You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Romney Victory :
- Thread starter Spike Trader
- Start date
It's tough. We all can see that Obama is a terrible president. I suppose Romney or McCain would have been a minor improvement, but we would have had to deal with amnesty, not to mention another disastrous neo-con foreign policy.
The main way you can say Obama is worse than Bush is Obamacare, plus tax increases and judicial appointments. Bush got us into two hideously expensive and ultimately pointless wars, ran up a huge debt and pretty much had an open borders policy. I find it hard to get excited about more of that.
Bush was a closet democrat. Not a nazicrat, but still a pseudo-democrat. No wonder he and slick willy get along so well.
bush senior came from the rockefeller - eastern elite wing of liberal republicans.
Bush junior was a front man for that group and you have to assume Jeb would be the same type of guy, trying to sneak stealth liberals onto the Supreme Court like his Dad did and his brother tried.
that liberal wing tried to paint over their liberal stripe... but you can still see their DNA in the establishment / sellout republicans.
Bush junior was a front man for that group and you have to assume Jeb would be the same type of guy, trying to sneak stealth liberals onto the Supreme Court like his Dad did and his brother tried.
that liberal wing tried to paint over their liberal stripe... but you can still see their DNA in the establishment / sellout republicans.
Bush was a closet democrat. Not a nazicrat, but still a pseudo-democrat. No wonder he and slick willy get along so well.
Here's a novel idea... Maybe the people in Ukraine (no "the", by the way, as it's offensive) shouldn't be relying on Obama's anything.defying Obama worked out a hell of lot better for leaders in Syria than it did for the people in the Ukraine relying on Obama's leadership.
And another, even better novel idea... In order for the whole world to stop relying on the US, maybe it's time to stop fomenting unrest and encouraging "regime changes" in the region (like they did w/Georgia and now Ukraine)? 'Cause, if you're not willing to credibly commit, that's just writing checks you know you won't be able to cash (like what happened with Georgia and now Ukraine).
except for your prententious comment about "the" I agree with you.
Ever since I realize how badly Bush was botching the wars... I have come to respect Pat Buchanan's and others somewhat isolationist veiw points. I would even say I agree with a lot of what they say now.
Back when we had all the industry, the exports, the profits and the standard of living it made sense for us to spend a fortune policing the world and keep trading lanes open.
Now that we are a big importer in most industries, it makes no sense for us to spending such large portion of our wealth policing the world. Let the EU and Japan start spending.
Note. I may not think "the" is offensive because I am typing in the United States and my wife's parents are from The Netherlands so I may have a different take than you.
Now if you told me you were from the Ukraine and you found it offensive I might reconsider.
Ever since I realize how badly Bush was botching the wars... I have come to respect Pat Buchanan's and others somewhat isolationist veiw points. I would even say I agree with a lot of what they say now.
Back when we had all the industry, the exports, the profits and the standard of living it made sense for us to spend a fortune policing the world and keep trading lanes open.
Now that we are a big importer in most industries, it makes no sense for us to spending such large portion of our wealth policing the world. Let the EU and Japan start spending.
Note. I may not think "the" is offensive because I am typing in the United States and my wife's parents are from The Netherlands so I may have a different take than you.
Now if you told me you were from the Ukraine and you found it offensive I might reconsider.
Here's a novel idea... Maybe the people in Ukraine (no "the", by the way, as it's offensive) shouldn't be relying on Obama's anything.
And another, even better novel idea... In order for the whole world to stop relying on the US, maybe it's time to stop fomenting unrest and encouraging "regime changes" in the region (like they did w/Georgia and now Ukraine)? 'Cause, if you're not willing to credibly commit, that's just writing checks you know you won't be able to cash (like what happened with Georgia and now Ukraine).
Here's a novel idea... Maybe the people in Ukraine (no "the", by the way, as it's offensive) shouldn't be relying on Obama's anything.
And another, even better novel idea... In order for the whole world to stop relying on the US, maybe it's time to stop fomenting unrest and encouraging "regime changes" in the region (like they did w/Georgia and now Ukraine)? 'Cause, if you're not willing to credibly commit, that's just writing checks you know you won't be able to cash (like what happened with Georgia and now Ukraine).
I think you and I are on the same page here, but you would be amazed by the faux outrage emanating from the political class and media here. Like a former foreign policy official asked in a letter to the WashPost this morning, what was Russia supposed to do? What did they expect it to do? Just meekly accept NATO rolling up to its doorstep and Russians in Crimea and esastern Ukraine getting shafted by neo-nazi's?
What I will posit here is that we are seeing a lot of crockadile tears from western politicians. They actually pulled off a pretty slick move, taking most of Ukraine from Putin's grasp and losing only a small part in the process. Their recklessness could have easily ended up with the Red Army invading all of Ukraine. What was Johnny McCain's plan then? Or Kerry's? Go nuclear?
The American ( and european) public are being sold a bill of goods on how we must confront Russia, but i will be curious to see their reaction when their leaders present them with the bill for propping up Ukraine. We are talking Egypt/Israel aid levels at a time when all foreign aid is deeply unpopular.
Apparently, "the" Ukraine is offensive because it is used in the context of Ukraine as a region of a bigger country, i.e. Soviet Union. The country is called "Ukraine", not "The Ukraine". I have recently learned this myself, so there you have it.except for your prententious comment about "the" I agree with you.
Ever since I realize how badly Bush was botching the wars... I have come to respect Pat Buchanan's and others somewhat isolationist veiw points. I would even say I agree with a lot of what they say now.
Back when we had all the industry, the exports, the profits and the standard of living it made sense for us to spend a fortune policing the world and keep trading lanes open.
Now that we are a big importer in most industries, it makes no sense for us to spending such large portion of our wealth policing the world. Let the EU and Japan start spending.
Note. I may not think "the" is offensive because I am typing in the United States and my wife's parents are from The Netherlands so I may have a different take than you.
Now if you told me you were from the Ukraine and you found it offensive I might reconsider.
My point is that, if you agree with me, why do you talk about Obama's leadership on Ukraine? Maybe, the real demonstration of leadership would have been to not continue with the Cold War-style foreign policy, which intentionally destabilizes the regions around Russia...
Unfortunately, there is no politician in the US who is capable of actually arguing something like this to the American people. Saber-rattling is part and parcel of the American Way.
Rand Paul is one who is not a fan of sabre rattling.
The public has been brainwashed but is slowly waking up.
While we're finger pointing, let's not forget it was the euros who pushed various interventions such as Kosovo, Libya, Syria and now this. They just preferred that we do the dirty work.
The public has been brainwashed but is slowly waking up.
While we're finger pointing, let's not forget it was the euros who pushed various interventions such as Kosovo, Libya, Syria and now this. They just preferred that we do the dirty work.
Well, here's the thing... The problem for the US is that they have not really taken most of Ukraine from Putin. No matter how you slice it (and this highlights the idiocy of this particular sad episode of the adventures in American foreign policy), Ukraine, especially the Eastern part, depends on Russia for a whole lot of things (not just gas). Moreover, the EU doesn't really have much appetite to add another impoverished, corrupt state to its existing roster.I think you and I are on the same page here, but you would be amazed by the faux outrage emanating from the political class and media here. Like a former foreign policy official asked in a letter to the WashPost this morning, what was Russia supposed to do? What did they expect it to do? Just meekly accept NATO rolling up to its doorstep and Russians in Crimea and esastern Ukraine getting shafted by neo-nazi's?
What I will posit here is that we are seeing a lot of crockadile tears from western politicians. They actually pulled off a pretty slick move, taking most of Ukraine from Putin's grasp and losing only a small part in the process. Their recklessness could have easily ended up with the Red Army invading all of Ukraine. What was Johnny McCain's plan then? Or Kerry's? Go nuclear?
The American ( and european) public are being sold a bill of goods on how we must confront Russia, but i will be curious to see their reaction when their leaders present them with the bill for propping up Ukraine. We are talking Egypt/Israel aid levels at a time when all foreign aid is deeply unpopular.
And as you say, the West's bill we're talking about here is huge. And guess who is gonna be getting paid the most? Yep, none other than a certain Mr Putin. The whole thing is a tragic farce, IMHO.
These are excellent, and much more eloquent, summaries of the points I am trying to make here:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/20/the-economics-of-limiting-russias-expansion/
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/12/the-i-m-f-ukraine-and-president-obama/
Yeah, and good for him... However, it seems that this is perceived to be such an unpopular stance that even Rand Paul has to come out with some sound bites about "condemning" etc. In general, he definitely has the right idea and I very much respect him for that.Rand Paul is one who is not a fan of sabre rattling.
The public has been brainwashed but is slowly waking up.
While we're finger pointing, let's not forget it was the euros who pushed various interventions such as Kosovo, Libya, Syria and now this. They just preferred that we do the dirty work.