Printable View
I'm am listening to him on FOX now...he shows his lack of understanding of the issues comparing Kennedy and Kruschev and Nixon and Mao.
The more the Democrats talk this issue up, the dumber they look.
As I listen to this amateur, he sounds like Richard Pryor's skit where he "acted" and "talked" like the white boy; this dude is a caricature!
Sorry, only 42% of the country thinks that. As opposed to 49% of the country who thinks the democrats will do a better job with national security, or fighting terrorism.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...rust_on_issues
I'm sure this shocks and dismays you, as it did Donald Rumsfeld, apparently, because he was heard on tapes to remark that maybe we need another terrorist attack to move public support back towards the REPS/CONS. Gee...wishing for another terrorist attack? Sounds kind of unamerican that someone would wish for innocent americans to die to serve his own political agenda, doesnt it?
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...sfeld_tape.htm
(Ignore all the liberal commentary youre sure to disagree with. The transcript is there, though.)
He's black, but he's enunciating! He's just a caricature!Quote:
Originally Posted by CARTEK
But then again, those of us who make fun of W for his drawl and pronunciation of "nuculer" are being unfair!
*cough*hypocrite!*cough*
Who said it is unfair to do that?Quote:
Originally Posted by daybreaker2
You didn't respond to my question. Don't you think this whining hurts him?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Quote:
Originally Posted by daybreaker2
DELONG: Politically, what are the challenges because you're not going to have a lot of sympathetic ears up there until it [a terror attack] happens.RUMSFELD: That's what I was just going to say. This President's pretty much a victim of success. We haven't had an attack in five years. The perception of the threat is so low in this society that it's not surprising that the behavior pattern reflects a low threat assessment. The same thing's in Europe, there's a low threat perception. The correction for that, I suppose, is an attack. And when that happens, then everyone gets energized for another [inaudible] and it's a shame we don't have the maturity to recognize the seriousness of the threats...the lethality, the carnage, that can be imposed on our society is so real and so present and so serious that you'd think we'd be able to understand it, but as a society, the longer you get away from 9/11, the less...the less...Man, when I read this post I thought I was going to click to a link hearing hearing Rumsfeld saying "Damn it man, we need another terrorist attack so the American people will respect what we're doing!". Instead, I get Rumsfeld referring to how good a job they apparently are doing since there have not been any attacks.
Kind of reminds me of watching my son's dixie ball team and the pitcher striking out all the kids. I look out there and see my outfielder with his glove off and think boy I wish they'd hit one his way just to show him he needs to be ready.
Then the article shows it's creditability:
Rumsfeld's admission that the correction for dwindling support of the Neo-Con imperial crusade is another terror attack is perhaps the most startling and blatant indication that 9/11 was an inside job.
I related his delivery to something that occurred before you ever got on breast milk, and somehow I'm being racist...that's what you're implying. You are a pathetic.Quote:
Originally Posted by daybreaker2
Quote:
Originally Posted by daybreaker2
Bush didn't say "some people running for president." He just said "some people."
I am convinced that Obama, who is completely moronic and naive, is flourishing among liberals who share the same characteristics. People who would honestly place talks with former communist leaders on the same plane as Obama/Iran and Carter/HAMAS are obviously the kind who will vote for Barry.
Oh, and if you think that we aren't talking to these groups to begin with, you're doubly naive. We absolutely talk with these governments, albeit typically through a proxy. But you damned sure don't send your president or other top officials to do so.
If you want to call it whining. When he was hit with the Wright stuff, he didnt whine, he gave one of the best speeches on race relations of my generation. In the democratic race so far, he hasnt been the one doing the whining.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
And I dont see how it's whining to respond to a veiled personal attack. Bush may have used vague language, giving the neocons on here the ability to claim it wasnt directed towards Obama, but we all know it was, whether theyre admitting it or not. And since everyone knows it, he has the right to respond.
Besides, I think it would hurt him more to not acknowledge attacks like these, because then the REPS/CONS get to bash him for being too scared to reply, and if he cant face fire from people in the US, how will he face terrorists, etc, etc.
And so in Israel, at a 60th anniversary celebration, he's going to use that stage to criticize an old ex-president? No, Obama was definitely the main target of that. Maybe not the only target, but definitely the main one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirtydawg
Personally, at this stage, I honestly believe that Bush doesn't feel like he has to take shots at Obama.Quote:
Originally Posted by daybreaker2
It was aimed at Pelosi and Carter.
Republicans are slipping in polls all over the place, even at a state level (see: Mississippi). I think it was a poor choice of location for a partisan attack.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirtydawg
And this man wants to be the defender of our nation? :(