Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Why should I vote for Hussein - An answer

A blogger named justfred has stepped up. Let's see what he has written. My comments are in italics.

First and foremost because he will truly unite the nation, restore respect for the Office of the President domestically and the nation, world wide. In the past our nation has been seen, as Ronald Reagan described, as the shining city on the hill - a beacon of freedom, democracy, hope and success of the human spirit. This image was damaged during Vietnam, restored by Reagan and Bush 41, but tinged by Clinton and destroyed by this administration.

What proof do you have of any of the above claims? He has demonstrated that he is a partisan Democrat and his leadership skills have not been extended past being a "community organizer." As for the rest of the world, remember that countries do not have "friends." Countries have "interests." The rest of the world will love us as long as we do what they want, and dislike us when we do things they do not like.

Is it your claim that Hussein will do things that will not be in our self-interest, but instead be in the interest of the United Nations?


How can we be the leader of the free world when we won't even talk to other countries? To quote JFK, 'We should never negotiate out of fear, but we should never fear to negotiate.'

Out of context quotes from a JFK speech aside, do you understand that Hussein has said he would meet any country...and that would include terrorist sponsoring countries....without pre-conditions.

Now, since you brought up JFK, do you remember that he met with Khrushchev with no pre conditions?


The parties reached no agreement on any set agenda or proposals prior to their meeting in Vienna... By all accounts, including Kennedy's own, the meetings were a disaster. Khrushchev berated, belittled, and bullied Kennedy on subjects ranging from Communist ideology to the balance of power between the Soviet and Western blocs, to Laos, to "wars of national liberation," to nuclear testing. He threw down the gauntlet on Berlin in particular, all but threatening war.

...

Reston reported that Kennedy said just enough for Reston to conclude that Khrushchev "had studied the events of the Bay of Pigs" and that he had "decided that he was dealing with an inexperienced young leader who could be intimidated and blackmailed." Kennedy said to Reston that Khrushchev had "just beat [the] hell out of me" and that he had presented Kennedy with a terrible problem: "If he thinks I'm inexperienced and have no guts, until we remove those ideas we won't get anywhere with him. So we have to act."


Link

Some historians think that after the meeting Kennedy felt he had to make some dynamic move to establish his credibility and that was increasing support for Vietnam. A deadly unintended consequence of a foreign policy mistake by a inexperience and young President.

Did you see the throngs who came to see Obama in Berlin? Do you think they did so because they are anti-American? No - they are pro-American, but just confused because they no longer regognize the country.

Actually I think a goodly portion came for free beer and rock and roll. But, who cares? Germany is anti-war in Iraq and Europe is rapidly coming under the control of Muslims. We need to start learning how to do without them, now.

On defense, Obama recognizes that our troops are spread out too thinly and overtasked. When GWB campaigned in 2000 he reported that two divisions would have to report 'Not ready for duty, sir' - well how many do you think are NOW in that position? We are sending back soldiers who have been wounded, mentally and physically, for their third or fourth tours in Iraq. We are sending back those who cannot wear a helmet or carry their TA-50. We need to reconstitute much of our military, but we cannot do so while the rotations of our fighting forces require them to spend more time in combat than they are in CONUS.


Again you make a claim but offer no proof. And you also say is that Hussein will pull back to the US. There is a word for that, and it is RETREAT. Our enemies will gave no problem understanding that even if you and Hussein do not.

He will get our troops out of places which are optional, to which we should have never gone in the first place - and then use a rested and rebuilt military to help catch OBL and bring those who attacked us to justice.

And your point is that Clinton shouldn't have gone to Kosovo?? As for catching OBL, I am all for that, but think that killing his supporters should be our first priority. After all, they are the ones who will attack.

And what do you mean with, "bring those who attacked us to justice?" Shall we have a full US justice type trial, or just kill'em?? Palin said it right when she said Hussein is worried more about reading them their rights than fighting them.


He will bring common sense back to US economics. He will increase federal receipts, lower deficits and debt, and quit rewarding companies for shipping US jobs overseas. He will tie the economy to new industries and technology - like those in energy production - which will create jobs while lowering our dependence on foreign oil.

How will he increase federal receipts? The answer is, by tax increases that will kill the economy.

As for oil, his energy plan is for us to inflate our tires. He opposes drilling in the US which is the only thing that will drop the price of oil back to the $20-$30 range in an acceptable time frame and get the economy moving. As for "alternative fuels," why doesn't he join McCain and simply say, "All of the above?"


He recognizes that the future of this country lies in our young people, and will invest in education. Not just throw money at the problem, but invest money, time and champion educational programs from the bully pulpit to make it more of a national and personal priority.

How much more money do you want to invest in education? The current system, with the tests, etc., has shown some modest improvement. Will he increase Federal oversight? Of course not. He is a Democrat and the Democrats are married to the Teacher's unions. He proposes more of the same.

How many more reasons do you need?

Well, one would have been nice. But all you have given me is a bunch of claims with no proof. Remember, hope is not a strategy.

9 comments:

  1. I knew I was wasting my time, but decided to try to educate you.

    However, you have again proven that it is impossible to educate someone who is so ill-informed that he thinks Obama's energy program is ONLY tire inflation; that his economic program is ONLY raising taxes; that his education program is giving more money to teachers unions; calls our historical allies names; obfuscates, lies and does not even know the candidate's name.

    No wonder no one responds to you. You are pathetic and hopeless and a liar.

    You said my post would be treated with respect. You don't even know the meaning of the word.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A harsh, but accurate assessment, IMHO.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am pleased to see that you agree with me. Actually I thought I was too soft....

    ReplyDelete
  4. I was talking about justfred's comment.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oh really?? Well that's a shock!

    ;-)

    Actually I was too nice to justfred. He has a history of personal attacks, some worse than the one here.

    And he provided no proof, just claims. Of course since Hussein has no real resume, all he can do is talk about hope and change.

    Perhaps you would care to answer the question?

    I will treat it as a post, with your "claims" and/or "facts" followed by my comments.

    Here's your chance to become famous!

    ReplyDelete
  6. You must think I'm stupid, because you'd write a new post instead of responding in the thread, just as you have with past comments I've made.

    You'd then be selective in citing quotes and stretch them out of context to fit into your POV, as with your characterization of Obama's energy plan as 'keeping the tires well-aired'.

    Not gonna play that. Wouldn't be prudent.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well, I don't deny that you are clueless, but I never thought you would run and hide.

    BTW - Your claim is wrong. In the first post on this subject I wrote.

    "I promise your reason(s) will be treated with respect and displayed as a Post rather than hidden as a Comment."

    You can then look at justfred's comment and see that when I posted it I did not leave out a single word.

    I'll give you the same deal.

    You've just been raised.

    Wanna play??

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm not hiding, I just refuse to engage in a debate when you'll oversimplify, insult, and otherwise attempt to vilify me in a post where you can quote selectively without engaging in a real debate.

    I promise your reason(s) will be treated with respect and displayed as a Post rather than hidden as a Comment

    Nah, if you dismiss Obamas' energy proposal as being about proper tire inflation, you're clearly incapable of fulfilling your promise as you give it.

    I'll give you the same deal.

    Which is why I turn it down.

    You've just been raised.

    Wanna play??


    No, I don't want to be played, but you can't tell the difference.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Scared, eh?

    I said I would post everything you write. So here's your chnace to explain Hussein's energy policy.

    But you won't because his policy is to do whatever Nancy Pelosi and Harry "The War is Lost" Reid tell him to. He wants high gasoline prices.

    Oh well, if you decide to let me know. In the meantime I must say you are showing that you are all hat and no cattle.

    ReplyDelete