Obama says iran has the right to nuke power

#26
#26
joevol320 said:
he would have had the balls to give tougher restrictions than 'the muslim' would have. you don't want to see that hussein is going to cower to mideast and they're terrorist friends, even more than Bush did. that's why he's trying pressure Israel so much. thank goodness the Israwl prime minister is the opposite to that marxist we have in office.
Click to expand...


Thanks for destroying the one hundredth of an ounce of credibility you had left.
 
#33
#33
LG: .... wondering if any of the standardbearer Obama-bashers will admit that Bush had the same policy towards Iran as expressed in this article about Obama's position.

Anyone got any integrity?

Anyone? No?

Ok then.
 
#34
#34
lawgator1 said:
LG: .... wondering if any of the standardbearer Obama-bashers will admit that Bush had the same policy towards Iran as expressed in this article about Obama's position.

Anyone got any integrity?

Anyone? No?

Ok then.
Click to expand...

Why is the most hated man in democrat history always used as the justification for obama to do something stupid?
 
#35
#35
Boortz (and Savage and Limbaugh) on swine flu:


In response to the administration's request for a name change, radio host Neil Boortz suggested calling the virus the "fajita flu." But that was one of Boortz's more tepid comments about the virus. Boortz stirred up fears that the virus was some sort of "bioterrorist" plot, asking, "What better way to sneak a virus into this country than to give it to Mexicans?" Similarly, radio host Michael Savage claimed, "There is certainly the possibility that our dear friends in the Middle East cooked this up in a laboratory somewhere in a cave and brought it to Mexico knowing that our incompetent government would not protect us from this epidemic because of our open-border policies." After all, Savage claimed, the terrorists might have known that Mexicans "are the perfect mules for bringing this virus into America."

It's hard to determine which came first -- the intolerance or the paranoia.

Indeed, they make conservative leader Rush Limbaugh's suggestions of a conspiracy on the part of the Obama administration seem just slightly less delusional. Limbaugh: "All of this is by design. It's designed to get people to respond to government orders. ... It is designed to expand the role and power of government and schools, and the media just falls right in line with it."

The swine flu was created by Middle Eastern terrorists, smuggled into Mexico because they knew we have lax borders, and then the government response was all designed to scare us into allowing more government control. And the liberal media ignored it.

It was the right's wet dream.
 
#36
#36
lawgator1 said:
LG: .... wondering if any of the standardbearer Obama-bashers will admit that Bush had the same policy towards Iran as expressed in this article about Obama's position.

Anyone got any integrity?

Anyone? No?

Ok then.
Click to expand...
wonder if you'll recognize that Bush took an entirely different approach to Iran than does Obama. I don't care what this article expressed, the two men approached the situation from entirely different negotiating positions.
 
#37
#37
droski said:
Why is the most hated man in democrat history always used as the justification for obama to do something stupid?
Click to expand...


I don't think Bush is the most hated. He is probably top three in terms of lack of any respect for intellectual horsepower.

Most hated would probably include smart but devious ones, like Nixon or Cheney.
 
#38
#38
lawgator1 said:
I don't think Bush is the most hated. He is probably top three in terms of lack of any respect for intellectual horsepower.

Most hated would probably include smart but devious ones, like Nixon or Cheney.
Click to expand...
nice try, but how about the actual point. Using the Bush regime is hardly a ringing endorsement of the current crowd.
 
#39
#39
lawgator1 said:
I don't think Bush is the most hated. He is probably top three in terms of lack of any respect for intellectual horsepower.

Most hated would probably include smart but devious ones, like Nixon or Cheney.
Click to expand...

ridiculous
 
#40
#40
BigPapaVol said:
nice try, but how about the actual point. Using the Bush regime is hardly a ringing endorsement of the current crowd.
Click to expand...

I was not using it as an endorsement in the slightest. I was saying that it is factually incorrect to say, claim, imply, asssert, twist, fabricate, or insinuate that Obama is "at it again," letting Iran off the hook on nukes.

When Drudge has on the first page in block red letters "Obama: Iran Has Right to Nuclear Power" the obvious effort is to make it look like Obama has stepped out and changed policy or taken some new position and OH MY GOD WHAT'S HE DONE NOW when therer is no story there to begin with.

I resent the intentional effort to mislead.


droski said:
ridiculous
Click to expand...


Among Democrats? I don't think so. Most thought him simply in way over his head. They pegged Cheney as the mastermind and manipulator. Still do.
 
#41
#41
lawgator1 said:
LG: .... wondering if any of the standardbearer Obama-bashers will admit that Bush had the same policy towards Iran as expressed in this article about Obama's position.

Anyone got any integrity?

Anyone? No?

Ok then.
Click to expand...

Do you know if Obama's position is for or against Iran enriching their own uranium? The quotes you posted from Bush clearly indicate that he doesn't have a problem with them using nuclear power but he does have a problem with them enriching their own fuel for the reactors.

In the post starting this thread, it implies Obama doesn't mind if they enrich uranium so long as they can prove they aren't using it for weapons.

That is a distinct difference.
 
#42
#42
Frankly, this part of the article bothers me more than anything...

"What we want to do is open a dialogue," Obama told the BBC. "You know, there are misapprehensions about the West, on the part of the Muslim world. And, obviously, there are some big misapprehensions about the Muslim world when it comes to those of us in the West."
Click to expand...

Leg 2 of the Apology Tour is about to get underway...
 
#43
#43
volinbham said:
Frankly, this part of the article bothers me more than anything...



Leg 2 of the Apology Tour is about to get underway...
Click to expand...


This thing will see more dates than the combined total of shows done by the Rolling Stones, KISS, and Aerosmith.
 
#45
#45
volinbham said:
Frankly, this part of the article bothers me more than anything...



Leg 2 of the Apology Tour is about to get underway...
Click to expand...


What's wrong with observing that a large number of Americans have some misconceptions about Islam?

It's true.
 
#46
#46
lawgator1 said:
What's wrong with observing that a large number of Americans have some misconceptions about Islam?

It's true.
Click to expand...

It's not that there are misconceptions about the Muslim world.

The problem is that he suggests the misapprehensions are more obvious and greater on the West's (the U.S.'s) side. There is nothing to back up his statement. Western citizens have not taken up arms against innocent Muslims last time I checked.

This isn't even a moral equivalence argument; it's a both sides are wrong but we are clearly more wrong statement.
 
#47
#47
volinbham said:
It's not that there are misconceptions about the Muslim world.

The problem is that he suggests the misapprehensions are more obvious and greater on the West's (the U.S.'s) side. There is nothing to back up his statement. Western citizens have not taken up arms against innocent Muslims last time I checked.

This isn't even a moral equivalence argument; it's a both sides are wrong but we are clearly more wrong statement.
Click to expand...


Ideally, Obama's overture would be met by leaders of the Muslim world with some equivalent response, i.e. telling their citizens that the U.S. and the West aren't exactly what they think, either.

Now, we realize that isn't going to happen. At least not for generations. But at some point the dialogue has to start.

I am NOT saying make substantive concessions -- and I am unaware of Obama making any -- but there seems little cost to creating avenues of discussion as time marches on.
 
#48
#48
lawgator1 said:
Ideally, Obama's overture would be met by leaders of the Muslim world with some equivalent response, i.e. telling their citizens that the U.S. and the West aren't exactly what they think, either.

Now, we realize that isn't going to happen. At least not for generations. But at some point the dialogue has to start.

I am NOT saying make substantive concessions -- and I am unaware of Obama making any -- but there seems little cost to creating avenues of discussion as time marches on.
Click to expand...
Exactly why does that dialogue have to start?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#49
#49
lawgator1 said:
Ideally, Obama's overture would be met by leaders of the Muslim world with some equivalent response, i.e. telling their citizens that the U.S. and the West aren't exactly what they think, either.
Click to expand...
. . . and then the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy will come out and sing "We are the World".

As you acknowledged - this isn't going to happen. So why go through with this pollyanna exercise?
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top