and borderline nuts."

    I had to read the sentence over because I swear I saw the word "hooligan" which would be more appropriate in view of the circumstances. (my own views, of course)

    Complain about this comment

  • 234. At 01:48am on 28 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 235. At 01:50am on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 220, Magic

    "It is accepted the term anti-semetic refers to Jews."

    The fact that you accept something does not make it valid.

    The word Semite comes from the biblical term "Shem", which means noble or majestic in reference to something or someone whose origins are celestial or heavenly. The Semitic people trace their origins to the neolithic population that lived in the Arabian plate and whose cultural, linguistic and genetic roots are from that region. It includes the Hebrews, Qahtanis and Syrians that have lived in that part of the world since time immemorial. Obviously, it doesn't include the tens of thousands of Jews that migrated to Israel from Eastern Europe during the past six decades, and for whom settlements continue to be built in direct violation of UN resolutions and a lack of humanity.

    When you claim the Palestinians are anti-semitic, you are accusing them of being prejudiced against themselves. Why don't you try hatred of the white europeans that have been appropriating their land? Do you see the dichotomy of supporting european settlements in Palestinian lands and opposing land appropriations to provide the indigenous people of Bolivia with the means to subsist?



    Complain about this comment

  • 236. At 01:53am on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 228, David

    "Other than being an ally, one of many, you couldn't explain what good Israel does for the United States and I very much doubt if you will answer this very straightforward question. I hope I am proved wrong."

    I gave Magic the answer to your question in an earlier post: intelligence provided by Mossad and political "advice" from AIPAC.

    Complain about this comment

  • 237. At 02:00am on 28 Jun 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    173 St. D.

    Well, America does get two other things in return for its support of Israel:

    First, it has the undying emnity of large portions of the Islamic world; and
    Second, it has the very expensive national security nightmare that goes along with it.

    America has no critical security interest in the eastern Mediterranean littoral west of the Jordan, and never has had. Israel used to be a good friend that shared America's values, and had America's sympathy. But now, America is expected to underwrite every crazy unyielding policy that arm-twisting by the religious parties can extort out of their coalition partners. It is long past time for honest talk between old friends: boot the religious parties out of your coalition, or no more cash. If you want to pursue those policies, then you're on your own.

    Complain about this comment

  • 238. At 02:01am on 28 Jun 2009, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    Has anyone brought up the Cap and Trade bill that narrowly passed the House today? Justin, I think that topic is worthy of its own page.
    I certainly understand the environmental aspect of this bill, but I simply cannot support it because it will be horrible for domestic industry. Some reports indicate that our utility costs will rise by 16% nationwide if the bill in its current form passes the Senate. I also think it undermines the whole point of Federalism in the US. If it is so important to have everything uniformly decided for us by Congress then we might as well drop the idea that all powers not specifically delegated to Congress by the Constitution are to be given to the states. If anyone wants to know what will happen to the US, just take a look at the states on the west coast and the Midwest that currently have the strictest environmental codes and taxes. Much of their industry has fled to other states or countries.

    Complain about this comment

  • 239. At 02:54am on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 232, Magic

    "Is Morales going to compensate the non Indians. they do produce the wealth and contribute.

    The people whose land is being appropriated by the government are being compensated for it; and no they have not produced anything constructive during the last five centuries other than keep the indigenous population oppressed, ignorant, destitute, and subservient to them.

    "but by your theory since Jews have been persecuted by millenia any land they won in a war should remain theirs because of centuries of persecution from arab nations."

    My "theory", if you want to call it that, is that nobody has an inherent right to abuse other people and that everyone should be allowed to live in peace, prosper, and offer a better future to their descendents.

    Jews have been persecuted for centuries by white "Christian" europeans. They coexisted in relative peace with Muslims, prospered, and in some cases, rose to positions of prominence. An example involves the Sephardic Jews during the Islamic occupation of the Iberian Peninsula, when many became business owners, professionals, and occupied important posts as a result of their education, work ethics, and initiative. Many became members of the elite in that era, until they were unceremoneously booted out by the Catholic Monarchs (Ferdinand and Isabella) and persecuted by the Inquisition.

    No need to rehash their treatment under the Third Reich.

    Complain about this comment

  • 240. At 04:43am on 28 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #234. MagicKirin: "In regard to Israel if there was not a constant terrorist/genocidal threat, the Israeli economy is self sufficent."

    Then why does America spend so much on supporting it?

    And when you reply, do let us know if you keep Kosher or whether you labour on Shabbat and recite Birkat Hamazon after meals. The mark of a true Jew is whether he obeys what is written. I have a feeling that you're Reformed - very reformed.

    Complain about this comment

  • 241. At 05:01am on 28 Jun 2009, Gary_A_Hill wrote:

    saintDominick (#235), although I am sympathetic to your discussion of the applicability of the term "semite," it is nevertheless true that the term "antisemitic" was coined specifically with reference to Jews, and that is how the term has always been used. It is how language is used that matters if one is interested in communication about the substantive idea behind the word. To argue whether it is the right word is a diversion.

    Here is a link to a discussion of the origin of the term, but there are many others available:

    http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/anti-masonry/antisemitism.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 242. At 06:53am on 28 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #241. Gary_A_Hill: "the term "antisemitic" was coined specifically with reference to Jews"

    That is only the opinion of Shmuel Almog. If you are serious about the origin of the phrase anti-Semitic then you would not into fall into the trap of quoting one doubtful source to prop up your argument.

    Complain about this comment

  • 243. At 08:38am on 28 Jun 2009, squirrelist wrote:

    What's this latest stuff got to do with potential Republican leaders? Can't you give it a rest?

    Complain about this comment

  • 244. At 10:13am on 28 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    Since this posting started with Gov Sanford, people may be interested in a new theory as to what caused him to commit adultery. It's here and it's courtesy of Rush Limbaugh. Apparently it's all President Obama's fault...

    - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/25/limbaugh-blames-sanfords_n_220993.html

    Complain about this comment

  • 245. At 10:49am on 28 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 246. At 12:08pm on 28 Jun 2009, squirrelist wrote:

    244. At 10:13am on 28 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    "Since this posting started with Gov Sanford, people may be interested in a new theory as to what caused him to commit adultery."

    Oh, I thought Sanford was blaming it on the Bible. Bad example of King David. Who apparently got away with it. There you are. Must read through that so I've got a good excuse next time I get caught out doing something I shouldn't. I can cry without having a peeled onion in my hand, too. I'm sure that'll help convince people of my reformed sincerity.

    (I forgot. It probably won't work: I'm not a 'religious' conservative and I don't harp on about good ol' fashioned family values. . .Maybe I'll just add "Burn this after reading' to all my emails instead. Don't you think he was a very poor plagiarist of the Song of Solomon?)

    Complain about this comment

  • 247. At 12:09pm on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 244, John

    If Rush's theory is correct the scope of President Obama's stimulus package is so broad that it may put Viagra out of business! I wonder if our President knows how to tango? That would provide irrefutable evidence of complicity in the demise of another Bible thumping Republican rising star. I wonder if Rush has considered the probability of Obama being responsible for the H1N1 virus? After all, our President visited Mexico City since the Inauguration and I would not be surprised if he and Michelle eat Mexican food every now and then. Definitely something to consider...

    Complain about this comment

  • 248. At 12:52pm on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 246, Squirrel

    The answer is to become a "born again" Christian, which exonerates you from all sins and prepares you for new adventures.

    Complain about this comment

  • 249. At 2:20pm on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    The GOP has plenty of popular politicians who are likely to run for President in 2012 including Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Tim Pawlenty, Haley Barbour, and Ron Paul. The problem is that their ideology and track record only appeals to small segments of the electorate and could, therefore, be easily defeated by Barack Obama if nothing catastrophic happens between now and then.

    The bleak scenario facing the GOP could change dramatically if someone like General Petraeaus retired, became a Republican, and decided to run for President in 2012. Should that happen, President Obama would likely be a one-term president working on his library in Chicago.

    Complain about this comment

  • 250. At 3:32pm on 28 Jun 2009, steelpulse wrote:

    Mark Sanford?

    GOP?

    My involvement with USA seems to me at least as long as United States history itself. An exaggeration I know but Justin, what am I doing here? lol

    I cannot believe the American political scene I have been forced to watch recently - is in charge of anything - let alone allegedly "my world"!

    Freedom Of Speech discussed in the 20 minutes I watched on C-Span. A critical film being shortly to be seen - "Shouting Fire"? A brief verbal history too on the supression of same - Freedom of Speech. And that word "liberal" spat out again!

    "Liberal" It is not synonomous with "weakness" in some cases believe me. So this odd version of the GOP and your "popular politicians" look to your own problems.

    Ward Churchill? In C-Span? Never heard of him but "Shouting Fire" mentions his case I understand and various others?

    So if someone meets with disapproval by whomsoever - trawl through a life and find something against someone allegedly. How many lives could bear that close an inspection, USA?

    I wont give C-Span even 20 minutes next Sunday. It is of no further interest. Freedom Not To Watch Speeches if you like.

    Complain about this comment

  • 251. At 4:09pm on 28 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 245 MagicKirin wrote:

    "I have stated the lies and hatread [sic] against Jews and Israel pushed by people like John and Marbles will be answered."

    The moderators have allowed Kirin to vilely libel me [and Ms Marbles - who as far as I can see hasn't actually posted ANYTHING on the current topic - but we can't expect Kirin to limit his smears because of the facts.]

    I therefore naturally expect that they will allow me to reply.

    At # 214, I said to MagicKirin "...you yourself are consumed by an intolerant hatred.....And one of your favourite tricks, when not libelling those who disagree with you as anti-Semitic, is to accuse them of being 'haters'. It's almost amusing, if it wasn't so ridiculous."

    He has been good enough to prove the point, yet again.

    I was wrong however. It's not just ridiculous - it's contemptible.

    It is contemptible - and self-harming - not just because it is a scurrilous lie. It is contemptible because if the Israel lobby and people like Kirin continue to smear anyone who dares question or criticise Israel or its government as 'anti-Semitic', it's likely that soon the description will lose all meaning. There will be genuine anti-Semites [there always are]; someone will call them on their anti-Semitism; but many will just assume that it's the usual smear tactics, and ignore it. Thus, real anti-Semitism will flourish.

    As it happens I have said little about Israel or Jews.

    You have a choice Kirin. Either

    [a] Provide evidence of where I have put forward "lies and hatread [sic] against Jews and Israel" [I will leave Marbles to respond to you herself, if she can be bothered with you] - or

    [b] Stand openly condemned, yet again, for the liar and libeller that you are.

    If you click on my name you can see pretty much every posting I've made.

    We're waiting.

    Complain about this comment

  • 252. At 4:25pm on 28 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    I referred at #244 to Rush Limbaugh's theory that Gov Sanford's adultery is in fact all President Obama's fault. And people have come up with a few alternative theories. But I feel that there's one that has been overlooked.

    I refer to Magic's explanation for the appalling spelling in his postings at #188 - ie "my spelling is being altered by one of the moderators".

    A similar excuse has been used recently by the Iranian authorities to explain the protests and unrest there - it's all inspired by the BBC.

    Suddenly it all becomes clear. The BBC and its Mods wanted a good juicy news story, so THEY sent all those emails to that lady in Argentina. They conned Gov Sanford onto a plane to Argentina by telling him he was going for a walk in the Appalachians.

    Perfidious Albion indeed!

    ;-)

    [Note to Mods. I am kidding. I am not really accusing you of setting up Gov Sanford. So don't 'moderate' me - please.]


    Complain about this comment

  • 253. At 5:22pm on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 252, John

    You may be kidding, but your theory may not be that far fetched. Geography has never been our strong point; if in doubt consider our decision to retaliate against the Wahhabist terrorists that carried out 9/11 by attacking and invading Iraq. You'll be surprised how many people still think they are one and the same.

    One of the GOP strengths is misinformation, and when you repeat it often enough time it eventually becomes reality to many no matter how bizarre the claim may be.

    Complain about this comment

  • 254. At 5:23pm on 28 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 255. At 6:07pm on 28 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 249 saintDominick wrote:

    "The GOP has plenty of popular politicians who are likely to run for President in 2012 including Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Tim Pawlenty, Haley Barbour, and Ron Paul. The problem is that their ideology and track record only appeals to small segments of the electorate and could, therefore, be easily defeated by Barack Obama if nothing catastrophic happens between now and then./The bleak scenario facing the GOP could change dramatically if someone like General Petraeaus retired, became a Republican, and decided to run for President in 2012. Should that happen, President Obama would likely be a one-term president working on his library in Chicago."

    Really?

    Firstly, I'm not entirely convinced that Obama will easily beat any of the Reps you named even if 'nothing catastrophic happens'. If the economy doesn't improve, or doesn't improve enough, who knows what may happen?

    Mind you, though Obama may have been unlucky to get into office at a time of recession, in one way he's lucky. Imagine if the economy had imploded a few months AFTER he came in, rather than before. Who can doubt that the Reps would have insisted it was all the fault of his commie-socialist-pinko policies?

    He also benefits from coming in after Bush. In particular, it makes it much harder for the Reps to claim that if they were in power spending would be lower, when Bush spent like a drunken sailor and no Rep complained.

    It is true, AFAIK, that a President failing to win re-election is relatively rare in the US - eg I THINK there were none between 1932-76. Having said that, there have been 3 in 33 years - and I assume Johnson didn't run in 68 as he believed he'd lose.

    As for Petraeus - I don't know. If the economy were doing badly, and in particular if the international situation was even worse than now, and if he was a good campaigner - maybe. OTOH, if Obama does reasonably well, and in particular if the public is mostly concerned about the economy and domestic issues, I wonder whether they would really go for someone with no political experience at all.

    There have been few soldiers who successfully entered politics that I know of. [Eisenhower is the obvious exception.] Gen Wesley Clark ran in 2004, but as I recall didn't make that much impact.

    Finally, you say of the other Reps, "The problem is that their ideology and track record only appeals to small segments of the electorate". But surely if Petraeus ran as a Rep he'd have to adopt the same ideology? I don't see much evidence of 'moderate' Republicans having much say in the party these days.

    Complain about this comment

  • 256. At 6:48pm on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 255, John

    The fact that Gen. Petraeus does not have political experience will be viewed by many as a plus. Many of us are sick and tired of politicians who promise us the world and do something entirely different after they are elected. The only thing Petraeus would have to do to chore up his police experience limitations would be to choose a moderate Governor or Senator, preferably a female, such as Snowe, Collins or Hutchinson and President Obama would be in serious trouble. Not only would he be facing a "hero", he would also be confronting acceptable female VP candidates.

    Under such circumstances Obama will have no choice but to dump Joe and get Hillary on his ticket to have a fighting chance. Fortunately for Obama, none of this is going to happen, the GOP will nominate either Romney or Palin which, barring a major international or domestic disaster, would guarantee Obama's re-election.

    Complain about this comment

  • 257. At 7:02pm on 28 Jun 2009, gunsandreligion wrote:

    I don't see what all the fuss is about. At least he's not gay and
    active in public restrooms in airports.

    Pretty soon, the qualifications for politicians will match those for voters;
    four straight limbs and a thumbprint.

    Complain about this comment

  • 258. At 7:08pm on 28 Jun 2009, gunsandreligion wrote:

    actually, I retract the part about limbs - apologies to anybody who is
    handicapped,

    Complain about this comment

  • 259. At 8:18pm on 28 Jun 2009, Gary_A_Hill wrote:

    Everyone attributes the origin of the term "antisemitism" with Wilhelm Marr, not merely Almog, and associates the use of the term with reference to Jews, not to Semitic peoples generally. For example:

    http://www.yale.edu/yiisa/mission.htm

    Dismissing a source as "dubious" is no substitute for finding an authoritative source with a contrary opinion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 260. At 8:28pm on 28 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #257. gunsandreligion: "I don't see what all the fuss is about. At least he's not gay"

    An unfortunate choice of phrasing. Unless of course you actually mean it. Sexuality has no place in the discussion, only ability.

    Complain about this comment

  • 261. At 8:50pm on 28 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #259. Gary_A_Hill: "Dismissing a source as "dubious" is no substitute for finding an authoritative source with a contrary opinion."

    I hardly think a Freemasonry site or part of Yale are "authoritative sources" to support your notion. Who is everyone? The hyphen and capitalised S are not there for nothing. Ask Vanessa Redgrave; she's just as authoritative!

    Complain about this comment

  • 262. At 8:50pm on 28 Jun 2009, gunsandreligion wrote:

    DC, I was actually trying to draw a humorous comparison with Sen. Larry Craig,
    who, gay or not, managed to make his whole world implode upon itself.

    Complain about this comment

  • 263. At 9:16pm on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 259, Gary

    "Everyone attributes the origin of the term "antisemitism" with Wilhelm Marr, not merely Almog, and associates the use of the term with reference to Jews, not to Semitic peoples generally."

    My hobby, since I retired, has been genealogy which by necessity includes the study of history, geography, ethnicity, migrations, sociology and other related topics. The intent of my original comment on the subject of semitism was simply to highlight the fact that, technically, the Jewish people are not the only ones with semitic ancestry.

    I don't consider Mr. Marr's assertion a reflection of ignorance. I suspect it was a deliberate attempt to deny his inconvenient neighbors their heritage which, by default, make them people without a country they can call their own.

    You are absolutely correct in saying that we - the West - use the term in conjunction with the Jewish people, which as incorrect as calling descendents of Aztecs or Quechuas "Hispanic".

    Complain about this comment

  • 264. At 10:02pm on 28 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #256

    Although people are running for the nomination now it is far to earlier. Remember that for the first 1.5 years after Bush won his second term, every major commentator said Hillary would win the nomination.

    So a lot could happen by than. Someone could come out of no where or they could be another scandal. Note earlier on McCain look like he would not get Republican nomination either.

    Complain about this comment

  • 265. At 10:03pm on 28 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    Question to Justn and his moderators:

    how long are you going to let David_Cunard and John in dublin get away with personal attacks?

    Complain about this comment

  • 266. At 10:05pm on 28 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #262. gunsandreligion: "DC, I was actually trying to draw a humorous comparison with Sen. Larry Craig,
    who, gay or not, managed to make his whole world implode upon itself."

    Thanks for the clarification - unless emoticons are used (not generally seen here) it sometimes difficult to distinguish between sly humour and meaningful opinion. Craig is a sad human being - wide stance indeed!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 267. At 10:42pm on 28 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    259. At 8:18pm on 28 Jun 2009, Gary_A_Hill wrote:
    Everyone attributes the origin of the term "antisemitism" with Wilhelm Marr, not merely Almog, and associates the use of the term with reference to Jews, not to Semitic peoples generally. For example:

    http://www.yale.edu/yiisa/mission.htm

    Dismissing a source as "dubious" is no substitute for finding an authoritative source with a contrary opinion."

    The word's origins are not relevant in its modern context. Wales was originally a very derogatory term , now it is used officially.People of the Sioux nations respond to the term, though it too was derogatory (ditto apache).

    The only meaningful use of the word is as a reference to semitic religions, the greatest of which is Islam.

    Many of the comments about Islam, the Palestinians etc on this board are plainly anti-seemeetic.

    It has been said that if it ever wants peace (and there is no real sign Israel does, it's political elite needs conflict) Israel needs to abandon its own anti-semetism.

    origins, the word equally applies to all semites and seemtic religions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 268. At 11:07pm on 28 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 265 MagicKirin wrote:

    "Question to Justn [sic] and his moderators:/how long are you going to let David_Cunard and John in dublin get away with personal attacks?"

    Really - you couldn't make this up.

    At # 245 - quite rightly moderated - he libellously, and vilely, with no evidence, called Marbles and myself anti-Semitic. Specifically, he said that we were guilty of pushing "lies and hatread [sic] against Jews and Israel". He actually said "people like John and Marbles" - so no doubt he had a few more targets in mind that he didn't name. A blatantly 'personal attack', by any normal standards. [Not unlike calling Michelle Obama a very ignorant parasite, which he also did.]

    I called him on this. I pointed out that the anti-Semitism smear is a disgraceful tactic, which he uses again and again. I asked for one jot of evidence.

    As ever, answer came their none.

    [Ironically enough, another nonsense he loves to repeat, without of course ever providing evidence, is 'you can't make any criticism of Obama, or his supporters call you a racist'. Pot, kettle....]

    And now he plays the victim and goes crying to the Mods.

    Reminds me of the old one of the guy who says 'I don't like one-armed waiters.

    They can dish it out...

    But they can't take it.'

    Complain about this comment

  • 269. At 11:34pm on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 264, Magic

    Absolutely, it is way too early to draw any conclusions. Too many things could happen between now and 2012 that could either strengthen or weaken President Obama's electability, and the same goes for all potential GOP candidates.

    I believe what Justin is looking for at this early stage is opinions about who win the GOP nomination, besides the obvious frontrunners. I believe there is a good chance that a new face may emerge, if nothing else because the message being put forth by the old no longer resonates among the electorate. Since, it is almost a foregone conclusion that President Obama will run for re-election, the question is who has a chance to win the GOP nomination?

    I disagree with those that believe the Republican party is finished and does not have a chance in 2012. They simply have to find a qualified, honest, and charismatic candidate capable of running on traditional social and fiscal conservative values to challenge an incumbent President that is likely to remain very popular. The first step they must take is to tell Limbaugh and Coulter to cool it. They make the party look like a bunch of middle school bullies.

    Complain about this comment

  • 270. At 00:13am on 29 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #268

    As the moderators removed the previous personal attack they must agree.

    Complain about this comment

  • 271. At 00:15am on 29 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #269

    Regarding Coulter and Limaugh, I agree to some extant. But remember that President Obama and all the Dems went to a Daily Kos conference. And the Kos is far more hateful ( I think some of the posters here work for them) than Limaugh.

    Complain about this comment

  • 272. At 01:03am on 29 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #265. MagicKirin: "how long are you going to let David_Cunard and John in dublin get away with personal attacks?"

    What "personal attacks" have I made upon you? Just type the number if you can find any. I have asked a couple of questions to which, so far, you have not responded. How those can be considered attacks are beyond me. You do Judaism no favours, which is shame, because a level-headed discussion might be worthwhile. Throwing around accusations of 'hate' does not help the debate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 273. At 01:23am on 29 Jun 2009, squirrelist wrote:

    248. At 12:52pm on 28 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 246, Squirrel
    The answer is to become a "born again" Christian, which exonerates you from all sins and prepares you for new adventures.


    Like going to confession? Do you start off all nice and shiny and clean, and gradually get dirty with age? That would explain a lot, I suppose. How many times can you be 'born again'?

    Complain about this comment

  • 274. At 01:48am on 29 Jun 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:

    DC, J-in-D, St. D, et al.,

    This is off topic, but you might be interested in reading this paper:

    "Prospects for Iran's 2009 Presidential Elections", by Walter Posch
    The Middle East Institute Policy Brief, No. 24, June 2009

    It is available in PDF format on line, without a subscription. I tried to post the link on the other string but the moderators wouldn't let it through.

    In rebuttal to some rather misleading postings on this blog last week, it pretty much demolishes any idea that the Iranian elections weren't fudged, and much else.

    Complain about this comment

  • 275. At 02:34am on 29 Jun 2009, Takeshi wrote:

    Why weren't the media asking similar questions about future leaders within the Democratic party a few month after President Bush was elected in 2000? Barack Obama had no national profile at that time but I don't recall any similar stories about a lack of new young leaders.

    Bobby Jindal and Sara Palin are two younger governors with already established national profiles and support within the party. Shouldn't a journalist already know this?

    Complain about this comment

  • 276. At 02:58am on 29 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    "I don't know how old you are but this retiree can assure you that I received a $250 stimulus check from Social Security last month. Doesn't sound like much but it helped pay the co-pays for the medication I need." Saint Dom

    Again a stimulus package is not a percentile increase of social security, after you spend the $250, that is it. Next year you receive no 2% overall increase. So basically you don't have that follow you until the end of your life so to speak helping you all the way along.













    Complain about this comment

    Complain about this comment

  • 277. At 03:21am on 29 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    Well the President of Honduras was ousted due to trying to change the Constitution of Honduras, so he could stay president. HMMM! Obama supports him, does that mean Obama would like a Constitutional change here so Obama could stay President???? Only time will tell. Just remember Obama brings a double standard into play, with AL Sharpton(remember the Tawana Brawley racist stunt/victim ploy) as his first visitor, Reverend Wright as his mentor, and close friend so Obama said... As far a parties both are so corrupt it is incomprehensible to envision a noteworty future. By the way for all those that seem to use personal attacks as a plan for quelling descent. I will be picking up my new handgun at the end of next week. so:

    "I wonder if they'll ever understand
    The trials of a freedom seeking man
    So have a round on me my friend
    What else can we do
    You know I always love ya
    But I think it's time that we flew

    We went dancin' across the USA
    On that crazy king's highway
    Too much passion
    Too much play
    We went dancin'...dancin'...dancin' across the USA" thank you Lindsey Buckingham

    Complain about this comment

  • 278. At 03:41am on 29 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    "You may be kidding, but your theory may not be that far fetched. Geography has never been our strong point; if in doubt consider our decision to retaliate against the Wahhabist terrorists that carried out 9/11 by attacking and invading Iraq. You'll be surprised how many people still think they are one and the same." Saint Dom
    HELLO we hit Afghanistan! We invaded Iraq for WMD.... No Obama wants to waste US lives, and money again in Afghanistan. We have been there 8 years. BRAVO to Germany PM, no more troops, no more money for Afghanistan. YES we have improved Afghanistans infrastructure, and they have increased poppy production quite a bit. So unless Obama supports illegal drugs, doesn't mind using Marines as cops and targets, then get out now. I now have my new t-shirt about Obama's War. All the comments have been positive, the Obambots have hung their heads and stumble for words. Plus people asked me where to get one...movement...in a different direction...." Old predictions by I forget who..I apologise..
    "Great Britain will spread itself out of existance.
    Germany will arm itself out of existance.
    America will spend itself out of existance." Who said that??? Could it be true????
    "The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail-its roof may shake-the wind may blow through it-the storm may enter-the rain may enter-but the King of England cannot enter!-all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!" William Pitt Thank you, with liberty and justice to all, the loyal opposition......ask how many in a Gallup poll who said it and what it was about!

    Complain about this comment

  • 279. At 03:51am on 29 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #243. squirrelist: "What's this latest stuff got to do with potential Republican leaders? Can't you give it a rest?"

    [I had responded earlier but someone had complained about another part of the same post, about which see immediately below.]

    Because in reference to Condoleeza Rice as a potential candidate, MK called the First Lady a parasite. Since he continually references Israel, a nation which, since 1949 [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]has received $135 Billion and provides nothing of substance in return, I suggested the same term might apply to it. Hence "the latest stuff". But as MK stated "Sanford is done" and in any case it is far too early to forecast a Republican candidate. Time for a new topic.

    Complain about this comment

  • 280. At 03:52am on 29 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    # #251. john-In-Dublin: "We're waiting."

    It's a long wait until hell freezes over. My question at #228 has not had a response and so, as far as I can tell, MagicKirin doesn't follow the dictates of his faith yet feels persecuted for no good reason; he's Jewish in name only - but I stand to be corrected. His defence of Israel is similarly misplaced.

    #270. MagicKirin: "As the moderators removed the previous personal attack they must agree."

    If you are referring to my post at #254 (edited above), it was there for quite a long time, and I feel sure that you read it. That leads me to suspect that someone complained about it. My guess is that someone was a poster whose name begins with "M". If that poster did read it, I wonder what offended her or him? Could it be that I suggested you were not a practicing Jew who doesn't follow the dictates of his faith yet feels persecuted for no good reason? I do not see how that can be considered an "attack".

    Complain about this comment

  • 281. At 04:11am on 29 Jun 2009, neil_a2 wrote:

    The problem with the teleprompter is that Obama needed them during his "debates". When forced to ad-lib, Obama shared legal boilerplate. (Obama's responses looked pretty shallow in the transcripts.)

    (I do not care about the SC governor committing adultry.) Clinton committed perjury, witness tampering, evidence tampering, and obstruction of justice in response with his adultry. That was considerably more than just adultry.

    Obama will not lose the nest election. He has ACORN working on his behalf. It does not matter how Americans vote, ACORN will see him through.

    Republicans ought to run "Joe the Plumber". At least the debates will be more entertaining.

    In fairness, Joe's thoughts and views are a lot more honest, direct, and detailed than Obama's. I do not think Obama will be able to defend his actions in 2012. By then, Obama will have appointed a "Media Czar" that reports directly to him to manage and edit any debates before presentation.

    So Justin, I propose "Joe the Plumber".

    Complain about this comment

  • 282. At 04:22am on 29 Jun 2009, U14052605 wrote:

    majickirin could you explain how you have so much anger for Michelle Obama?

    It really seems to be very strange. No one else seems to care.I have never heard someone complain that Michelle Obama had a well paid job.

    I think you need a beer mate!
    Relax enjoy a warm frothy head of lager and relax.
    She is a succesful woman who probably deserved being overpaid no more than any other executive or board member. I suspect that they got more value from her than many of the other people holding similar possitions. She after all had to fight people attacking her all the way, I suspect.

    Nice Lady she seems. If she ever gets to Canning end she will be welcome. However I suspect you wuld be required to drink a couple before you came in.

    Complain about this comment

  • 283. At 04:32am on 29 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    "The problem with Obama I feel is that he is trying too hard to be a "nice" guy with the ignorance, arrogance and downright bigotry hurled at him and his wife by the likes some of those in these posts." Foxtrottango1
    Naw I think Obama is a moron like Bush. Both nice but morons, flowery speeches (he can speak well, with the telepromter, better than Bush), developed his views with radicals, some racist Wright, Sharpton. Passed a law to protect whistleblowers, then fired one in deference to his own doing. Supports ACorn, a Special Action type group, thugs, opportunists, etc. Public funds a create no substantial job stimulus package but a tax burden for the future. Spouts nonsense about a nationwide police force (Gestapo? Acorn?) Try to take credit for Iran, and hides out to public opinion, lies about AIG bonuses, until public opinion. Hides on North Korea, escalutes Afghanistan, changes policy to put more US forces in harms way there. Bails out private messes, GM, Chrysler, now Ford I hear. Airforce one buzzes New York, with fighter jets in tow. Kow tows in Saudi. What has he done that is note worthy? What has he accomplished? Point out the bright points of his Messianic star? All the Obambot say is he is popular, we like him, gallup polls. The US populace doesn't want GM. Obama made a secretive proposal to Russia, they put it out in public. What a laughing stock. Kosovo, Georgia, Obama and Biden made fools of themselves there. Oh, the Albanians loved him for giving him the Serbian land.... As a Georgian dictator tries ethnic domination with US support laying waste to cites there...Was he outraged? The European couldn't even fess up in Georgia. But he kill a fly, and PETA got angry. LOL that was the only time I was on his side. I thought PETA was ridiculous, but that is my opinion. SO GET THE US FORCES OUT OF AFGHANISTAN. I also think NATO has gone beyond being defensive as an organization and expensive to the US. The same with the UN. The US pays exorbitant amounts. When has the UN accomplished anything with its flowery speechs, North Korea? THE US NEEDS A THIRD PARTY, demo and repub are stagnant, corrupt entities.
    "The history of liberty is a history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of the limitation of governmental power, not the increase of it." Woodrow Wilson

    Complain about this comment

  • 284. At 04:54am on 29 Jun 2009, neil_a2 wrote:

    Michelle's title changed and her salary tripled when her husband became a senator. This is normal for Chicago politics.

    I would not read too much into her professional merits to warrant this consideration.

    Complain about this comment

  • 285. At 05:10am on 29 Jun 2009, U14052605 wrote:

    284 neil a2

    I have just read your posts I would not read too much into what you say. It seems a little strange especially seeing as you seem to think america was subject to the same travesty of justice and democracy that the poor people of Iran suffer. And yet most seem to think that it was unique to the Iranian elections.
    "truth be told "it was a stolen election in the USA?
    my god.this is going to cause some of your fellow countrymen some distress.
    Will they show the same determination for justice as we saw in Iran.

    Complain about this comment

  • 286. At 05:41am on 29 Jun 2009, U14052605 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 287. At 06:02am on 29 Jun 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    193. At 4:49pm on 27 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:
    "let us look at the issue of ignorance."
    'Only in the US and then it's largely confined to the Bible Belt where all the bible thumping, flag waving wanna-be super patriots re-born "Christians" is the arrogance, hatred and hypocrisy possible. And on a huge scale, I might add. It's a region where the term "God" is used loosely for political, profit (and forgiveness, of course) and full scale hypocrisy exists. These individuals come very close to proving there is no God to speak of.'

    foxtrot, I live in that Bible belt, and I am one of those - the correct term is 'born again' Bible thumpers. You are right - evangelical Christians are active here 'on a huge scale'. While these sentiments are not 'largely confined' to the South, neither are arrogance, hatred and hypocrisy. let me remind you that arrogance, hatred and hypocrisy are as well represented on the Left as the Right of the spectrum. (your post would make a good demonstration of that, it seems to me...)

    Except for hypocrisy - for that, I am sure you are aware, one must first make a commitment to a standard of conduct, and then fail to live up to that standard. Christians are much more at risk, then, than the irreligeous, and 'loud mouthed' Christians more so, as our scriptures warn us. You are right again, then, only among us is hypocrisy even possible.

    And 'these individuals' you describe use the word 'God' in ways that show they are ignorant of the word's meaning - hardly any evidence of its truth.

    But only the notorious among us make it onto the front pages where good liberal folks like yourself take notice of them. There are still the millions who remain in the shadows of the forests and the mirages of the prairies, living lives not so unlike your own, struggles, successes, failures, joys and miseries - but also lifted up by forgiveness for each other, and an unreasoning hope. Please don't forget or deny us our honor along with your scorn.


    'But the truth might be that not only "ignorance" but also arrogance, hatred, bigotry or racism is a double edge sword. It poisons the mind of everything it comes in contact with.'

    I agree - that is my understanding as well.

    'After all, these "American" neo-conservatives will never like, much less love you, but they sure in hell will respect you if one treats them the way they treat others!'

    These neo-cons have shown that they 'will never like, much less love' - or understand - conservative, bluecollar Americans, either. But vile behavior is not necessary - just don't vote for them again. I didn't.

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 288. At 06:34am on 29 Jun 2009, U14052605 wrote:

    169. At 11:23am on 27 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #167

    How about Israeli being our allie against this centuries Nazis the Palestinians and other Islamic facists. Please dont give me the line that not all Palestinians are not terrorists. They have made no attempt to get rid of Hamas and have an honest peace dialouge which would include reperation to Israel for 50+ years of terrorism.

    A true parasite we give money and other resources to is the U.N"

    this comment is highly offensive to all with a sense of proportion or decency. the fact that a post criticising it was removed is very odd.
    Nazis have not been around for centuries.
    The double negative
    " not all Palestinians are not terrorists." is a hard one to follow.
    "not all Palestinians are terrorists" I would get.
    this statement would be true

    "not all Palestinians are not terrorists" is still a little confusing. Do explain.

    Complain about this comment

  • 289. At 09:01am on 29 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #288. beerontap: "not all Palestinians are not terrorists" is still a little confusing. Do explain."

    See #280. A waste of time even asking.

    Complain about this comment

  • 290. At 10:18am on 29 Jun 2009, SaintOne wrote:

    #288

    You need to take in in context;

    a) He is Jewish
    b) He is paranoid

    As for the Nazi argument, well its quite ridiculous. I would say you could switch the roles and it would amke for a far more accurate mirror. The nazis had a larger military force and rounded up the jews to kill them. The Israeli's have a larger military force, and have trapped the Palestinians in Gaza and have killed a large number.

    I wouldn't call the Jewish Nazi's though, because neither the Israeli's nor the Palestinians have commited a crime as substantial. But you can't go around calling people your scared of Nazi's in a pathetic attempt to justify killing them.

    Complain about this comment

  • 291. At 10:27am on 29 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #288 and 290

    I see you are still doing personal attacks.

    I was refering to the fact that the Hamas philosophy and other Islamic facists of genocide against another ethnic group is the same as the Nazi's last century.

    The fact that the Palestinians and their supporter refuse to repudiate this hate shows they are unworthy of any support.

    Good foriegn news (although Obama is wrong side again) was the removal of the Hondures dictator by the courts for trying to remain in power illegally. I hope this inspires the people of Venezuela and Bolivia to do the same.

    Complain about this comment

  • 292. At 11:26am on 29 Jun 2009, SaintOne wrote:

    #291

    You seem to miss the point that the same "philosphy" can just as easily be applied to the Israeli's.

    There is no black and white in this arguement, stop trying to paint the Israeli's as the victims and the Palestinians as the villains. Similarly, I would suggest those that argue the opposite stop doing the same.

    Complain about this comment

  • 293. At 11:29am on 29 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    274. At 01:48am on 29 Jun 2009, Interestedforeigner wrote:
    DC, J-in-D, St. D, et al.,

    This is off topic, but you might be interested in reading this paper:

    "Prospects for Iran's 2009 Presidential Elections", by Walter Posch
    The Middle East Institute Policy Brief, No. 24, June 2009

    It is available in PDF format on line, without a subscription. I tried to post the link on the other string but the moderators wouldn't let it through.

    In rebuttal to some rather misleading postings on this blog last week, it pretty much demolishes any idea that the Iranian elections weren't fudged, and much else."



    Does it? Not the document I read, it seems to show Mousavi's credentials were a bit confused to say the least.

    And his projections have been wrong, it often happens.

    Complain about this comment

  • 294. At 11:40am on 29 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    291. At 10:27am on 29 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #288 and 290

    I see you are still doing personal attacks.

    I was refering to the fact that the Hamas philosophy and other Islamic facists of genocide against another ethnic group is the same as the Nazi's last century.

    The fact that the Palestinians and their supporter refuse to repudiate this hate shows they are unworthy of any support."

    The fact that the Israelies elect a far right government which repudiates peace and wishes to introduce apartheid ( a nazi derived philosophy) among their own citizens and extend land stealing shows that any who support5 them are deeply corrupt and racist

    Complain about this comment

  • 295. At 12:05pm on 29 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 291, Magic

    You continue to mix a religion, Islam, with political parties or philosophies, and accuse Hamas and the Palestinians of practicing genocide without evidence of such thing.

    You may want to familiarize yourself with Islam, fascism, the Nazi party, and look up the definition of genocide before you make claims that reveal nothing but ignorance on your part. The fact that President George W. Bush linked these terms does not validate his conclusion, which was unfounded and illogical.

    Modern examples of genocide include the Holocaust, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Darfur, etc. If anything, it is the Zionists that could be accused of genocidal tactics although doing so would, clearly, be an exaggeration.

    Islam, fascism and nazism have nothing in common. I suspect the people you emulate were well aware of the incongruity of their statements, and use it simply to offend and convey their cultural and religious intolerance and overt hatred.

    Complain about this comment

  • 296. At 12:55pm on 29 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #280

    Your question does not merit a response regarding my being a practicing Jew.

    It reminds of Jessie Jackson and other African American actvists questioning if Barack Obama was black enough.

    congratulation to the people of Hondures for overthrowing their dictator may the Venezuelans and Bolivians follow suit.

    Complain about this comment

  • 297. At 1:17pm on 29 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    AmericanGrizzly

    "Saint Dom
    HELLO we hit Afghanistan! We invaded Iraq for WMD"

    Yes, we invaded Afghanistan shortly after 9/11, but it didn't take us long to geet our eyes off the ball and focus instead on the more lucrative Iraq. The diversion allowed Al Qaeda, our true enemy, to reorganize and become more dangerous than ever.

    Regarding the WMD and the nuclear weapons that Colin Powell showed the world at the UN, Al Baradei, UN and US inspectors, as well as France and Germany assured the Bush Administration that all had been destroyed. The whole thing was a ruse to pursue a neocon goal that existed since long before 9/11.

    Ref 296, Magic

    Congratulations for your consistency in advocating the demise of the indigenous people of the Americas, stifling democracy and freedom, and supporting the despotism of right wing military dictators.

    Complain about this comment

  • 298. At 1:25pm on 29 Jun 2009, sean33z wrote:

    The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania needs young, talented Republican Leaders. Ed Rendell faces this Tuesday's budget deadline, without a clue. He insists on a tremendous increase of personal income tax for revenue. Rendell's special interests want the tax money. Why allow a corrupt politician destroy a prosperous state? England founded PA on frugality and honesty.

    Complain about this comment

  • 299. At 1:39pm on 29 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 298, Sean

    I am afraid we need a lot more than talented Republicans or Democrats. What we need - as a people - is fiscal discipline and common sense. The problems facing California, Florida and so many other states are the result of people refusing the pay for the services they want. A solution may be to have a referendum in which we list all the services we get from our state government and ask people which ones they are willing to fund, which ones they want to reduce by a specific percentage, and which ones they want to eliminate. There are no free rides, if we want something we have to pay for it. Admittedly, that is a concept so revolutionary to the credit card generation that suggesting it would be an invitation to a mental hospital.

    Complain about this comment

  • 300. At 1:50pm on 29 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 270 MagicKirin wrote:

    "ref #268

    As the moderators removed the previous personal attack they must agree."

    Indeed. Presumably you are referring to your own postings at # 189, # 234 & # 245, all removed by the Moderators? Since I saw the latter before it was removed, and quoted from it, I assume it was because of your personal attacks and libellous smears in said posting. I don't know what their reasoning was behind removing the other 2, as I didn't get to read them.

    Pot, kettle...

    [In case anyone is interested, my posting at # 202, where I ventured to cast doubt on Magic's theory that the Mods were inserting spelling errors into his postings, was referred to the Mods - presumably by MK. They clearly in their infinite wisdom thought it was OK, as it now stands unmoderated.]

    Complain about this comment

  • 301. At 1:56pm on 29 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 275 Takeshi wrote:

    "Why weren't the media asking similar questions about future leaders within the Democratic party a few month after President Bush was elected in 2000? Barack Obama had no national profile at that time but I don't recall any similar stories about a lack of new young leaders."

    Three possibilities occur

    [a] The meeja is full of liberal-commie-pinko-gay-muslim-radicals, who hate the Republicans

    [b] It was less of a burning issue, since the Democrats got half a million more votes than the Reps in the presidential election.

    [c] They were, and your memory is faulty

    "Bobby Jindal and Sara Palin are two younger governors with already established national profiles and support within the party. Shouldn't a journalist already know this?"

    I think you can take it that J Webb has heard of both Jindal and Palin - he has posted on them. Whether he considers them realistic contenders to beat Obama is another issue...

    Complain about this comment

  • 302. At 2:17pm on 29 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 281 neil_a2 wrote:

    "The problem with the teleprompter is that Obama needed them during his "debates". When forced to ad-lib, Obama shared legal boilerplate. (Obama's responses looked pretty shallow in the transcripts.)"

    We heard much from the Reps before the 3 Presidential debates about how Obama was only a great speaker when he had a teleprompter. [Why do you refer to them in inverted commas? Do you dispute that they were debates?] Then he was held to have beaten McCain, his far more experienced rival, in all 3 debates, by most pundits and most of the public, according to the polls. Youmay consider his answers to have been 'shallow', or 'shared legal boilerplate', whetever that is. They worked. He won.

    "(I do not care about the SC governor committing adultry.)"

    That's your choice. What the voters think is rather more important. However, as I understand it he has run as a 'family values' type, and been ready to condemn others in a similar position. Hypocrisy is never an attractive quality.

    "Obama will not lose the nest election. He has ACORN working on his behalf. It does not matter how Americans vote, ACORN will see him through."

    You perhaps have evidence that they affected the vote last year? Perhaps you're going to tell us that Obama actually got 500,000 votes less than McCain, but that ACORN used their influence with the Supreme Court to get Obama into the White House.

    I'm kidding of course. As if that could ever happen...

    "Republicans ought to run "Joe the Plumber". At least the debates will be more entertaining./In fairness, Joe's thoughts and views are a lot more honest, direct, and detailed than Obama's."

    "In fairness"??? I don't think so.

    "Joe's thoughts and views are a lot more honest, direct, and detailed than Obama's". I'd love to see some evidence of that. According to the Huffington Post, he recently suggested Sen C Dodd be lynched. [Link here - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/26/joe-the-plumber-suggests_n_221631.html] Of course, Magic tells us that the Huffington Post is a "hate sight" [sic], so maybe we shouldn't believe them? He also apparently said ""Let me give you another extremist view, 'In God We Trust,'" he said to wild applause. "Say that too loud in some parts of America and you will be shot. It's terrible." So while I thought he was a simplistic fake, clearly I was wrong...

    "So Justin, I propose "Joe the Plumber"."

    So, I'm sure, does Obama....

    "I do not think Obama will be able to defend his actions in 2012. By then, Obama will have appointed a "Media Czar" that reports directly to him to manage and edit any debates before presentation."

    Yes, and he'll also be beaming liberal thoughts into our heads - unless we have our special hats on....

    Complain about this comment

  • 303. At 2:20pm on 29 Jun 2009, john-In-Dublin wrote:

    # 280 David_Cunard wrote: [of the wait for Kirin to provide factual evidence for his personalised smears]

    "It's a long wait until hell freezes over."

    Agreed


    He also addressed Kirin

    "If you are referring to my post at #254 (edited above), it was there for quite a long time, and I feel sure that you read it. That leads me to suspect that someone complained about it. My guess is that someone was a poster whose name begins with "M"."

    I second that guess, from my own experience.

    Complain about this comment

  • 304. At 2:40pm on 29 Jun 2009, ghostofsichuan wrote:

    The Republicans are a wierd lot. Overtly religious and telling everyone about our moral shortcomings. When confronted with their own behaviors they always remind us that God offers forgiveness, that is for Republicans who go astray, not Democrats. The, do as I say, not as I do crowd are forever being caught with their pants down. Limbaugh was lucky that the Bush/Cheney crowd was in office when his illegal drug abuse was sited. Republicans are the party of the morally confused and facist right. They may offer up someone in 2010 but not anyone acceptable to the majority of Americans. I think Palin remains the most popular among them and that should tell you something about their chances. No one better to assure a large Democratic turnout. Those Republicans who are thinking about a future will stay out of the race. Of course, corporate America will have a candidate with funding but most believe that the Republicans have been taken over by the religious right and therefore the hopes of victory are slim until fiscal conservatives can regain control or start a new party. The bankers will probably put someone forward to make sure they are not regulated and that the current "loans" are forgiven.....for the good of the country of course.

    Complain about this comment

  • 305. At 2:53pm on 29 Jun 2009, verycynicalskeptic wrote:

    In the weird where did that come from topic that has spawned on this blog that was supposed to be about who is going to be the new republican leader (I think Satan would be most suited if he was not FICTIONAL), just for clarification about terms 'Biased' - 'Hater'- 'anti-Semitic'. These now all just mean how dare you disagree with me now shut up Most commonly used in the USA but spreading to more civilised countries as well. In a similar vein you can take those reinvented medieval words Redacted, Heinous and other absurdly pretentious usages back and keep them on your side of the pond. Stop pretending to be grown up please its embarrassing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 306. At 3:54pm on 29 Jun 2009, David Cunard wrote:

    #296. MagicKirin: "Your question does not merit a response regarding my being a practicing Jew.'

    Since you won't answer the question, I can only assume that you are not; a practicing Jew would be proud of his ancient heritage and the discipline needed to live it. However, I'm beginning to think that you are not one individual, but a cover name for a (probably) small group of like-minded persons. Sometimes spelling and phrasing are atrocious but at others they are near perfect, as above. As far as I am concerned, the subject is closed, although I do not expect that your confusion about opinion and attacks will abate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 307. At 4:29pm on 29 Jun 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    It won't take much Republican leadership in the Senate to kill the carbon cap and trade energy tax bill. The Senate voted down Kyoto during the Clinton administration 95-0. Perhaps it will be a little closer this time but probably not much. It will penalize all states that make money from mining coal, extract natural gas, or produce power or use power from fossil fuel plants which happens to be....all of them. It will increase the cost of gasoline, home heating, air conditioning, industrial production, and will do nothing to create jobs or slow global warming. At least the Obama Administration was clever enough to exempt agriculture which is very energy intensive. Practically every state produces some farm products and it is America's number one export. I expect a loud debate and the bill to get blown away. Trying to disguise this as a jobs bill and not an energy tax just won't work. I think it's a lost cause. Obama will have to do a lot better if he hopes to get the US Senate and the American people on board. He can start by persuading China and India that the US will not act if they don't make their fair share of sacrifices too. However we got here, we are all in it together. BTW, Europe has been strangely quiet about global warming since China became the number one CO2 producer in the world and the EU leaders stonewalled the press over their use of the highest CO2 emitting personal vehicles available on the market. Now why do you suppose that is?

    Complain about this comment

  • 308. At 4:36pm on 29 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #296

    Shades of TR Theodore's "walk softly and carry a big stick." The theory of the "splendid little wars" is back. History repeats itself, after all. Is it wonder why the right wing in America speak so well of the Honduras military take over?


    The right wing elite and the military have decided it was time to return the country to nothing more than a banana republic, after all. It obvious Fascism is alive and well in Honduras. It also obvious they couldn't cope with the change a duly elected president was doing, so it was "democracy" at the point of a gun, again! The very few elite capitalist rich (who, by the way, have their loot stored in US banks) and the military didn't want to chance the forthcoming votes so it became a military coup.

    Negroponte, you rule again.

    But the biggest surprise is, the OAS went along with the military coup. Is it any wonder why Cuba turned down membership with the OAS? He flatly just didn't like the company it had. I just wonder on whose payroll the OAS is.

    What's going to happen now. Another "guerrilla" war, perhaps. Latin America doesn't deserve that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 309. At 4:39pm on 29 Jun 2009, seanspa wrote:

    Did I just read MAII says that we are all in this together?

    Complain about this comment

  • 310. At 4:49pm on 29 Jun 2009, lochraven wrote:

    Complain about this comment

  • 311. At 5:05pm on 29 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #296
    Dominick I have stated the difference between Islam and Islamic-facism which is what Hamas and Hezbollah practice.

    The latter is no different in it's desire to commit genocide against Jews. And the Palestinian silence on that is deafning

    Complain about this comment

  • 312. At 5:35pm on 29 Jun 2009, foxtrottango1 wrote:

    #309, Seanpa

    Shucks, the MA11 just wants us to be one of his boys, so to speak. Obviously, he has no friends. Must be lonely upstairs.

    What's the old saying? "friends like him, who need enemies?"

    Yes indeed, he can be amusing.

    Complain about this comment

  • 313. At 6:22pm on 29 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    311. At 5:05pm on 29 Jun 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #296
    Dominick I have stated the difference between Islam and Islamic-facism which is what Hamas and Hezbollah practice.

    The latter is no different in it's desire to commit genocide against Jews. And the Palestinian silence on that is deafning"

    And because they are "silent" that is reason enough to kill their children?

    You believe because somone doe not make the statemetns you like that entitles you to starve them, deny their children medical aid?

    You think the more Palesitnians the Israelies kill the more they will be liked?

    Let's deal with your silence on Avigdor Lieberman and his attempts and that of his gang to "deal" with Israel's own citizens who do not fit his ethnic criteria

    Let us have your views or are you too ashamed to state them? Dershovitz won't help you now.

    Complain about this comment

  • 314. At 6:23pm on 29 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    "307. At 4:29pm on 29 Jun 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
    It won't take much Republican leadership in the Senate to kill the carbon cap and trade energy tax bill."

    So you are saying the bills are safe then?

    Complain about this comment

  • 315. At 6:28pm on 29 Jun 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Seanspea; no, you read me say that President Obama will have to convince China and India that they will have to do their fair share of the sacrificing if they want the US to cooperate in trying to stop global warming. Europe seems so far to agree with China's and India's position which is that they did not cause it and therefore they should not have to make any sacrifices to their economies to stop it. If that is the bottom line, don't expect much from the US either. Obama has few in industry convinced that dealing with climate change won't cost the American economy a lot of money and Americans will not make unilateral sacrifices. Either everyone does or America won't.

    Complain about this comment

  • 316. At 8:11pm on 29 Jun 2009, arclightt wrote:

    @299 (StD): I couldn't agree more. I have wondered for a while what sacrifice the Baby Boomers were going to be asked to make, in the same vein that the Greatest Generation made. I now know, I believe: The Boomers are going to be asked to sacrifice their financial future and their plans for retirement for the sake of stabilizing the currency enough to allow their children and grandchildren to remain free. Whether or not they will actually make the sacrifice is yet to be seen.

    Complain about this comment

  • 317. At 8:33pm on 29 Jun 2009, Gary_A_Hill wrote:

    arclightt (#316), I can tell you that I, for one, am not going to roll over on this. One reason that most taxpayers are in revolt is that the middle class has been losing ground while a relative handful of the elite has been skimming the cream. Obama pointed this out awhile back in relation to the problem with financial problems. He said he could understand why some people might make 20 times the salary of an average person, as was once the case, but not 200 times. (From memory - the numbers might have been a little different.)

    Another contributor here tried to make a generational warfare thing out of this, as if the "baby boomers" were responsible. I don't buy it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 318. At 8:51pm on 29 Jun 2009, Gary_A_Hill wrote:

    Here's a link to that US National Debt site again: http://zfacts.com/p/57.html

    The US National Debt, adjusted for inflation, was approximately constant from shortly after WWII until about 1980. It was during the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, both part of the "Greatest Generation," that the national debt tripled. Our first "Baby Boomer" president, William J. Clinton, brought the debt down (relative to GDP), but our second, George W. Bush, sent it up again.

    The fix we are in today isn't due to Baby Boomers, it's due to Republicans, and to Reaganomics in particular.

    Complain about this comment

  • 319. At 10:39pm on 29 Jun 2009, saintDominick wrote:

    Ref 281, Neil

    "I do not care about the SC governor committing adultry"

    The problem with Sanford goes well beyond adultery, he used taxpayers money to pay for his trip to Argentina. The fact that he offered to return the money after he was caught does not excuse his behavior. His chances to run be nominated by the GOP in 2012 are nil.

    Complain about this comment

  • 320. At 11:04pm on 29 Jun 2009, Gary_A_Hill wrote:

    saintDominick (#319) " ... he used taxpayers money to pay for his trip to Argentina."

    That question has been raised, but has it been established? Where?

    Complain about this comment

  • 321. At 11:14pm on 29 Jun 2009, Gary_A_Hill wrote:

    Here's a story on the subject of who paid for the trips: LA Times

    To summarize, Sanford paid for this most recent trip with his own funds. An earlier trip was an official business trip to Brazil and Argentina, paid for by the state. He has offerred to pay for the Argentina leg of the trip.

    It appears to me that he mixed pleasure with business on a business trip. That is not unusual, and it puts the matter of the cost into a gray area. It's not at all the same as if he took an entire personal trip at state expense.

    Complain about this comment

  • 322. At 11:56pm on 29 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    315. At 6:28pm on 29 Jun 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
    climate change won't cost the American economy a lot of money and Americans will not make unilateral sacrifices. Either everyone does or America won't."


    You had better send a memot to this effect to Mr Obama. One doesn't get the impression he is actually listening to you

    Can't think why.

    Complain about this comment

  • 323. At 00:51am on 30 Jun 2009, american grizzly wrote:

    " While these sentiments are not 'largely confined' to the South, neither are arrogance, hatred and hypocrisy. let me remind you that arrogance, hatred and hypocrisy are as well represented on the Left as the Right of the spectrum. (your post would make a good demonstration of that, it seems to me...)" KScurmudgeon
    Bravo, you hit the nail on the head. Personal accountability is a double standard, as well as comments made. Congratulations to the RICCI case, discrimination! Equal protection under the law, title 7 is an affront to the 14th amendment. Sotomayor was wrong, and bias is quite evident, this could very well fracture the country with someone like her with a life appointment.

    Complain about this comment

  • 324. At 02:34am on 30 Jun 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:

    Simple Simon #322

    You deliberately misquoted me by citing only part of my posting in such a way as to make it say exactly the opposite of what I said so here is the quote in full;

    "Obama has few in industry convinced that dealing with climate change won't cost the American economy a lot of money and Americans will not make unilateral sacrifices."

    If the energy tax (cap and trade) bill that just barely passed in the House was voted on in the Senate today, it would be dead on arrival. In fact it isn't even clear that it would make it out of committee. It would be an unmitigated disaster for the US economy if it became law as it is written. And it wouldn't make even a dent in stopping or slowing global warming. We know that is exactly why Europeans want it passed. I don't think it will have much chance though, not unless China and India change their tune and Europe forgoes its usual hypocricy and starts living up to its obligations. I'm not holding my breath waiting for either to happen.

    Complain about this comment

  • 325. At 08:30am on 30 Jun 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    Simple Simon #322

    You deliberately misquoted me by citing only part of my posting in such a way as to make it say exactly the opposite of what I said so here is the quote in full;

    "Obama has few in industry convinced that dealing with climate change won't cost the American economy a lot of money and Americans will not make unilateral sacrifices."



    I know I made you look like the fool you are.

    The quote is worthless, who in American industry feels this way, what is meant by American industry?

    The car industry? - We don't like your ideas Mr Obama, can we have another $5 billion?

    Ho ho

    "If the energy tax (cap and trade) bill that just barely passed in the House was voted on in the Senate today, it would be dead on arrival. In fact it isn't even clear that it would make it out of committee. It would be an unmitigated disaster for the US economy if it became law as it is written. And it wouldn't make even a dent in stopping or slowing global warming. We know that is exactly why Europeans want it passed. I don't think it will have much chance though, not unless China and India change their tune and Europe forgoes its usual hypocricy and starts living up to its obligations. I'm not holding my breath waiting for either to happen. "



    Your problem is that your prejudices undercut everythiig you say.

    You cannot accetpt that Obama is a masterly politician. He will get the bill passed - he will simply time it well and present it when it is likely to succeed.

    The majority of Americans like the majority of people everywhere don't care.


    Complain about this comment

  • 326. At 12:57pm on 30 Jun 2009, arclightt wrote:

    @318, 319 (GAH): Gary, you don't have to roll over. I reviewed the data at the link you provided (thank you for that).

    You blame the Republicans. That is factually incomplete. During the 1980s under both Reagan and Bush, the Democrats controlled the House for the entire time, and the Senate for all but 2 years. The Congress sets the budget, not the President. If the Congress under the Ds had been concerned about the size of the debt, they would have stopped Reagan by forcing him to balance the budget. They were not and did not, as is evidenced by their behavior both before and after Reagan and Bush were in office. I also recall (with frustration) watching on NBC news a Democrat senator standing up after the San Francisco earthquake in 1989 and saying, "I don't want to declare this off-budget like we did with (Hurricane) Hugo. I want the American People to Stand Up and PAY FOR THIS THING". I thought to myself at the time, "You mean we AREN"T going to pay for Hugo, you "leader of the people", you???"

    Gary, the Congress has been irresponsible about the budget for a long time. It is continuing to be irresponsible. To assign all the blame to one party is inexcusable. To assign it to BOTH of them is accurate.

    I have made comments about the Baby Boomers because (a) I am one and (b) as I view their performance relative to the benefits that they had as they began adulthood, I am forced to conclude that they have squandered more than they have produced, and to an elevated degree value things that have no long-term value.

    As an aside, the statement that the debt shrunk as a factor of GDP under Clinton is useless...that only happened because $3 trillion (!) of 401K money was shoveled into the "dot.com" boom/bust. If that irresponsible, no-business-plan stupidity had not happened, I suspect the debt would NOT have shrunk as a function of GDP.

    Your comments about excessive compensation also apply, by the way, to professional athletes and professional entertainers, but I don't hear anyone complaining about the salaries they draw down. Is it because many if not most of them (particularly in the entertainment space) vote Democrat?

    Complain about this comment

  • 327. At 5:46pm on 30 Jun 2009, Gary_A_Hill wrote:

    arclightt (#326) "The Congress sets the budget, not the President."

    I believe you are mistaken. Here is a link to a description of the budget process:

    http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/indiv/usgd/budget.html

    The President submits a budget to Congress. While the Congress, in principle, can do whatever they like with it, in fact they merely argue about the details. When the Congress is not of the same party as the President, those details may be significant, however Reagan was a popular president, so got his way in most respects. While I agree with you that Congress has been irresponsible about the budget, I believe that when the government is divided, it is the President who is most responsible. That is why the debt to GDP chart correlates so well with presidential terms.

    Irresponsibility in Congress has always been there, but it was 1981 when the debt really got out of control. If you look at national debt adjusted for inflation, it is constant in the period from shortly after WWII through 1980. This was an extended period of increasing prosperity in the US, without paying off the debt. There is nothing wrong with being constantly in debt if it doesn't grow out of control. The problem we have now is that the debt has grown so large that debt service has become a much larger part of the equation. And more of the debt is held overseas, in places such as China. I don't believe it is in the power of any one president to fix this problem in eight years. I'm hoping we make some progress on it, however.

    Your comment about the influence of the dot-com boom and bust on the numbers during the Clinton era is interesting, but I'm not sure I buy it yet. The boom started about 1998 and the bust was 2001. Yet GDP has gone up nearly every year, with only a couple of small declines in 2001. If you are saying that the reduction in debt to GDP in the 1990s was due to an artificially inflated GDP, I don't see it. That doesn't mean I think you must be wrong. Needs further investigation.

    As for athletes, I complain about their salaries. Baseball used to be affordable for a family outing. Now it's not, unless you live in a minor league town.

    Complain about this comment

  • 328. At 5:54pm on 30 Jun 2009, DJ-In-Illinois wrote:

    Finding a suitable Republican presidential candidate is more or less a moot point. The Republican party is going to stay in a downward spiral until they hit rock bottom. There is no place in the party for "old school" conservatives who want to put aside the fanatical dogma and stick with policies proven to work. We are forced to hold our noses and go along with Obama. The Republicans keep offering the same Bush rhetoric that got us into this mess.

    Right now, the Republican policies are dictated by media gasbags and pushed by a coalition of social activists (Palen) and financial cowboys (Romney). For the Republicans to regain their credibility they must acknowledge the Bush/Chaney disaster, jettison the Foxoholics and Rush-fanatics, then create a positive message with some substance behind it.

    The Republican party is living by the adage "Pessimists are never wrong. It just hasn't happened yet."

    Complain about this comment

  • 329. At 6:34pm on 30 Jun 2009, U14054759 wrote:

    "The latter is no different in it's desire to commit genocide against Jews. And the Palestinian silence on that is deafning"says a kirin.
    That may be because they are deaf themselves due to low level sonic booms and their vocal cords are damaged by the "air".

    "Europe seems so far to agree with China's and India's position which is that they did not cause it and therefore they should not have to make any sacrifices to their economies to stop it. If that is the bottom line, don't expect much from the US either."

    It is. America used most of what has been used so far. until they accept that and do their best without preconditions to other countries to clean up their acts Americans will still be called all sorts of well deserved names.
    and you will still seem to be really anti European.
    but are you really as anti economic sense as you seem.

    Green technology if not hampered by the dinosaurs of the baby boomer generation that gave up their dream would be the top selling export. but it is not because people kept saying "cannot be done".

    when the rest of the world is already doing it it will be too-late for America to benefit.
    Your advice seems to be the equivalent to those that said "video games will never make you money"why not get into sliderules instead. as if I were some ancient engineer.
    The world moves on Marcus. you can sit where you are and watch it get smaller or jump up and try to catch up.



    Complain about this comment

  • 330. At 6:39pm on 30 Jun 2009, U14054759 wrote:

    arclight I couldn't agree more about the baby boomers.

    they even invented the phrase "spending kids inheritance"

    some do it on a local home front level and others, though not mutually exclusive,do it on a national level.

    Either way they should start giving some back.

    Complain about this comment

  • 331. At 7:12pm on 30 Jun 2009, OldSouth wrote:

    Better we learn now that Mark Sanford is an idiot who can't keep it in his pants.

    Republicans, unlike the Democrats, do think that this sort of thing matters. The Dems shamed themselves defending, and now idolizing, Bill Clinton.

    I wish Fred Thompson were five to ten years younger. I doubt he will try again, even though he was spot on about the challenges we face.


    A dark-horse choice: Bob Corker, who has quietly been very effective in difficult circumstances. Had he been heeded last December, GM and Chrysler bankruptices could have likely been avoided.

    Complain about this comment

  • 332. At 5:30pm on 01 Jul 2009, sohner wrote:

    The nominee in 2012 depends on what the Republicans want to do.
    I think that if they're purpose to make a statement, go with Gingrich, Paline, or Jindal.
    From what I've read, the the Massachussettes universal healthcare fiasco blew it for Romney.


    If they want to win the White House, I would go with Colin Powell or John Boehner.
    Between the two, I have to go with Powell. I don't know of a modern-era President that was a Congressman.

    Complain about this comment

  • 333. At 6:02pm on 01 Jul 2009, Gary_A_Hill wrote:

    sohner (#332) "I don't know of a modern-era President that was a Congressman."

    John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford.

    Complain about this comment

  • 334. At 11:38pm on 01 Jul 2009, stormcat4u wrote:

    Sarah Palin, BO's Nemesis.

    Complain about this comment

  • 335. At 11:54pm on 01 Jul 2009, stormcat4u wrote:

    In Greek Mythology Nemesis was the goddess of retributive justice. My vote is for Sarah Palin to replace Obama in 1912. This would be just punishment for her terrible treatment by the press and other Obama "worshipers." IMHO

    Complain about this comment

  • 336. At 06:11am on 02 Jul 2009, Ross Nicholson wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 337. At 06:24am on 02 Jul 2009, KScurmudgeon wrote:

    335. At 11:54pm on 01 Jul 2009, stormcat4u wrote:
    'In Greek Mythology Nemesis was the goddess of retributive justice. My vote is for Sarah Palin to replace Obama in 1912. This would be just punishment for her terrible treatment by the press and other Obama "worshipers." IMHO'

    IMHO, it wasn't the Obamites, it was her Republican handlers, who turned her into a cartoon of the sort of figure they imagined their rednecked base would like. I thought, and think, she has promise, and that the Republican leadership doesn't have a clue who their 'faithful' really are.

    KScurmudgeon

    Complain about this comment

  • 338. At 09:33am on 02 Jul 2009, allmymarbles wrote:

    "Mark Sanford let me down too."

    Really, Justin, what does a person's sex life have to do with his (or her) ability to to do the job he was elected to do? A large proportion of ment and women in their married lives have been unfaithful. Should a teacher be thrown out of her job because she had a roll in the hay with her butcher, or an accountant be fired because he slept with his second cousin once removed? Why this unrealistic and hypocrytical double standard?

    Having said that, I get a giggle when a televangelist or a holier-than-though elected official is caught enjoying the vices he rails against. I love to see them humiliated because they are dishonest. Perhaps Worse than these hypocritical philanderers are their characterless wives who "stand by their men." In real life there would be a huge argument, or packed bags, or a skillet to the noggin.

    Complain about this comment

  • 339. At 1:38pm on 02 Jul 2009, Simon21 wrote:

    335. At 11:54pm on 01 Jul 2009, stormcat4u wrote:
    In Greek Mythology Nemesis was the goddess of retributive justice. My vote is for Sarah Palin to replace Obama in 1912. This would be just punishment for her terrible treatment by the press and other Obama "worshipers." IMHO2


    I think Obama shares your hope that she runs. It would be like shooting fish in a barrell, though to be fair she might have actually asked someone what her job would involve by then.

    Complain about this comment

  • 340. At 4:25pm on 02 Jul 2009, maffitt47 wrote:

    Obama is doing such a credible job faced with such disatrous foreign and domestic problems inherited from the last administration, I can't think of any Republican young or old who could present a serious challenge. In order to attract serious new talent, perhaps the Republicans should stop goose stepping behind the likes of Limbaugh and the other right wing squawk show hosts. Then perhaps the middle of the road voters (like me) would look at them more positively. Perhaps its time for the US to have a third party targeting the rest of us.

    Complain about this comment

  • 341. At 6:39pm on 02 Jul 2009, U14054759 wrote:

    Storm cat
    Glad to see you hate Palin as much as I do. Just imagine after the witch doctors and separatist Alaskan Independence party issues and her Oh so greta family gets paraded around as examples of sound judgement she will not feel any worse then it looked like she felt when John McCain forgot to invite her on stage.

    And to all that say Obama is doing what he was elected to do.you seem to be right.
    He walks the line of democracy better than anyone thought he would(well some had faith from the start).Trying to please all whilst pulling back on those that would race away from the traces..
    Justin has regularly missed that about him, both before and since the election.Or he has tried to hide it in the reports.

    Complain about this comment

  • 342. At 9:39pm on 02 Jul 2009, seven839 wrote:

    ...because many are aware of their own bankrupt philosophy and deceptive economic lies...republicans (via Gingrich pathetic lies and insults) dare to criticize Obama spending when in fact EVERY REPUBLICAN president starting with Reagan created huge deficits while preaching restrains, it was Clinton who created a surplus...Obama cannot balance budget because of Bushs extraordinary debt repayment commitments...it is republican philosophy that have created an environment of unregulated greed and an environment that rewards financial speculation instead of production...Enron, Boesky or Madoff are their babies...

    Complain about this comment

  • 343. At 11:39pm on 02 Jul 2009, U14054759 wrote:

    Seven I'm with you. therepublicans claiming fiscal responsibility should be laid to rest. there is only a difference in what they spend the money on.
    GW had his wars. GW snr had his reagan had the war on drugs.

    Obama wants to spend on healthcare and services for the people.(not church services)

    Complain about this comment

  • 344. At 7:23pm on 03 Jul 2009, junkgwicz wrote:

    Rupert Murdoch will let us know who the next Republican leader is via his vast "news" network(s). Right now it's interesting that Dick Cheney's daughter is getting a lot of air time. It's probably too early to tell. As a voter,(and former conservative)I can only say that, I wish a third party would surface. The neo-cons destroyed all confidence.

    Complain about this comment

  • 345. At 8:27pm on 03 Jul 2009, U14058382 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 346. At 10:40am on 04 Jul 2009, krishnamurthi ramachandran wrote:

    Dear,Mr.Justin,
    Well and wish to hear the same from you.
    After reading your blog-Republican!s lack of leaders in America are more or less true picture.
    I have been watching,listening of all existing active members from Republican party from BBC.news channel,from American newspapers like The New York Times,The Washington Post,New Jersy News,Huffington Post and from leading,populr websites,and from my American friends on day today political events,views,probable political equations in larger extents.
    From your article, i came to understand that,not much interests shown by major leaders,or from major fans.
    If all parameters suits to Mr.John Thune,and Mr.Bobby Jindal ,then they will be the candidates for American Presidency in 2012.
    If my prediction goes true,then i will be a eligible to get first prize.
    As on today, Mr.Obama is going popular,stronger day by day.
    Very difficult to get a new no.one speaker for any viable alternative.

    Complain about this comment

  • 347. At 3:34pm on 04 Jul 2009, U14058382 wrote:

    If it is true that Palin will be running the long distance to become prez, then maybe the republicans and democrats are really working together and don't care who wins

    We don't need no Re- Ron (B-Movie) running again

    Complain about this comment

  • 348. At 8:41pm on 04 Jul 2009, brooklyntaurus wrote:

    As long as the Republican party refuses to expand from it's traditional powerbase to include new,younger and "browner skinned " Americans,they will continue to be outside the proverbally political wilderness.It is so incredible how out of touch the Republican party is with modern day America.It seems to many people that the GOP only cares about big business groups and wealthy people.They just cannot connect with the things that most average Americans care about.

    Complain about this comment

  • 349. At 8:27pm on 05 Jul 2009, tedlotring wrote:

    you miss-understand. Palin/Jindal/Huckabee truly represent the gop as it currently exists. a party of White Male DopeS [with a couple of tokens]. the WMD party will hopefully go the way of the WHIGS.

    zeno-phobia, racism, sexism,hared and milatarism are the no longer an afequate basis for a political party.

    Complain about this comment

  • 350. At 10:24pm on 05 Jul 2009, mikeywes wrote:

    As a independent voter.....the Rs need to break to mold of the 1990's and the bush years....they are constrained by a narrow view of the world and of politics..hence the word conservatives.....there is at least one articulate, famous and possibly intelligent newcomer who would scare me...and dont laugh....Tom Brady of the New England Patriots...telegenic, articulate and a natural winner and leader...everyone else has the baggage of the past and is full of the negative hate spewed mantra that represents the Rs of today

    Complain about this comment

  • 351. At 04:28am on 08 Jul 2009, William1950 wrote:

    A post O'man win says to both parties that neither has any leadership, ideals or new ideas. After forty years of two party central government run by business it is time for new insights into government and new, not from the same old and failing leadership.
    The American people, the MiddleAmerican2010, understand they are the core of America. They will have to pay and have had to pay for Republican and Democratic failure in leadership. These hard working Americans are looking at both real political parties and now see that they are not for America or for the working Americans.
    Yes, the republicans have no new names in the lead, neither do the Democrats. That is because the have no new ideas, they are not separate parties and worst they have lost sight that they should have been pro-American instead of trying to destroy the very people who elected them.
    MiddleAmerican2010 and proud of the fact I am for America and not a Democrat or Republican party.

    Complain about this comment

  • 352. At 07:12am on 15 Jul 2009, Rapturiana wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 353. At 02:14am on 27 Jul 2009, wantmyfreedom wrote:

    I think an honest person who works for the good of all people, not just a specific group, would be the ideal candidate.
    Honest, good moral character, outstanding work ethics.
    It should not be about the skin color.
    We need a leader, not a dictator.

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.