Reply With Quote
The VRWC has won, and will continue to win, dragging governance to the right, which is to say, unstoppably DOWN for the 90%, and WAY UP for the 10%.
Hillary would also do nothing progressive. I doubt anybody primarying her will drag her to the left.
http://www.theamericanconservative.c...-a-republican/According to exit polls in 2008, Obama ended up with 20 percent of the conservative vote. Even in 2012, after four years of relentless conservative attacks, he still got 17 percent of the conservative vote, with 11 percent of Tea Party supporters saying they cast their ballots for Obama.
They were not wrong. In my opinion, Obama has governed as a moderate conservative—essentially as what used to be called a liberal Republican before all such people disappeared from the GOP. He has been conservative to exactly the same degree that Richard Nixon basically governed as a moderate liberal, something no conservative would deny today. (Ultra-leftist Noam Chomsky recently called Nixon “the last liberal president.”)
The VRWC has won, and will continue to win, dragging governance to the right, which is to say, unstoppably DOWN for the 90%, and WAY UP for the 10%.
Hillary would also do nothing progressive. I doubt anybody primarying her will drag her to the left.
Winehole23 I think his foreign policy was the closest thing we'll ever get to a libertarian's.
Obama's? How so?
Boutons is right even if Hillary wins we get another liberal Republican....yippee....whomever wins the GOP nomination will either be a tea-bag hag or a social extremists..it's what the GOP is now....If the GOP ran someone who was a true, deregulation Reagan conservative without the extremists anti-immigration bull rhetoric .....they could win.....but Hillary is way to far to the center of every GOP candidate out there... she will out center them..
Recall, I said closest thing...
But Ukraine, syria, isis. Always keeping the stick out of all negotiations. Sure he draws lines...and he has a thing for israel.
he has a pretty laiz e faire view on all foreign conflict. Although I think it's more to do with him not knowing, rather than an actual policy view.
We've been bombing ISIS for months now. We told the Iraqi's we will not provide military support with Maliki in charge.
Enlisted types that want to send more of there contemporarys down range are amusing. Your MO infantry?
It's MOS. I'm not in anymore but my MOS was 19D. I'm a cavalry scout. a completely different level than infantry. Civilians wanting to close their eyes, letting genocide go on, while wanting their govt to give social welfare because "it's the right thing".
Or you are a racist and realize that welfare has been the cause of blacks in america not moving to and above the middle class as fast as other ethnic groups. Which makes sense why you're ok with entire groups of non-whites being wiped out!
come on man. we have been bombing them and arming the peshmerga and Iraqi's for months. Following the debacle of the northern iraqi army after our last round of hand holding, I think the policy of empowering and support while they retake their own country will lead to a more stable Mesopotamian Valley.
As for going to the Syrian plateau with boots that means Soviet style brinksmanship given the current climate.
if the offensive stops then that would one thing but they are surrounding tikrit after relieving that mountain to the E. it looks like ISIS is not taking the opportunity to withdraw so then its going to be a siege for awhile.
There is being a hawk and then there is being reckless.
Half-ass fighting numerous foreign wars? Drone murders? Arming terrorists? Yea, really libertarian. Obama's problem is he stirs up then doesn't follow through. If you're going to be a warmonger at least be like Bush and do it right.
How did Bush do it right? You description of Obama fits Bush perfectly.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
