Obama's new era of Foreign Policy

[Crookshanks]

O'S FOREIGN FAILURES
NEW PREZ FLUNKING GLOBAL TESTS

AMERICA'S enemies smell blood and it's type "O."

All new administrations stumble a bit as they seek their footing. But President Obama's foreign-policy botches have set new records for instant incompetence.

Contrary to left-wing myths, I wasn't a fan of the Bush administration. (I called for Donald Rumsfeld to get the boot in mid-2001.) But fair's fair. Despite his many faults, Bush sought to do good. Obama just wants to look good.

Vice President Dick Cheney was arrogant. Vice President Joe Biden is arrogant and stupid. Take your pick.

Don't worry about the new administration's ideology. Worry about its terrifying naivete.

Consider a sampling of the goofs O and his crew have made in just two months:

China: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (you know that gal married to the Saudi hireling) crawled to Beijing to tell the party bosses that human rights don't matter. Our "relationship" is more important than freedom and human dignity.

Beijing's response? A staged military confrontation with an unarmed US Navy vessel; continued screw-America currency cheating; a renewed crackdown on dissidents and, yesterday, a call for a new global currency to replace the dollar.

Thanks, Hill. You're a sweetheart.

Pakistan: With viral corruption throughout and Islamist fanatics sweeping half of its territory, Pakistan's coming apart. Its Dem-adored prez tries to ban opposition parties and gut the judiciary. It has nukes and seethes with hatred of America. And Islamabad controls our primary supply route into Afghanistan, using it as an extortion tool.

Obama's response? Billions in new aid for Pak pols to pocket. We'd be better off handing the money to AIG to pay out more bonuses.

Afghanistan: Obama's Vietnam. Am I the only American who remembers that candidate Obama had a plan to capture Osama bin Laden and fix our previous "mistakes" in Afghanistan? President Obama doesn't have a clue.

Iran: Obama tried to reach out, to talk. After all, talking got him to the White House. But America-bashing is what keeps Iran's leaders in office, it's their political essence. After 30 years of fierce hostility, hasn't anyone figured out that the senior mullahs need us as an enemy? Without the Great Satan America to blame, they'd have some real explaining to do to their homies. So O got the left-hand finger.

He wanted to chat with the Taliban, too. They told him he could stick it where the sun don't shine.

North Korea: Obama wanted a fresh start. North Korea's response? Threats of war with South Korea and the kidnapping of two American journalists. And the renewed pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, along with rocket tests.

Cuba: Obama would like to liberalize our relationship. The Castro boys told him to kiss off. They need an enemy, too. (Dear Mr. President: It's not always about us or how evil America is.)

Venezuela: Guess who else needs an enemy?

Mexico: The good news: Obama knows where it is on a map and recognizes that Mexico's government faces a narco-insurgency that threatens our country, too. His first action? Cave to the Teamsters, violate a lawful treaty on cross-border trucking, reignite fading anti-Americanism and undercut President Felipe Calderon.

Poland: Obama's stance on our bravest ally on the European continent? The Russians are more important than you are. He's sending the same message to Ukraine and Georgia.

Russia: Bolshie Biden, the commuting commissar, knows he's the man who can turn Russia into our best pal. After "Friend of Bill" Strobe Talbott tried and failed disastrously. And after poor W saw into Putin's soul, only to get his butt handed to him. "Uncle Joe" Biden has nothing to learn from past failures, though: He's got a re-set button.

Moscow's response to the Obama administration's bid for a new start? It threatens NATO members it once occupied and continues to back Iran's nuclear program. Plus, it bribes Kyrgystan to kick us off the critical-to-Afghanistan Manas airbase (then offers to help replace that supply lifeline, giving Russia a choke-hold on our troops).

Next, the Kremlin threatens massive re-armament and demands the abandonment of the dollar as the international reserve currency.

Obama's response? Push that re-set button again. And again.

At what point does naivete become cowardice?

As for our allies, Obama apparently needs them less than Bush did. O treated Britain's prime minister like the deputy Paraguayan veterinary inspector, and he blindsided the leaders of the Czech Republic, Poland, Mexico and Canada on issues ranging from missile defense to trade. But he'd like them to take the Gitmo terrorists off our hands, please.

The one bright spot thus far has been Iraq, where Obama quickly tossed aside his campaign promises. The O-man doesn't want to be on the blame-line for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in Baghdad. And his MoveOn.org supporters can throw all the tantrums they want. (Breaking news, folks: O's a professional pol, not the messiah . . . )

Apart from Iraq, a success Sen. Obama did all he could to prevent, his foreign policy's an instant wasteland. By comparison, the Carter administration is starting to look like a model of manly strength, courage and patriotism. :lmao

Ralph Peters recently became Fox News' first "strategic analyst."

==================
Golly gee whiz - and I thought Obama promised that he would change the way the world viewed America - he'd bring respect back. Yeah...right...
ANOTHER broken campaign promise!!! Obama is nothing more than an arrogant empty suit.

[Red Hawk #21]

Cuba: Obama would like to liberalize our relationship. The Castro boys told him to kiss off. They need an enemy, too. (Dear Mr. President: It's not always about us or how evil America is.)

Damn, one of the reasons I was happy that Obama won was because I thought he could finally restore the relationship between the U.S and Cuba. That looks pretty dim at this point. Shit sucks, I have family members in Cuba that I have never met.

[RandomGuy]

Ralph Peters recently became Fox News' first "strategic analyst."

==================
Golly gee whiz - and I thought Obama promised that he would change the way the world viewed America - he'd bring respect back. Yeah...right...
ANOTHER broken campaign promise!!! Obama is nothing more than an arrogant empty suit.

Golly gee whiz, I'm sure we can believe all claims and assertions from Fox New's editorials.

An editorial from a right-wing news source would NEVER EVER try to distort things and use unsupported claims about a left-wing president.

Nah, that would never happen. We should always take such editorials at face value, especially if we happen to be of the same ideological bent.

We all know the best way to formulate foreign policy is from op-ed pieces from sources we agree with.

Doing silly things like supporting claims with data or sound logic is for idiots.

[johnsmith]

Golly gee whiz, I'm sure we can believe all claims and assertions from Fox New's editorials.

An editorial from a right-wing news source would NEVER EVER try to distort things and use unsupported claims about a left-wing president.

Nah, that would never happen. We should always take such editorials at face value, especially if we happen to be of the same ideological bent.

We all know the best way to formulate foreign policy is from op-ed pieces from sources we agree with.

Doing silly things like supporting claims with data or sound logic is for idiots.

Golly gee whiz, I'm sure the best way to argue against articles like this is to not make a point other then to bash the writer.

Nah, it would make much more sense to just dismiss it and not argue any of the points it makes because partisanship rules.

[DarrinS]

Golly gee whiz, I'm sure we can believe all claims and assertions from Fox New's editorials.

An editorial from a right-wing news source would NEVER EVER try to distort things and use unsupported claims about a left-wing president.

Nah, that would never happen. We should always take such editorials at face value, especially if we happen to be of the same ideological bent.

We all know the best way to formulate foreign policy is from op-ed pieces from sources we agree with.

Doing silly things like supporting claims with data or sound logic is for idiots.




So, all of those things in the OP are untrue?

[clambake]

i'm sure hillary said that to china.

the problem is that crooks is a bitter, dried up old vagina.

[boutons_deux]

"Bush sought to do good"

Crooky's posting absolute shit, again.

dubya "sought to do good" as defined by dickhead and dubya's Repug puppetmasters.

"good" intentions, even if bona fide (which dubya's weren't) aren't enough when running an empire, and pave the way to hell.

[johnsmith]

"Bush sought to do good"

Crooky's posting absolute shit, again.

dubya "sought to do good" as defined by dickhead and dubya's Repug puppetmasters.

"good" intentions, even if bona fide (which dubya's weren't) aren't enough when running an empire, and pave the way to hell.




Wow, so the second version of Boutons can read minds........

[LnGrrrR]

Who cares if Bush "sought to do good"? That's so wishy washy that it should be no basis for an argument.

[Bill Ayers]

I sought to do good, and so is Barack

[DarrinS]

"Bush sought to do good"

Crooky's posting absolute shit, again.

dubya "sought to do good" as defined by dickhead and dubya's Repug puppetmasters.

"good" intentions, even if bona fide (which dubya's weren't) aren't enough when running an empire, and pave the way to hell.





Tourettes?

[Crookshanks]

Did you libs even read the article - or did you just skip to the bottom to see who had written it?

The author CLEARLY says he wasn't a fan of the Bush Administration - but since he writes for Fox I guess that doesn't mean anything.

What about Juan Williams? He's an Obama supporter, but he's also a major contributor on Fox News - are his views and opinions suspect also?

And considering how much sarcasm is used on this board - I find it interesting that you don't recognize it when used by others.
Despite his many faults, Bush sought to do good. Obama just wants to look good. This is clearly tongue-in-cheek.

But regardless of what you think of Bush, he was steadfast in his belief that everyone should experience liberty and freedom - and that belief governed much of what he did.

Clam and boutons2 - you both are idiots and not worth my time to comment on your hateful posts.

[RandomGuy]

Golly gee whiz, I'm sure the best way to argue against articles like this is to not make a point other then to bash the writer.

Nah, it would make much more sense to just dismiss it and not argue any of the points it makes because partisanship rules.

My point actually:

One should be skeptical of such op-ed peices and, as always, claims stand or they fall on the merits of the claims, independently of the source.

While one cannot logically dismiss the claims, one can roughly judge how much initial weight to assign them and how much critical thinking should be done.

Further:

One should be skeptical of the Obama administration, and be on the lookout for mistakes. One should expect mistakes. Hell, it took Bush 6 years before he really got the hang of it.

BUT

There is a line between fair criticisms and partisan hackery.

Sokay. Either these policies will work after 4 years or they won't.

They are a definite change in strategy, and unlikely to make conservatives happy, because if they end up really working, that success will invalidate a lot of how conservatives view the world.

He is going in a direction I have been advocating for a while. It will be interesting to see who is right after 4 years.

[RandomGuy]

So, all of those things in the OP are untrue?

Good question.

You get points over johnsmith for succinctness, clarity, and a lack of smartassery, though. :lol

The answer:

Maybe.

They either stand on their own or not. Interesting bit that I will get to over the weekend.

[RandomGuy]

Golly gee whiz, I'm sure the best way to argue against articles like this is to not make a point other then to bash the writer.

Nah, it would make much more sense to just dismiss it and not argue any of the points it makes because partisanship rules.

It is pretty obviously partisan in both the manner and character of the attacks/critcisms made.

Do you dispute that?

[ChumpDumper]

Am I the only American who remembers that candidate Obama had a plan to capture Osama bin LadenThat was McCain. He said it was a secret plan and apparently it is staying a secret because he didn't get elected. Is that political or does McCain just hate America?

And really -- this douche is trying to write a foreign policy obituary for an administration that has been in office for a little over 50 days. Once again it is the conservatives who think problems can be fixed with a magic wand. I challenge any of them to write an opinion piece without using the word "messiah" or characterizing Obama as such.

[baseline bum]

What's up with all the right-wingers who defended Bush and called us all anti-Americans now throwing that fucktard under the bus? All of you are 8 years too late.

[johnsmith]

It is pretty obviously partisan in both the manner and character of the attacks/critcisms made.

Do you dispute that?

Absolutely not but my point was more at the content of your post and not the opinion piece. You complain that he didn't back his opinion(s) up with post that lacked any backing of your opinion(s).

[ChumpDumper]

From some liberal rag:

John McCain says in almost every stump speech that he knows how to capture Osama bin Laden and that he’d follow the al Qaeda leader to the “Gates of Hell.”

So Washington Wire was wondering, what does McCain know that President Bush and the Pentagon don’t about how to sweep up America’s most elusive enemy.

“One thing I will not do is telegraph my punches. Osama bin Laden will be the last to know,” he said today while riding on the back of his bus between Florida events. In other words: he’s not telling. Why not share his strategy with the current occupant of the White House? “Because I have my own ideas and it would require implementation of certain policies and procedures that only as the president of the United States can be taken.”

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/01/27/mccains-secret-plan-to-capture-bin-laden/

I'm sure McCain would have captured Bin Laden by now.

And freed Cuba.

And destroyed North Korea.

And ended the drug wars.

And forced China to become a democracy.

And converted the Iranians into Southern Baptists.

Foreign policy is easy and quick. Bush and Clinton proved that.

[DarrinS]

^ Isn't this thread about Obama's foreign policy?

[ChumpDumper]

This thread is about the douchebag's article.

Judging foreign policy eight weeks into an administration is stupid.

Conservatives' wand theory fails once more.

[johnsmith]

How much longer do we have to wait before we can judge the policy of your Queen in charge and the rest of her congressional minions?

[ChumpDumper]

Again, hyperbole and stupidity doesn't help you.

Oddly enough, the polls for Congress are the best they have been in three years. Still low, but rising.

[RandomGuy]

[the article was] Absolutely ...[partisan] but my point was more at the content of your post and not the opinion piece. You complain that he didn't back his opinion(s) up with post that lacked any backing of your opinion(s).

I could, and probably will, completely eviscerate this piece quite easily, don't doubt that for a second either.

Some of what Obama has done I have been advocating for years, and will be happy to provide a defense for it.

Just don't have the time for it at the moment.

I'm sure crookshanks thinks she has really "socked it to those libs" with this turd masquerading as an essay, but all it does for me is simply demonstrate how little respect Fox News has for the intelligence of its viewers.

[Crookshanks]

I'm sure crookshanks thinks she has really "socked it to those libs" with this turd masquerading as an essay, but all it does for me is simply demonstrate how little respect Fox News has for the intelligence of its viewers.

Why must you add a personal attack. All I was doing was posting an article that I agreed with and found interesting - I knew I wasn't going to change any minds among you libs. I was under the impression this forum was for political discussion - but maybe now in the age of Obama, we can't have an opposing opinion.

But I also don't understand this automatic hatred you guys have for ANYTHING having to do with Fox News. So, since you're so much more intelligent than us who watch Fox News, please enlighten us as to where this author is so grossly incorrect.

[mogrovejo]

I don't even think there's properly a new strategic orientation from the administration. In fact, I believe they simply don't have a strategy, at least a coherent and thoughfull one, except trying to look nice and popular - at home, via getting good press from the tendentious cosmopolitan MSM; it's like they're running a political campaign, not exactly a country. Aboard, so far, it has failed miserably, at least from the perspective of the European allies - at least checking the public opinion, op-eds and political leaders. But mostly because of how amateurish and unprepared this administration seems. I mean, just as an example, the recent Secretary Geithner gaffe with the issue of the dollar being substituted as the global reserve currency is truly bizarre. I feel they are disoriented and lack leadership, what's understandable considering the POTUS is essentially focused on the domestic agenda.

[ChumpDumper]

please enlighten us as to where this author is so grossly incorrectWand theory.

Next.

[balli]

A crooks thread? Off yourself bitch.

[Crookshanks]

This thread is about the douchebag's article.

Judging foreign policy eight weeks into an administration is stupid.

Conservatives' wand theory fails once more.

What's amazing is how many gaffes Obama has made in such a SHORT time! You'd think a new President, especially one as inexperienced as Obama, would tread slowly and carefully until he fully understood what was happening around the world. Instead, Obama rushes full steam ahead and he's stepping in it right and left.

Obama reminds me of a child with ADD - he can't focus on any one thing for very long.

[ChumpDumper]

What's amazing is how many gaffes Obama has made in such a SHORT time! You'd think a new President, especially one as inexperienced as Obama, would tread slowly and carefully until he fully understood what was happening around the world. Instead, Obama rushes full steam ahead and he's stepping in it right and left.

Obama reminds me of a child with ADD - he can't focus on any one thing for very long.Nothing major. It's not like he started an unnecessary war or has chosen to ignore terrorism anything like that.

[johnsmith]

Again, hyperbole and stupidity doesn't help you.

Oddly enough, the polls for Congress are the best they have been in three years. Still low, but rising.

Polls aside Chump, how do you think congress is doing?

[johnsmith]

I could, and probably will, completely eviscerate this piece quite easily, don't doubt that for a second either.

Some of what Obama has done I have been advocating for years, and will be happy to provide a defense for it.

Just don't have the time for it at the moment.

I'm sure crookshanks thinks she has really "socked it to those libs" with this turd masquerading as an essay, but all it does for me is simply demonstrate how little respect Fox News has for the intelligence of its viewers.

I have no doubt you will.........fuck, it's really not that hard considering this is a true "fluff" piece of journalism. But haven't you learned by now just to make fun of me back when I post something like I did to you originally in this thread?

[sook]

This is probably the area i have most confidence in Obama and quite frankly the only area i support him in. The republicans mutilated our image around the world, repairing it will be no easy task.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Anyone who thinks the foreign policy of this country will have been any different if McCain had been elected is naive.

[ChumpDumper]

Polls aside Chump, how do you think congress is doing?Congress runs pretty well when one party has a supermajority. They haven't taken on anything terribly difficult, so I can't give a complete score.

If they succeed in destroying America, I guess I'll have to give them an A.

[PixelPusher]

Golly gee whiz, I'm sure the best way to argue against articles like this is to not make a point other then to bash the writer.

Nah, it would make much more sense to just dismiss it and not argue any of the points it makes because partisanship rules.

"bashing the writer/poster" is pretty much the entirety or your schtick in the Politcal Forum.

[Ignignokt]

"bashing the writer/poster" is pretty much the entirety or your schtick in the Politcal Forum.

johnsmith's job would be harder if certain douches didn't cut and paste progressive blogs as fact.

[SnakeBoy]

Nothing major. It's not like he started an unnecessary war or has chosen to ignore man caused disasters anything like that.

Just fixin that for you.

[RandomGuy]

Why must you add a personal attack. All I was doing was posting an article that I agreed with and found interesting - I knew I wasn't going to change any minds among you libs. I was under the impression this forum was for political discussion - but maybe now in the age of Obama, we can't have an opposing opinion.

But I also don't understand this automatic hatred you guys have for ANYTHING having to do with Fox News. So, since you're so much more intelligent than us who watch Fox News, please enlighten us as to where this author is so grossly incorrect.

Don't confuse automatic hatred with automatic skepticism.

I don't hate the crazy guy on the corner telling me that cheese is loaded with alien mind-controlling chemicals, but I am skeptical.

What I do dislike is when Fox news commentators post things like this that amount to little more than demogoguery. Because there are some out there who will read this and think that they are being told the truth without any distortion.

I will set aside any personal attacks then, and simply some basic critical thinking questions, and you can help me on this.

[RandomGuy]

Bush sought to do good. Obama just wants to look good.

Crookshanks, what kinds of things would constitute a good level of evidence or support for this statement?

[Rogue]

Crookshanks, what kinds of things would constitute a good level of evidence or support for this statement?
Obama has trolled many times that he will do things that can practically benefit us rather than earmarks, but I haven't seen anything benefitial he has done but earmarks. His words sound epic and encouraging but we're not kids or idiots living on the other side of the earth, what we want to see from him is action but not words, even though the words sound 100 times more enjoyable than the national song.

I don't think Obama will have a more successful presidential career than Mr George Walker Bush, at least Barack has already failed in the area of international affairs. The biggest mistake he has made is nominating Hillary Clinton as his secretary of state. Hillary is a smart woman and also an experienced politician, but she is still not capable enough to take the job of SOS, though Hillary had worked as the first lady for 8 years in the white house before bush stepped into the house 8 years ago. what us needs is a decisive secretary of state that can do a perfect job dealing with international issues. Rice did a nice job at that position in bush's administration, so I think the SOS should still have been an african-american woman like Halle Berry. With her remarkable intelligence and unforgettable beauty, Halle Berry is inarguably an ideal candidate for that job and she would definitely do a great job if she had been nominated, though she has little experience in political area.

[ChumpDumper]

Just fixin that for you.He didn't cause disasters, his people just fucked up the response to Katrina. He looked out the window at it though. That was nice.

[Oh, Gee!!]

hey, the author prefaced this smear job by stating that he was no fan of Bush, so the editorial must be "fair-and-balanced." right?

[George Gervin's Afro]

O'S FOREIGN FAILURES
NEW PREZ FLUNKING GLOBAL TESTS

AMERICA'S enemies smell blood and it's type "O."

All new administrations stumble a bit as they seek their footing. But President Obama's foreign-policy botches have set new records for instant incompetence.

Contrary to left-wing myths, I wasn't a fan of the Bush administration. (I called for Donald Rumsfeld to get the boot in mid-2001.) But fair's fair. Despite his many faults, Bush sought to do good. Obama just wants to look good.

Vice President Dick Cheney was arrogant. Vice President Joe Biden is arrogant and stupid. Take your pick.

Don't worry about the new administration's ideology. Worry about its terrifying naivete.

Consider a sampling of the goofs O and his crew have made in just two months:

China: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (you know that gal married to the Saudi hireling) crawled to Beijing to tell the party bosses that human rights don't matter. Our "relationship" is more important than freedom and human dignity.

Beijing's response? A staged military confrontation with an unarmed US Navy vessel; continued screw-America currency cheating; a renewed crackdown on dissidents and, yesterday, a call for a new global currency to replace the dollar.

Thanks, Hill. You're a sweetheart.

Pakistan: With viral corruption throughout and Islamist fanatics sweeping half of its territory, Pakistan's coming apart. Its Dem-adored prez tries to ban opposition parties and gut the judiciary. It has nukes and seethes with hatred of America. And Islamabad controls our primary supply route into Afghanistan, using it as an extortion tool.

Obama's response? Billions in new aid for Pak pols to pocket. We'd be better off handing the money to AIG to pay out more bonuses.

Afghanistan: Obama's Vietnam. Am I the only American who remembers that candidate Obama had a plan to capture Osama bin Laden and fix our previous "mistakes" in Afghanistan? President Obama doesn't have a clue.

Iran: Obama tried to reach out, to talk. After all, talking got him to the White House. But America-bashing is what keeps Iran's leaders in office, it's their political essence. After 30 years of fierce hostility, hasn't anyone figured out that the senior mullahs need us as an enemy? Without the Great Satan America to blame, they'd have some real explaining to do to their homies. So O got the left-hand finger.

He wanted to chat with the Taliban, too. They told him he could stick it where the sun don't shine.

North Korea: Obama wanted a fresh start. North Korea's response? Threats of war with South Korea and the kidnapping of two American journalists. And the renewed pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, along with rocket tests.

Cuba: Obama would like to liberalize our relationship. The Castro boys told him to kiss off. They need an enemy, too. (Dear Mr. President: It's not always about us or how evil America is.)

Venezuela: Guess who else needs an enemy?

Mexico: The good news: Obama knows where it is on a map and recognizes that Mexico's government faces a narco-insurgency that threatens our country, too. His first action? Cave to the Teamsters, violate a lawful treaty on cross-border trucking, reignite fading anti-Americanism and undercut President Felipe Calderon.

Poland: Obama's stance on our bravest ally on the European continent? The Russians are more important than you are. He's sending the same message to Ukraine and Georgia.

Russia: Bolshie Biden, the commuting commissar, knows he's the man who can turn Russia into our best pal. After "Friend of Bill" Strobe Talbott tried and failed disastrously. And after poor W saw into Putin's soul, only to get his butt handed to him. "Uncle Joe" Biden has nothing to learn from past failures, though: He's got a re-set button.

Moscow's response to the Obama administration's bid for a new start? It threatens NATO members it once occupied and continues to back Iran's nuclear program. Plus, it bribes Kyrgystan to kick us off the critical-to-Afghanistan Manas airbase (then offers to help replace that supply lifeline, giving Russia a choke-hold on our troops).

Next, the Kremlin threatens massive re-armament and demands the abandonment of the dollar as the international reserve currency.

Obama's response? Push that re-set button again. And again.

At what point does naivete become cowardice?

As for our allies, Obama apparently needs them less than Bush did. O treated Britain's prime minister like the deputy Paraguayan veterinary inspector, and he blindsided the leaders of the Czech Republic, Poland, Mexico and Canada on issues ranging from missile defense to trade. But he'd like them to take the Gitmo terrorists off our hands, please.

The one bright spot thus far has been Iraq, where Obama quickly tossed aside his campaign promises. The O-man doesn't want to be on the blame-line for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in Baghdad. And his MoveOn.org supporters can throw all the tantrums they want. (Breaking news, folks: O's a professional pol, not the messiah . . . )

Apart from Iraq, a success Sen. Obama did all he could to prevent, his foreign policy's an instant wasteland. By comparison, the Carter administration is starting to look like a model of manly strength, courage and patriotism. :lmao

Ralph Peters recently became Fox News' first "strategic analyst."

==================
Golly gee whiz - and I thought Obama promised that he would change the way the world viewed America - he'd bring respect back. Yeah...right...
ANOTHER broken campaign promise!!! Obama is nothing more than an arrogant empty suit.




Ralph Peters recently became Fox News' first "strategic analyst."
:rolleyes

This guy will surely bring objective analysis to the fair and balanced network.

[johnsmith]

But in all fairness, this forum is the equivelant of Fox News only leaning left instead of right.

[RandomGuy]

But in all fairness, this forum is the equivelant of Fox News only leaning left instead of right.

http://www.trephination.net/gallery/macros/intresting.jpg

Translation:

"Boo hoo, I have to deal with news that doesn't always fit into my worldview and people I don't agree with."

[RandomGuy]

He didn't cause disasters, his people just fucked up the response to Katrina. He looked out the window at it though. That was nice.

The horse show judge had handle on it.

I mean if a guy can figure out how to contribute money to a presidential campaign, handling a multi-state disaster response should be a snap, right?

[johnsmith]

http://www.trephination.net/gallery/macros/intresting.jpg

Translation:

"Boo hoo, I have to deal with news that doesn't always fit into my worldview and people I don't agree with."

I don't really "have to" deal with news that doesn't always fit into my worldview and people I don't agree with. I only come to this site for entertainment, which from what I understand is why you guys watch Fox News more then conservatives do and you listen to right wing radio showhosts FAR more then we do.

[balli]

But in all fairness, this forum is the equivelant of Fox News only leaning left instead of right.
As Colbert famously told Bush, I'm sorry reality has a well-known liberal bias.

[johnsmith]

As Colbert famously told Bush, I'm sorry reality has a well-known liberal bias.

That's the thing about the folks of this board, they think that their reality is the only one that exists.

In my reality, I'm socially liberal and fiscally conservative............but you can stick with your single party lines, believing an issue is either black or white, and just vehemently disagreeing with one side while gleefully supporting another, it's doing awesome for America so far.

[johnsmith]

Oops, forgot to add the..........:tu