random off-topic thread

[Newman]

wolf, who's side of that civil war should WE be on? The Sunni side represented by al qaeda and the ba'athists of Saddam Hussein?

Or the Shia side represented by Iran and their leader Mamoud Ahmedinejad and the Ayatollah Khomeini, he of the hostage takers back in Jimmy Carter's reign?

It's their "country". Is it really a country? Aren't they more interested in religion, and being a Shia or a Sunni, than they are in being an Iraqi? How do WE fix that when we are a Christian nation, for the most part, and don't speak Arabic, don't relate to their bird selling culture, and have no business being over there except to steal their oil?

(See, here would be a perfect spot for Roxpert to jump in and clarify the situation with his mature, articulate prose).

[indianadrew]

Originally Posted by Newman

wolf, who's side of that civil war should WE be on? The Sunni side represented by al qaeda and the ba'athists of Saddam Hussein?

Or the Shia side represented by Iran and their leader Mamoud Ahmedinejad and the Ayatollah Khomeini, he of the hostage takers back in Jimmy Carter's reign?

It's their "country". Is it really a country? Aren't they more interested in religion, and being a Shia or a Sunni, than they are in being an Iraqi? How do WE fix that when we are a Christian nation, for the most part, and don't speak Arabic, don't relate to their bird selling culture, and have no business being over there except to steal their oil?

(See, here would be a perfect spot for Roxpert to jump in and clarify the situation with his mature, articulate prose).

it seems to me that the people that are pro-remaining in iraq are not really looking out for the best interest of our country. now we are in such deep crap. i hear people argue. "if we leave now all of the american lives we have lost in iraq would be in vain" it is my contention that all of our troops that have lost their lives have already done so in vain. bring them home now so we lose no more american lives for nothing.

it's not our job to teach these people what freedom is. they have to learn that for themselves.

[Newman]

Well said, Drew. And they have to want freedom for themselves. It can't be shoved down their throats by Uncle Sam.

Wasn't that one of the lessons of Vietnam, that Bush ignored? You can't make a people fight for their country, if they don't want to. A foreign superpower (that would be us) can't nation build, can't force democracy on a country who didn't ask for it, has no history of it, may not want it.

It has to come from within. The Iraqi people themselves have to want to be one unified country. No amount of surging is going to do that. The foreign superpower surge isn't going to make the Shia want to get along with the Sunni.

As Barack has said, "we need to be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in to Iraq." But we do need to get out, soon, in an orderly fashion.

[indianadrew]

it's been too damm quiet for too long. ihad to break up the silence.

hilary v barak really looks like it is going to get ugly folks. i still say that hilary is unelectable. the republican (mccain) that runs against her will dig up soooooooo much dirt on her she wont know what hit her.

i think barak v mccain will be the ballot. i am not quite sure who would be their running mates. mccain will probably go with rudy. is it possible for bill clinton to be hilarys VP?

HF what do you do for fun in armenia?

[John Cocktoston]

Originally Posted by indianadrew

hilary v barak really looks like it is going to get ugly folks. i still say that hilary is unelectable. the republican (mccain) that runs against her will dig up soooooooo much dirt on her she wont know what hit her.

FWIW, Obama had an interesting comment on that issue the other day. Essentially, he said that the Republicans would (or may already have) a dumptruck of dirt that they would unload on Hillary in the general election.

He then went on to say that he, on the other hand, has already been vetted in that regard by running against Clinton, Inc., which is probably about as fearsome and Machiavellian a political machine as you can muster. If they haven't come up with much on Obama, you can infer that the GOP won't either, since you know damn well that (a) the Clintons are actively looking for it and (b) they wouldn't hesitate to use it.

I think there's probably some truth in that, although the jury is still out on whether they haven't found anything or are simply waiting in the weeds to pull it out...

[indianadrew]

Danes nab suspects in cartoonist plot - Yahoo! News

talk about holding a grudge. people poke fun at the "christian" god and they sometimes catch some flack over it but this is just crazy. remind me never to draw a cartoon of mohamed.

[indianadrew]

i remember during the world series somebody mentioned how dustin pedroia was from the land of the pig people. well, i think this guy is the leader of that place.

[Newman]

The latest college killer, Northern Illinois University. Why? On Valentine's Day. Did he break up with his gf? Interesting that the media is keeping this relatively on the downlow. That's good if you think nothing can be learned from it, nothing can be done, and it only contributes to future copycats.

This guy was kicked out of the army. Psych discharge? Not much has come out on that. Haven't heard his boot camp buddies speaking out.

He was in a psych ward for a year after high school? Hello? Isn't this enough to keep the guy from ever getting guns legally? Can't we keep mentally unstable people from getting guns in America? Is that asking too much? Isn't it for the good of society?

I heard that 5 years had passed since he got out of the sanitarium? And because of that it is wiped off his record and he would be legally allowed to buy guns.

Do you HAVE TO HAVE guns? I don't own one. Would it be so draconium of a societal measure to ban people who have ever been in a psych ward from owning guns? Would the ACLU take the other side on this? Personally I'm sick and tired of people going schoolyard, destroying innocent lives just because their lives are crap.

[BigRapidsJackass]

A weird thing happened over the last few months: the public absolutely refused to accept the pre-ordained candidates the party leaders were handing them, Romney and Hillary.

So we may be left with Obama and McCain. And I hope that happens. I've mentioned before (way too often) that as a libertarian I am constantly forced to accept the lesser of two evils: more government involvement in private "moral" areas and meddling in foreign matters not essential to our security (Republicans) vs. bigger government and higher taxation (Democrats).

And superficially that's what Obama vs. McCain boils down to.

But here's what's weird: voting record-wise (and pre-campaign rhetoric-wise), Obama is more liberal than Hillary. But the electorate ain't buyin' it. Obama gets the more educated and more centrist vote. Hillary is now retreating into a John Kerry old Democratic corner: organized labor. And I think the electorate is right. That's why Obama's comment about Reagan's Rebublicans being the "party of ideas" is so telling. I sense that he doesn't fear new ideas, even if ostensibly non-liberal ones, and the public agrees with me.

A little different with McCain. It's clear that the public wasn't buying the Romney as "movement conservative" crap. Even though McCain presumably committed political suicide by proposing campaign finance reform and immigration reform, the public rewarded him for being more "authentic" than serial liar Romney. And despite what they'll tell you, Romney was the pre-ordained choice, the W of 2008. (Remember where he gave that "critical" speech on his Mormonism? At the George Bush 41 Presidential Library. Not a coincidence.) Weirdly enough, I would've probably supported the real Romney -- the one who was kind of an old-style country club Republican, the one who actually governed Massachusetts pretty well. The phony Romney gained no converts, and he lost people like me as soon as the campaign started for real last fall.

And I can live with McCain or Obama. It's not nearly as much of a stinker of a choice as, say, W vs. Kerry. Seems like the primary process, despite being stacked on purpose in favor of the pre-ordained candidates, actually worked.

[indianadrew]

Originally Posted by Newman

Do you HAVE TO HAVE guns? I don't own one. Would it be so draconium of a societal measure to ban people who have ever been in a psych ward from owning guns? Would the ACLU take the other side on this? Personally I'm sick and tired of people going schoolyard, destroying innocent lives just because their lives are crap.

i am sick of it too newman but there is really nothing that can be done to keep someone like this from getting a gun. if he or she has done nothing wrong, and has not been declared "legally insane" it is their right to own one. there is no litmus test to determine whether or not somebody is going to go postal.

i dont own any guns eithor newman, but i'll be dammed if the government will tell me i cant own one. out of my cold dead hands

[Newman]

The NIU killer had spent a year in a mental hospital right out of college. He had been kicked out of the army for unspecified reasons. Isn't this enough of a red flag? I'm just trying to get guns out of the hands of the obviously mentally ill, which Steve K_______ had a resume of.

So Jackass, who are you going to vote for? Obama or the Double Talk Express? McCain has flip flopped on two important issues to righties, tax breaks for the very wealthy and now he's in favor of torture because for some reason Conservative Evangelical Christians support torture! Talk about someone who is not authentic. McCain is a maverick. You don't know where he stands on any given day and seemingly he will do anything to get elected.

The NY Times snafu indicates that he's right in the middle of the lobbyist mess, even though he tried to get some kind of lobyying reform. He is old school Washington, stay the course. Vote for McCain is 4 more years of Bush. Where do they differ?

[BigRapidsJackass]

Newman, right now Obama would have my vote. Two main reasons:

1. Iraq. The full scope of the disastrous intervention has not even been realized yet. The latest: Turkey, upset at the prospect of a breakaway Kurdistan (the Kurds acting perfectly rationally when faced with the chaos in Baghdad), claims the "Iraqi" Kurds are making cross-border incursions. Turkey responds (or so they say) by sending their own forces into Iraqi Kurdistan. The Old Guard ("paleoconservative") wing of the Republican Party -- Bush 41, Scowcroft, Powell, etc. -- were right. Stability, even if it was the stability of a tyrant, was better than the alternative. I can't see how McCain, essentially a 100% supporter of the Bush 43 line on Iraq, can ever achieve a positive outcome. Maybe Obama can't either, but at least there's a chance.

2. Overall competence. Iraq is just the worst example of this Administration's blundering. McCain's instincts, I believe, are stronger than W's. But he exhibits a similar inattention to detail.

Don't get me wrong here. As I said, I'm more satisfied with this year's choices (if it is in fact Obama vs. McCain) than I've been with most presidential choices throughout my adult life. My dream outcome would be a modest Republican majority in both houses of Congress and Obama as President, since I'm afraid of the runaway excesses a strongly Democratic Congress will push on Obama. But that ain't gonna happen ...

[GerryInCS]

I just heard about the troubles in Armenia and was wondering if you're keeping away from the madness.

[Newman]

More info. Where is Armenia anyway? And why is Heltonfan there? Did he join the Colorado National Guard or something? Or is he scouting some Armenian lefty? Didn't even know they played baseball in Armenia.

[indianadrew]

i saw that too gerry and was wondering the same thing. it looks to me like there is trouble in yerevan, which is where he is.

newman, he is teaching english there.

STAY SAFE HF

the president of armenia has declared a state of emergency. he may not have internet access