Re: Obama's True Colors Come Out!

"RT" <RT-not@home.place> wrote in message
news:5mec049f530d11ekjem489i3qhoc4knau3@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 17:05:11 -0500, "nc@gntbcr.com" <Not PC> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 19:45:34 GMT, RT <RT-not@home.place> wrote:
>>
>>>By all measures the failures in Iraq and Afganistan have made the world
>>>and the
>>>US less safe.
>>
>>Less safe? I seem to recall a couple of tall buildings that were
>>brought down by terrorists in 2001 with about 3000 people killed. Have
>>you seen a repeat of this since then in the U.S.? Did the "right wing
>>media" cover it up?
>
> The 4K killed (so far) in Iraq?

They are soldiers doing dangerous work
Idiots seem to forget that soldiers are usually sent where bullets are
already flying or will soon be doing so.
It's part of the job description

"celtex" <rsjdn@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:TQxNj.66692$y05.19429@newsfe22.lga...
> <snip>
>> Just today the history news network released an informal poll of
>> historians.
>> "Asked to rank the presidency of George W. Bush in comparison to those of
>> the
>> other 41 American presidents, more than 61 percent of the historians
>> concluded
>> that the current presidency is the worst in the nation's history. <look
>> at
>> that- the Worst!> Another 35 percent of the historians surveyed rated the
>> Bush
>> presidency in the 31st to 41st category, while only four of the 109
>> respondents
>> ranked the current presidency as even among the top two-thirds of
>> American
>> administrations."
>>
>> 98.5% said the Bush presidency was a failure. 1.5% said a success. I
>> guess I
>> fit with the 98.5%- He has really let us down as pres.
>
> It is also known the ratio of history profs is 9.5 to 1 Democratic. So
> DUH! What do you think they would say. Using the numbers from a biased
> sample is worthless.

Not to mention that it's difficult to evaluate a President on the short term
Just look at Truman who left the White House with an even lower rating
than Bush currently has. And yet 50 odd years later he's considered to have
been one of the better President

"RT" <RT-not@home.place> wrote in message
news:8g1a04d68jdcg1u2fgv5flgnoml8a4b02j@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:31:58 -0400, "NapalmHeart"
> <olsonfamNOSPAM@iserv.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"RT" <RT-not@home.place> wrote in message
>>news:jsm7045e8hgm0d4vkrcg5puautkqlfaam0@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:15:08 -0400, "NapalmHeart"
>>> <olsonfamNOSPAM@iserv.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Morton Davis" <antikerry@go.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:FXJMj.119896$yE1.9683@attbi_s21...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:7b9cb7f7-ee75-4787-a42d-7b56f765d581@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > At a <snip> fundraiser in San Francisco, <snip> Obama spoke
>>>>>>> > <snip>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > "So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling
>>>>>>> > to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them
>>>>>>> > or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to
>>>>>>> > explain their frustrations," Mr. Obama said. (Quoted by the New
>>>>>>> > York Times, April 12, 2008)<snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> People get bitter about a variety of things. People are frustrated
>>>>>> over a variety of things as well. So what if Obama stated that
>>>>>> people
>>>>>> "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like
>>>>>> them
>>>>>> or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to
>>>>>> explain their frustrations."? Big whoop. Isn't it true?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bitter and frustrated, loves guns and religion. Sound so
>>>>>> unfamiliar?
>>>>>> And most people are, unfortunately, anti-immigrant. Even
>>>>>> immigrants.
>>>>>> :
>>>>>> ( Obama, from my perspective, was stating facts not stating that he
>>>>>> agreed with those facts or that he believes that scenario is the
>>>>>> ideal. The media loves to blow things out of proportion and focus
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> comments out of context.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> The only true bitter people are the Democrats over the two fuckups
>>>>> they have to choose from.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>And the two they nominated before them.
>>>>
>>> yeah- we're so freaking lucky to have had Bush and Cheny. Where would
>>> we be
>>> without them? Oh yeah, out of debt and not bogged in an extremely
>>> poorly
>>> conceived and executed war. Too bad they can't run again. Four more
>>> years and
>>> we'd all be speaking Mandarin.
>>
>>Not saying that they have been great, just that they were better than
>>the Democratic alternatives.
>>
>
> I've loved my country under Reps and Dems, but Bush is the worst I have
> ever
> seen. He has really screwed the pooch. The history network just released
> an
> informal poll in which 61% of the historians responding (not scientific
> but
> still) rated Bush II as the WORST president ever! I honestly do not know
> how
> anyone could have been worse in anyones opinion.
>

So you're just a stupid parrot repeating the party line ?
Got It.

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@Hotmail.com> wrote in
news:SImdnXMWMIj7D5XVnZ2dnUVZ_qninZ2d@cpinternet:

>
> "celtex" <rsjdn@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:TQxNj.66692$y05.19429@newsfe22.lga...
>> <snip>
>>> Just today the history news network released an informal poll of
>>> historians. "Asked to rank the presidency of George W. Bush in
>>> comparison to those of the other 41 American presidents, more than 61
>>> percent of the historians concluded that the current presidency is the
>>> worst in the nation's history. <look at that- the Worst!> Another 35
>>> percent of the historians surveyed rated the Bush
>>> presidency in the 31st to 41st category, while only four of the 109
>>> respondents ranked the current presidency as even among the top
>>> two-thirds of American
>>> administrations."
>>>
>>> 98.5% said the Bush presidency was a failure. 1.5% said a success. I
>>> guess I
>>> fit with the 98.5%- He has really let us down as pres.
>>
>> It is also known the ratio of history profs is 9.5 to 1 Democratic. So
>> DUH! What do you think they would say. Using the numbers from a biased
>> sample is worthless.
>
> Not to mention that it's difficult to evaluate a President on the short
> term
> Just look at Truman who left the White House with an even lower
> rating
> than Bush currently has. And yet 50 odd years later he's considered to
> have been one of the better President
>

The 2 things I think Truman was good for was integrating the military and
having the cajones to use the A Bomb. The casualties on both sides would have
been horrendous if we had to invade mainland Japan. I am convinced that Japan
as a nation, culture and people would not have survived much past 1946 if
they hadn't surrendered when they did. There was no more food being imported
as thier merchant fleet had been sunk and thier citied had been burnt out in
conventional raids. The civil population was effectively dehoused and forced
into the country side. No food, little clean water, no shelter, no medical
care and winter was looming on the horizon. Truman probaly did the Hapanese
more of a favor than he did for our military, though that was clearly not the
intent or apparent at the time.

Probably one of the last really old school politicain/statesmen. He made an
incredibly difficult decision, never apologized for it and has been
vindocated by history.

As to Bush, remains to be seen. Good yes, great I don't know. To many missed
opportunites, to much crap like the border. Maybe it remains for future
presidents to carry the ball against the terrorists even further. OTOH after
decades of terrorism going back to at least the '60s, during which the West
mostly just wrung it's hands and tried to make nice with the likes of Arafat
while Israel burned, Bush did take the first step of formal, organized
military and other actions against these cancers on civil society. I think
perhaps it is a bigger job the Bush appreciated, but he did at least shake
off the immoral stupor of the west and say "No more without consequences".

Frank

HeyBub wrote:
> RT wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 17:05:11 -0500, "nc@gntbcr.com" <Not PC> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 19:45:34 GMT, RT <RT-not@home.place> wrote:
>>>
>>>> By all measures the failures in Iraq and Afganistan have made the
>>>> world and the US less safe.
>>> Less safe? I seem to recall a couple of tall buildings that were
>>> brought down by terrorists in 2001 with about 3000 people killed.
>>> Have you seen a repeat of this since then in the U.S.? Did the
>>> "right wing media" cover it up?
>> The 4K killed (so far) in Iraq?
>
> They don't count. They knew the risk going in and volunteered anyway.
>
> Heck, the 3rd-ID, now on it's THIRD tour of duty in Iraq, just last week
> reached its re-enlistment goal for the year even though the (fiscal) year is
> only six months old.
>
> Only the hard and strong may call themselves Spartans.
>
> Only the hard. Only the strong.
>
> We march.
>
> For our lands. For our families. For our freedom.
>
> We march.
>
> Into the Hot Gates we march. Into that narrow corridor we march. Where
> Xerxes numbers count for nothing.
>
> Spartans. Citizen soldiers, free slaves, free Greeks all.
>
> Brothers. Fathers. Sons.
>
> We march.
>
> For honor's sake. For duty's sake. For glory's sake.
>
> We march.
>
>

But why did you leave out the end:

"We are undone! Undone, I tell you!"

Patrick Karl wrote:
>>
>> We march.
>>
>> For honor's sake. For duty's sake. For glory's sake.
>>
>> We march.
>>
>>
>
> But why did you leave out the end:
>
> "We are undone! Undone, I tell you!"

Buncha pussies who don't deserve quoting. The Arcadians deserted in the end.

---

My brothers died. Barely a year ago.

But from free Greek to free Greek the word was spread.

Now, here, on this rugged patch of earth, Xerxes hordes face obliteration!

Just there, the barbarians huddle - sheer terror gripping tight their hearts
with icey fingers, knowing full well what horrors they faced at the swords
and spears of 300. There they stare now at the face of ten thousand Spartans
leading thirty thousand free Greeks!

The enemy outnumber us a paltry three to one. Good odds for any Greek!

This day we rescue a world from mysticism and tyranny and usher in a future
brighter than anything we can imagine.