Who will be the next President of the United States?

[Foxtrot]

Obama? But he got a funny name so he must be a terrorist
You get the picture?

Ellison was elected. The story pushed through Hillbilly circles much like this...

Toothless moron 1: "some nigra hads been er electud and weres promisin to launch Jihad by swearin on da cuhran".

Toothless moron 2: "Well Bobby, wat dis nigra's name?"

Toothless moron 1: "merst be dat Usama one, I seens him on somethin during da wrastlin commericals, he be on Tv often..reckon must be him"

Toothless moron 2: "By golly, yous must be rights, I's gonnas tells evrybody!"

[Tchocky]

Kerry endorses Obama

And it was all going so well

[dean_acheson]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

I didn't get to see it, will try to catch up this weekend. Fred's my man.

In other news, John Kerry being,...well, John Kerry. This guy reminds me why I voted for Bush in '04.
Kerry endorses Obama over '04 running mate


.

Aw Neal, that's horrible. It was a great debate, even if the Ronulan was there.

Make sure to watch the quotes, they were better in context, but still good for laughs.

The 'find the virgins they are always looking for' was priceless.

[dean_acheson]

Originally Posted by Foxtrot

Obama? But he got a funny name so he must be a terrorist
You get the picture?

Ellison was elected. The story pushed through Hillbilly circles much like this...

Toothless moron 1: "some nigra hads been er electud and weres promisin to launch Jihad by swearin on da cuhran".

Toothless moron 2: "Well Bobby, wat dis nigra's name?"

Toothless moron 1: "merst be dat Usama one, I seens him on somethin during da wrastlin commericals, he be on Tv often..reckon must be him"

Toothless moron 2: "By golly, yous must be rights, I's gonnas tells evrybody!"

Not exactly, being from the Ozarks, I know a great deal about being a hillbilly.

It was more like this:

Toothless moron 1: Those Yankee idiots have elected a jihad supporing Muslim who likes to hang out with Lewis Farahakan.

Toothless moron 2: Isn't he that anti-Semitic jerk who wears the funny suits?

Toothless moron 1: Yeah, the Nation of Islam get-up.

Toothless moron 2: I'm not really excited about Shria law. Thank God for the 2nd amendment.


Whatever....

However, if you are using the enlightened election of Keith Ellison to show what dummies we hillbillies are, I have grave concerns about your other political choices.

[dean_acheson]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_E..._of_Islam_ties


I can't imagine why us dumb hillibillies might even qustion where this fellow's loyalties might lie....

[Ishmael]

Originally Posted by dean_acheson

I'm sorry, you just offended every serious book I've ever read on Foreign Policy. And sir, after a B.A. in American History, a M.A. in American Diplomatic History, another M.A. un U.S. foriegn policy, and a J.D. with an emphasis in International Law, that is more than one or two.

We 'installed' the Shah? Where did you get this? Do you really believe those stupid stories about Eliott Roosevelt?

We 'caused' tensions with the Arab world? I think that was a pretty tension filled bunch long before we came on the scene.

We 'installed' Saddam? What?

'Meddled' with others 'internal' affiars? Yeah, that's called 'foreign policy,' most governments practice it.

Regarding the Shah and meddling in other's internal affairs, I would point you to "The CIA and The Cult Of Intelligence", by John Marks and Victor Marchetti for the salient facts that we did indeed install the Shah in 1954 with the help of the mullahs to prevent Mossadegh from nationalizing Iran's oil. It also spotlights "meddling" in guatemala in 1958, Vietnam in the 1960's and Chile in 1973 in the first instance of what Naomi Klein writes about in "The Shock Doctrine".

Now it is true we didn't install Saddam, we just sold him the nerve gas he used in Halabja. Sort of like Halliburton selling Iran gas centrifuge technology in the 90's while Cheney was running the show there. Or Sibel Edmonds statements of how we allowed our nuclear technology to be stolen and sold to the A.Q. Khan network on the sly.

With all due respect to your history degrees, I am still reminded of the phrase from "The Quiet Man".

If you knew your country's history like you claim to...

[STEED]

I wonder. :hmm:

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/covers/full/1201_big.jpg

[elite_hunter_sh3]

Regarding the Shah and meddling in other's internal affairs, I would point you to "The CIA and The Cult Of Intelligence", by John Marks and Victor Marchetti for the salient facts that we did indeed install the Shah in 1954 with the help of the mullahs to prevent Mossadegh from nationalizing Iran's oil. It also spotlights "meddling" in guatemala in 1958, Vietnam in the 1960's and Chile in 1973 in the first instance of what Naomi Klein writes about in "The Shock Doctrine".

Now it is true we didn't install Saddam, we just sold him the nerve gas he used in Halabja. Sort of like Halliburton selling Iran gas centrifuge technology in the 90's while Cheney was running the show there. Or Sibel Edmonds statements of how we allowed our nuclear technology to be stolen and sold to the A.Q. Khan network on the sly.

With all due respect to your history degrees, I am still reminded of the phrase from "The Quiet Man".

If you knew your country's history like you claim to...

bingo.. now if the CIA hadnt done that, didnt go into Iraq, wasnt sending billions and billions of dollars in weapons, aircraft, bobmbs, missiles, and nukes to israel, 9/11 wud not have happen...

[dean_acheson]

Originally Posted by Ishmael

Regarding the Shah and meddling in other's internal affairs, I would point you to "The CIA and The Cult Of Intelligence", by John Marks and Victor Marchetti for the salient facts that we did indeed install the Shah in 1954 with the help of the mullahs to prevent Mossadegh from nationalizing Iran's oil. It also spotlights "meddling" in guatemala in 1958, Vietnam in the 1960's and Chile in 1973 in the first instance of what Naomi Klein writes about in "The Shock Doctrine".

Now it is true we didn't install Saddam, we just sold him the nerve gas he used in Halabja. Sort of like Halliburton selling Iran gas centrifuge technology in the 90's while Cheney was running the show there. Or Sibel Edmonds statements of how we allowed our nuclear technology to be stolen and sold to the A.Q. Khan network on the sly.

With all due respect to your history degrees, I am still reminded of the phrase from "The Quiet Man".

If you knew your country's history like you claim to...

Certainly the Agency was active in Iran, but we didn't install the Shah, that is simply incorrect, or "reinstall" him, as it were. Mossadegh's short sighted economic policies had already made him hugely unpopular with the Iranian people.

Sure, we played around in Guatamala, as well as most of Latin America. So what? What's your point? The US is a big evil bully? We supported dictators? We should just pull out of the world because we ain't worthy to carry Chavez's water?

I'm sure if you are a Marks fan, next you will be telling me to pick up something by that American hero Seymor Hersh. Naomi Klien? The anti-globalist hack? Nice authors there. Might as well trot out Noam Chomsky.

Cheney and Haliburton? Bush and the Rangers? Any other tired left-wing conspiracies you want to trot out? Iraq is all about the oil right? Exxon and Haliburton and the Trilateral Commission are all conspiring to take away our rights.

Did U.S. companies sell some pretty bad things to Iraq in the 80s? Sure:

http://jarrarsupariver.blogspot.com/...-chemical.html

Again, so what? So did France, so did Germany, so did alot of other places. Did we tell Saddam to gas his own people?

I know my country's history pretty well, I just don't agree with the knee-jerk leftwing conclusions that it's the most evil empire in the history of the world. I spent ten years in school embracing that philosphy, then moving away from it, the finding myself harshly disputing it. I've read Chomsky, I've read Howard Zinn, I've read Walter Lefaber. They are all full of crap. I spent enough time in the profession to know how to cherry pick facts, and know when I'm reading it.

Maybe you ought to pick up something by John Lewis Gaddis for a bit more nuanced view of world politics. Maybe you ought to read something by Robert Conquest for a little bit of context before throwing stones at U.S. foreign policy.

If you and Elite want to embrace a Ron Paul view of the world, that's your right, at least in the United States, but it's silly.

[SteminDemon13]

Go John McCain! We not only need someone that is good for our issues at home, but also one that is willing, like Cap, Lehman, and Reagan did in the 80's to fight the pork and actually build up our military instead of wasting trillions in BS R&D and cost plus fee nightmares. His record shows that he is true to his words about fighting pork barrel projects, supports meaningful hardware and supports our military. I support John McCain for president. I do not agree 100% on all of his ideas, but it is my belief that he is the best candidate for president and I wish him all the best.

Bush has thrown the money at the military, but he is blind to how it is being wasted and it is a shame. It is also a shame that for 16 years the boots on the ground have not had a credible NSFS platform. What they have recieved in those 16 years is a bunch of R&D papers and political hampering of proven systems.

[Iceman]

I happen to see the movie "Why We Fight" again this morning and it strikes me that John McCain had the courage to be in it and speak his mind concerning government policies.

[dean_acheson]

Looks like my guy is pretty much out now, with a third place in South Carolina.

Poor ol'Fred, and I feel sorry for my party...

[sonar732]

Looks like I'm going to be watching the morning news programs for highlights of the show tonight in South Carolina.

This is worse than the Bush-Mccain feud of '04. But than again...I don't remember Bush Sr taking pop shots at Mccain like Bill is at Obama.

Oh how I miss the Reagan-Mondale debate that everyone was laughing at the time.:rotfl::rotfl:

[sonar732]

Hillary-Edwards secret meeting

[GlobalExplorer]

Interesting thread for an outsider. Though it would be more enlightening if everyone wrote objectively not his opinions about who he wants to be elected.

Of course from here I have no idea. It just strikes me that there seems to be no serious Republican contender. Does that mean the serious Republican candidates have written off this election?