BTW, I casme up with the following pertinent joke about Jimmuh---
What do you call a former president from Georgia who hugs a Hamas thug?
DHIMMI CARTER.
LOL, that’s good.
People want “change,” but they also want national security (well, not his hardcore leftist supporters, but everyone else), so I have to hope that will save us from Obamania.
People do not want Bush/McCain style “National Security” in which we have squandered both hard and soft power on unnecessary wars. America is much weaker than she was 8 years ago both economically and militarily, whether or not you care to admit it.
Uh-huh. Even if I accepted that assertion--which I don’t--surely Obama’s abject surrender policy is not the ideal alternative? Even Hillary is more credible on foreign policy than Obama.
All you can do is distort and smear. ("Abject Surrender"). Obama is talking about using soft power as opposed to blowing our military capabilities needlessly. Had we done that, we might not be in the mess we’re in.
Why do you think Obama has been endorsed by Hamas? They know a surrender--I’d better not type “monkey” or that will be construed as a racist remark--biped when they see one.
All you can do is distort and smear. ("Abject Surrender"). Obama is talking about using soft power as opposed to blowing our military capabilities needlessly. Had we done that, we might not be in the mess we’re in.
this is pure speculation. What jvf asks us to do is believe that his unfounded hypothesis is correct. Based on what? Can we discuss those occassions when “soft power” actually accomplished anything? I’m sure the list is quite long, right?
I wonder if the issue is ‘soft power’ versus ‘hard power’ or whether, as citizens (and voters), we trust the judgment and experience of the particular candidate to know which to use. My concerns were raised when Obama declared in advance that he would talk to anyone, which he then modified by saying that he would, of course, prepare before meeting. Seems to me a thoughtful person would take the position that it depends on the circumstances and that taking such a unilateral position in advance is no more useful that claiming he would always send in the marines. We are looking for adults to fill the office of President.
I am young, so I could be wrong, but didn’t Truman attend Yalta because Roosevelt was dead?
I know lefties have the view that history began on the day they were born, but it’s not an excuse for a lack of basic education. ‘The Big Three”, i.e. Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill attended Yalta. If I were you, I’d apply for a job as a history advisor with the Yobama campaign; you’d fit right in.
Mr. Kelly had more time to research his column of May 9, 2009, then I did in a blog post, but he hit every point.
It is nice to see great minds think alike and better yet to see the facts get out! I couldn’t get anyone to link mine, but Mr. Kelly’s got the word out that Obama is a lightweight. As Kennedy said of Kruschev, “He beat the hell out of me,” and Obama is levels below Kennedy.
