[Shadowfax]

ROFLMAO!! Don’t take this debate offline! It’s been funny as hell!

Surveyor, he’s got you. You are doing exactly what you are arguing against. Using an “expert” to prove your position. You are just using a lesser-accepted, nut-job expert. In legal negligence cases, you frequently have a “battle of the experts” to prove one’s case. Frequently, the expert with the better credentials and more convincing demeanor is the most persuasive. Bolton and Spencer against the rest of the foreign policy “elite” is a poor showing. Good luck.

Another comment, but a fine point, to say that Obama has “no knowledge of history” is to assume that you could determine his knowledge base. I think you could more successfully argue that his past discussions have caused you to believe that his appreciation of certain historical events is uninformed or naive. But that one event (Obama’s interpretation of Kennedy’s actions) is a poor statistical sample of the sum of a person’s knowledge of foreign affairs. (Even two such examples is still a small sample. If I spent a few minutes researching, I am sure I could find some homeruns in his arsenal. At least 2.) And to parrot someone else’s earlier comment–you’d be hard pressed to find a presidential candidate who is an expert at everything. That’s what their cabinet is for. What you really want is a good leader–someone who makes good decisions, is thoughtful and careful, and can inspire their people in a time of great challenge. We are heading into, IMHO, one of the hardest periods in our nation’s history. We don’t want a Carter (as much as I think his heart was in the right place), we need a leader who can inspire. (Kennedy and, gulp, Reagan comes to mind–those who know me know how hard it is for me to admit this.)

[Shadowfax]

ROFLMAO!! Don’t take this debate offline! It’s been funny as hell!

Surveyor, he’s got you. You are doing exactly what you are arguing against. Using an “expert” to prove your position. You are just using a lesser-accepted, nut-job expert. In legal negligence cases, you frequently have a “battle of the experts” to prove one’s case. Frequently, the expert with the better credentials and more convincing demeanor is the most persuasive. Bolton and Spencer against the rest of the foreign policy “elite” is a poor showing. Good luck.

Another comment, but a fine point, to say that Obama has “no knowledge of history” is to assume that you could determine his knowledge base. I think you could more successfully argue that his past discussions have caused you to believe that his appreciation of certain historical events is uninformed or naive. But that one event (Obama’s interpretation of Kennedy’s actions) is a poor statistical sample of the sum of a person’s knowledge of foreign affairs. (Even two such examples is still a small sample. If I spent a few minutes researching, I am sure I could find some homeruns in his arsenal. At least 2.) And to parrot someone else’s earlier comment–you’d be hard pressed to find a presidential candidate who is an expert at everything. That’s what their cabinet is for. What you really want is a good leader–someone who makes good decisions, is thoughtful and careful, and can inspire their people in a time of great challenge. We are heading into, IMHO, one of the hardest periods in our nation’s history. We don’t want a Carter (as much as I think his heart was in the right place), we need a leader who can inspire. (Kennedy and, gulp, Reagan comes to mind–those who know me know how hard it is for me to admit this.)

[Shadowfax]

ROFLMAO!! Don’t take this debate offline! It’s been funny as hell!

Surveyor, he’s got you. You are doing exactly what you are arguing against. Using an “expert” to prove your position. You are just using a lesser-accepted, nut-job expert. In legal negligence cases, you frequently have a “battle of the experts” to prove one’s case. Frequently, the expert with the better credentials and more convincing demeanor is the most persuasive. Bolton and Spencer against the rest of the foreign policy “elite” is a poor showing. Good luck.

Another comment, but a fine point, to say that Obama has “no knowledge of history” is to assume that you could determine his knowledge base. I think you could more successfully argue that his past discussions have caused you to believe that his appreciation of certain historical events is uninformed or naive. But that one event (Obama’s interpretation of Kennedy’s actions) is a poor statistical sample of the sum of a person’s knowledge of foreign affairs. (Even two such examples is still a small sample. If I spent a few minutes researching, I am sure I could find some homeruns in his arsenal. At least 2.) And to parrot someone else’s earlier comment–you’d be hard pressed to find a presidential candidate who is an expert at everything. That’s what their cabinet is for. What you really want is a good leader–someone who makes good decisions, is thoughtful and careful, and can inspire their people in a time of great challenge. We are heading into, IMHO, one of the hardest periods in our nation’s history. We don’t want a Carter (as much as I think his heart was in the right place), we need a leader who can inspire. (Kennedy and, gulp, Reagan comes to mind–those who know me know how hard it is for me to admit this.)

[Shadowfax]

ROFLMAO!! Don’t take this debate offline! It’s been funny as hell!

Surveyor, he’s got you. You are doing exactly what you are arguing against. Using an “expert” to prove your position. You are just using a lesser-accepted, nut-job expert. In legal negligence cases, you frequently have a “battle of the experts” to prove one’s case. Frequently, the expert with the better credentials and more convincing demeanor is the most persuasive. Bolton and Spencer against the rest of the foreign policy “elite” is a poor showing. Good luck.

Another comment, but a fine point, to say that Obama has “no knowledge of history” is to assume that you could determine his knowledge base. I think you could more successfully argue that his past discussions have caused you to believe that his appreciation of certain historical events is uninformed or naive. But that one event (Obama’s interpretation of Kennedy’s actions) is a poor statistical sample of the sum of a person’s knowledge of foreign affairs. (Even two such examples is still a small sample. If I spent a few minutes researching, I am sure I could find some homeruns in his arsenal. At least 2.) And to parrot someone else’s earlier comment–you’d be hard pressed to find a presidential candidate who is an expert at everything. That’s what their cabinet is for. What you really want is a good leader–someone who makes good decisions, is thoughtful and careful, and can inspire their people in a time of great challenge. We are heading into, IMHO, one of the hardest periods in our nation’s history. We don’t want a Carter (as much as I think his heart was in the right place), we need a leader who can inspire. (Kennedy and, gulp, Reagan comes to mind–those who know me know how hard it is for me to admit this.)

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Casca]There are a lot of people here with very curious loyalties.[/quote]

Seems to me, there are a lot of people here who don’t let the wool get pulled over their eyes and are questioning and demanding accountability from their leadership. Being inquisitive is not being disloyal or “unpatriotic” (wanted to clear that up before we go there).

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Casca]There are a lot of people here with very curious loyalties.[/quote]

Seems to me, there are a lot of people here who don’t let the wool get pulled over their eyes and are questioning and demanding accountability from their leadership. Being inquisitive is not being disloyal or “unpatriotic” (wanted to clear that up before we go there).

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Casca]There are a lot of people here with very curious loyalties.[/quote]

Seems to me, there are a lot of people here who don’t let the wool get pulled over their eyes and are questioning and demanding accountability from their leadership. Being inquisitive is not being disloyal or “unpatriotic” (wanted to clear that up before we go there).

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Casca]There are a lot of people here with very curious loyalties.[/quote]

Seems to me, there are a lot of people here who don’t let the wool get pulled over their eyes and are questioning and demanding accountability from their leadership. Being inquisitive is not being disloyal or “unpatriotic” (wanted to clear that up before we go there).

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Casca]There are a lot of people here with very curious loyalties.[/quote]

Seems to me, there are a lot of people here who don’t let the wool get pulled over their eyes and are questioning and demanding accountability from their leadership. Being inquisitive is not being disloyal or “unpatriotic” (wanted to clear that up before we go there).

[Shadowfax]

Dan,

That’s called “projecting.” HAHAHAHA!

[Shadowfax]

Dan,

That’s called “projecting.” HAHAHAHA!

[Shadowfax]

Dan,

That’s called “projecting.” HAHAHAHA!

[Shadowfax]

Dan,

That’s called “projecting.” HAHAHAHA!

[Shadowfax]

Dan,

That’s called “projecting.” HAHAHAHA!

[Shadowfax]

Has anyone noticed that this is an op-ed piece? Not a news article that would normally be subject to verification and fact-checking? Other than the byline, there is no information on the background/credentials of the author. And, yes, those things matter when you are making such a broad statement about political policies….

Perhaps more to the point, is anyone out there still deluded enough to think that the Bush administration has not been participating and amply funding corporate welfare? Exxon made record profits–and now we are all hi-jacked with gas prices. Don’t you think Uncle Sam could skim a little more off the top (oh, wait, the consumer pays a gas tax)? Or at least require them to divery their billion dollar profits into R&D for renewable energy sources. Ooops, careful, now I am sounding like a socialist. Gee, if Exxon has to pay more in taxes it will hinder innovation and hard work….bullshit. They will just game the system AGAIN to make MORE money and gauge the rest of us over prices.

Go OBAMA!!!

[Author]

Posts