Obama’s biggest flaw is that his lies keep changing. The “big lie” strategy favored by the left does require that the same lie (Bush Lied, 3 million homeless, anthropogenic global warming, heterosexual AIDS) be repeated constantly and consistently. Otherwise, the lefty’s have to start relying on facts--which would make them conservatives.
Clearly the Obamessiah needs a little more mentoring with Ayers and Wright.
>>Obama’s repeated statements that he will talk with enemies without preconditions BUT WITH PREPARATION.
I have the feeling that anyone as full of hope as yourself will be deaf to reality, but let’s give it a try.
At the CNN/Youtube debate, Obama made NO such qualification about “preparation.” That only came after people started to question him about meeting without preconditions. At that point, he conceded a bit and said that there would be “an agenda.” I had to roll my eyes at the man’s inexperience. Doesn’t he know that a key purpose of an agenda is to set preconditions?
Suppose, for instance, that a President Obama draws up an agenda for a meeting with North Korea that includes human rights. North Korea counters with an insistence that it will agree only if human rights is discussed in the context of American imperialism abroad and the oppression of minorities on American soil--no discussion of North Korea’s violations of human rights will be allowed.
At that point, Obama either agrees--in which he has essentially demonstrated that setting an agenda was a meaningless exercise, since he’s just going to talk about whatever North Korea talks about anyway--or he disagrees, which means that he did indeed have some preconditions in mind.
I don’t think Obama is even familiar with the most basic rules of negotiating. He needs to do a college workshop first. Or maybe attend a Model U.N.
There is nothing for the NYT to correct...it is you that is doing the misrepresenting. You ommitted
1. McCain’s second statement “If Senator Obama is favored by Hamas, I think people can make judgments accordingly.”
and
2. Obama’s repeated statements that he will talk with enemies without preconditions BUT WITH PREPARATION. Demanding another country does what we tell them to before the President even talks to them is a rediculous policy that hasn’t worked for decades. Gorbachev agreed to meet Reagan in four summit conferences around the world: the first in Geneva, Switzerland, the second in Reykjavík, Iceland, the third held in Washington, D.C., along with the fourth summit in Moscow, Russia. Reagan believed that if he could persuade the Soviets to allow for more democracy and free speech, this would lead to reform and the end of Communism.
Bsh has destroyed relations with just about everyone. Every bit of hard work that President Reagan did..has been destroyed by BUSH!
The real question is whether McCain will be more like Reagan or more like Bush.
I’m not convinced that the analogy in point #2 is apt. Further, I do not believe that stating pre conditions for a meeting is inappropriate. There is significant import to a meeting with our president. Our president is a man of tremendous influence and prestige. That prestige should not be diminished by acknowledging global pariahs and granting them meetings.
Further, there is no proof in support of the contention that Bush has “destroyed relations with just about everyone.” Quite the contrary.
Here’s an analogy: Bush is like Reagan because both will have begin truly fighting wars that will be viewed as victory after they leave office.
There is nothing for the NYT to correct...it is you that is doing the misrepresenting. You ommitted
1. McCain’s second statement “If Senator Obama is favored by Hamas, I think people can make judgments accordingly.”
and
2. Obama’s repeated statements that he will talk with enemies without preconditions BUT WITH PREPARATION. Demanding another country does what we tell them to before the President even talks to them is a rediculous policy that hasn’t worked for decades. Gorbachev agreed to meet Reagan in four summit conferences around the world: the first in Geneva, Switzerland, the second in Reykjavík, Iceland, the third held in Washington, D.C., along with the fourth summit in Moscow, Russia. Reagan believed that if he could persuade the Soviets to allow for more democracy and free speech, this would lead to reform and the end of Communism.
Bsh has destroyed relations with just about everyone. Every bit of hard work that President Reagan did..has been destroyed by BUSH!
The real question is whether McCain will be more like Reagan or more like Bush.
Perhaps you could be more specific as to just ‘which’ politically friendly relationships Bush has destroyed (?) England (don’t think so. . .) France (Sarkozy loves America AND respects . . .Bush). Germany. . .Ms. Merkel is a FOA, for sure. . .
Perhaps you are thinking of Ahmadinejad or Chavez. . .or perhaps, just the ‘Hamas collective’ or you are thinking of those ugly American messages from Al Qaeda.
Meantime, Obama and Hillary have had to apologise to Canada. . .have threatened our good friend Columbia; have offered - without any authority to do so - veiled threats to China. . .
Also, beyond their totalitarian proclivities there is simply no legitimate comparison between Russia and Iran - or their Leadership or Reagan’s efforts and Obama’s musings. . .
That said, agree that McCain needs to decide whose footsteps he will follow. His own, are not big enough.
From now til November it’s full steam ahead for the MSM and the Obama campaign. Expect to see it all, lies, half-truths, and spin. The NYTs, Newsweak, Time, the big nets…
Something happened in the election of 2000. Something in the liberal mind snapped...they still cannot quite believe that Gore was not elected and they will do whatever is necessary to make Barry O the next POTUS.
Be interested to know if anybody knows how we can counter this...still millions read and believe whatever is in the NYTs.
I have a close work-associate who swears that the TIMES is just a neutral observer...nothing I can say, no evidence makes a bit of difference.
>>Obama’s repeated statements that he will talk with enemies without preconditions BUT WITH PREPARATION.
I have the feeling that anyone as full of hope as yourself will be deaf to reality, but let’s give it a try.
Miss Orange, I salute your humanitarianism.
However, the individual obviously suffers from an acute and incurable affliction. He is obviously in the final stages of a relatively new and deadly disease, Obamorrhea. Much like the tertiary stage of syphilis, the progression of Obamorrhea to its tertiary phase will have caused the disease to breach the blood/brain barrier, making it incurable. Crossing into the brain, the centers of logic and reason are quickly and irreversibly destroyed. Leg sensations and tingling in the grion region are not uncommon signs. Not even the strongest tonic of truth will put the sufferer into remission, nor reverse the permanent damage to the cognitive sphere.
One telling symptom is relying on that old refrain, “what will the rest of the world think of the US”? It is almost embarrassing to point out to these people what the rest of the world would think if Obama’s rapid withdrawal from Iraq were put into place. The rest of the world would think that the US is as unreliable as ever, promising to stand with a nation and then beating a hasty retreat. They would witness the ensuing chaos and genocide that would naturally follow from the vacuum of political will. The rest of the world will remember how our departure from Vietnam led to a massacre of US allies in the South, and how it allowed a Marxist like Pol Pot to exterminate over 1 million of his own people. The rest of the world will never, ever, trust the US to honor its word again.
That would be a logical thought process, but those afflicted with Obamorrhea lost those mental faculties via the disease.
We can only hope for a cure, and pray that the Obamorrhea outbreak was not part of a US government plot intentionally introduced into the US population.
Wouldn’t it a least be appropriate to use the whole statement from Barack’s website?
Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.
It’s a shame that as the old paper news organizations see their paper circulation drop, their journalistic standards are in a race with their readers to hit the bottom.
So many of the “authors” of these hit pieces have no discernable biography or background. When you look for them in their publications, whether the New York Time or the Washington Post, you only get a list of the columns they have written.
Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.
this is just plain silly. Vague empty platitudes that mean nothing in the real world.
The Iranians have been negotiating with the “west” for years. The EU three have been lead around endlessly by the mullahs and all the while the mullahs were advancing thier drive toward nuclear power.
further, the Iranian government has stated repeatedly that it will not abandon its nuclear ambitions. So this whole idiotic passage is a loser from the start.
this kind of rhetoric might impress someone in high school but the world demands hard headed adults who understand both the rules and the stakes.
The New York Times will be working overtime to introduce their former “Maverick” to the politics of personal destruction. Say what you like, but John McCain is the Republican nominee for president and unless you relish an Obama or Clinton II administration, our choice is to support him or stay home.
Now that Barack Obama is almost certain to be the Dem nominee, the media will now go into full damage mode. Damage to John McCain that is. The challenge to all who either read, post to, or host personal blogs, will be to be on the MSM like .... well what ever cliche meets your mood.
“We have entered an era in which leading news organs will intentionally and persistently misinform their readers in order to achieve a political objective-- . . .”
We had already entered this era by 1966, at least. So where have you been?
Their chief means of doing this is by what they choose to not report, or to not include in what they do report.
It has been nothing but propaganda for almost three generations, which is precisely why we are in the political fix we are now in.
This country is about to elect an avowed Marxist as President. This is not because he is necessarily dishonest about his true ideology, although he is just to the extent necessary; it is because his true ideology has been made acceptable to nearly half of the American people by the incessant brainwashing of a corrupted mass media and a hijacked educational system over a period of at least 50 years.
The media is having orgasms over him because they finally have a snake oil salesman who can turn a profit on their long term investment and close the deal on the suckers.
I’m confounded at the low-level thinking of you bloggers:
“Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.”
That is precisely what sets Obama apart. Communication without threat and diplomacy are key. Is your ego blind to this basic fact? Granted, it is something we haven’t seen from a politician so you are not familiar with the concept; yet it is precisely why we’re bankrupting our country with a billion+ dollar war, because we have a blundering idiot president who can’t speak with diplomacy and authority - he had no other choice, but brute force. Communication with preconception is strength not a weakness - try it sometime, if your ego will let you.
There is a difference between Iran and Ahmadinejad. Moreover, who cares if the US meets with Iran unconditionally. They aren’t going to make us do something just from talking to them.
I’m confounded at the low-level thinking of you bloggers:
“Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.”
That is precisely what sets Obama apart. Communication without threat and diplomacy are key. Is your ego blind to this basic fact? Granted, it is something we haven’t seen from a politician so you are not familiar with the concept; yet it is precisely why we’re bankrupting our country with a billion+ dollar war, because we have a blundering idiot president who can’t speak with diplomacy and authority - he had no other choice, but brute force. Communication with preconception is strength not a weakness - try it sometime, if your ego will let you.
The heartbreak of Obamorrhea on display. And with BDS complications. Sad
But thank you for the 1984-ish phrase
Communication with preconception is strength not a weakness
. It is priceless to imagine that just communicating without any sort of conditions to even begin discussions can ever get anywhere.
