PDA

View Full Version : Media What has the Republican Party really changed about itself since 2008?


Direckshun
01-20-2010, 01:35 PM
Honest question.

I mean, they lost the Presidency in a landslide, and they gave Democrats huge majorities in both chambers.

Agenda.

Ideas.

Ideology.

Rhetoric.

Tone.

Attitude.

Approach to politics.

Anything. I'm serious.

RedNeckRaider
01-20-2010, 01:41 PM
Nothing they are the same dumps they were. All they did was let the left show their true self and suddenly the Repulicans look much better. The left is the much worse of two evils~

CoMoChief
01-20-2010, 01:42 PM
Nothing they are the same dumps they were. All they did was let the left show their true self and suddenly the Repulicans look much better. The left is the much worse of two evils~

agreed

Amnorix
01-20-2010, 01:43 PM
It's the economy, stupids...

RedNeckRaider
01-20-2010, 01:49 PM
It's the economy, stupids...

The first Republican since 1952 to hold the Mass. seat. Hell those people are so loony left they kept the embarrassment Ted Kennedy in that seat for 47 years. The problem is much deeper than the economy. If they can't win in Mass. they are in deep shit everywhere else~

Radar Chief
01-20-2010, 01:52 PM
Honest question.

I mean, they lost the Presidency in a landslide, and they gave Democrats huge majorities in both chambers.

Agenda.

Ideas.

Ideology.

Rhetoric.

Tone.

Attitude.

Approach to politics.

Anything. I'm serious.

I think they learned to STFU and let Democrats be Democrats. That’s usually enough to turn off the public. ;)

RJ
01-20-2010, 01:54 PM
The first Republican since 1952 to hold the Mass. seat. Hell those people are so loony left they kept the embarrassment Ted Kennedy in that seat for 47 years. The problem is much deeper than the economy. If they can't win in Mass. they are in deep shit everywhere else~


I think the real issue is that Americans are pissed. I know I am. I'm not pissed at either party in particular, but if I had to vote for something tomorrow I'd probably take my pissedness out on the incumbent. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that if there was a Republican president and congress, I'd be no less pissed at government than I am now, and maybe more so. They'd probably have me pissed for different reasons, but pissed is pissed.


RJ

Pissed off about being pissed off

Amnorix
01-20-2010, 01:55 PM
The first Republican since 1952 to hold the Mass. seat. Hell those people are so loony left they kept the embarrassment Ted Kennedy in that seat for 47 years. The problem is much deeper than the economy. If they can't win in Mass. they are in deep shit everywhere else~

You really and honestly don't know what you're talking about if you think the election here was a referendum on Obama, or if you think that Brown has even a 50/50 shot of retaining his seat past 2012.

Also, we had a Republican Senator from '63 or somesuch until '79. It's just THIS seat that has been Democratic since '52, which is hardly a surprise because Ted Kennedy held it for 40 years or whatever...

HonestChieffan
01-20-2010, 01:55 PM
We got rid of Bush.

RJ
01-20-2010, 01:58 PM
We got rid of Bush.


Which one?

The Mad Crapper
01-20-2010, 01:58 PM
Republican is just a word---

Are you a conservative? Thats all I want to know. I'm not voting for you if you say no.

talastan
01-20-2010, 02:01 PM
Honestly nothing of note has changed. The people though after eight years of Republican :BS: and one year under Obama's pseudo-socialistic principles have changed. Americans are finally standing up and paying attention once again to the leaders of this nation and holding them accountable.

RedNeckRaider
01-20-2010, 02:09 PM
You really and honestly don't know what you're talking about if you think the election here was a referendum on Obama, or if you think that Brown has even a 50/50 shot of retaining his seat past 2012.

Also, we had a Republican Senator from '63 or somesuch until '79. It's just THIS seat that has been Democratic since '52, which is hardly a surprise because Ted Kennedy held it for 40 years or whatever...

Spin all you want this was a huge loss to the left. You really and honestly don't know what you're talking about if you think the election there was not referendum on Obama and his shrinking approval rating~

Chocolate Hog
01-20-2010, 02:10 PM
Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin all are favorites still so nothing has changed.

Cannibal
01-20-2010, 02:10 PM
Spin all you want this was a huge loss to the left. You really and honestly don't know what you're talking about if you think the election there was not referendum on Obama and his shrinking approval rating~

I agree. It was a huge loss. Brown will be a 1 term guy though.

RedNeckRaider
01-20-2010, 02:13 PM
I agree. It was a huge loss. Brown will be a 1 term guy though.
Agreed I am still stunned he won to begin with~

BigRedChief
01-20-2010, 02:19 PM
I agree. It was a huge loss. Brown will be a 1 term guy though.a 2 year guy. He will lose in 2012.

Republicans are the same. They think that because voters are ticked off thats good for them and in a way it is but when you drill down their policies and politics are not okay with the majority.

HonestChieffan
01-20-2010, 02:19 PM
I agree. It was a huge loss. Brown will be a 1 term guy though.

Why?

Cannibal
01-20-2010, 02:20 PM
a 2 year guy. He will lose in 2012.

I agree with you. I guess I should have said, the remainder of this term.

Cannibal
01-20-2010, 02:21 PM
Why?

Because it's a very, very liberal state, or "Taxachussetts" as you would call it.

BigRedChief
01-20-2010, 02:22 PM
Why?Are you kidding? The mass dems will run a superstar in 2012 and wipe him out.

vailpass
01-20-2010, 02:30 PM
Spin all you want this was a huge loss to the left. You really and honestly don't know what you're talking about if you think the election there was not referendum on Obama and his shrinking approval rating~

Absolutely. It's intersting seeing the obamaites hanging on to their decaying dream.

Mile High Mania
01-20-2010, 02:31 PM
Someone said it earlier as best as you can sum it up... they watched the Libs take over the democratic party... and then you have the many things that Big O promised yet has failed to deliver. The democrats are their own worst enemy at this point...

mlyonsd
01-20-2010, 02:31 PM
Are you kidding? The mass dems will run a superstar in 2012 and wipe him out.

Curt Schilling?

mlyonsd
01-20-2010, 02:33 PM
Someone said it earlier as best as you can sum it up... they watched the Libs take over the democratic party... and then you have the many things that Big O promised yet has failed to deliver. The democrats are their own worst enemy at this point...

The party resembles nothing what it once did. People like my grandmother were staunch democrats but she would have switched parties by now if still alive.

The Mad Crapper
01-20-2010, 02:35 PM
Are you kidding? The mass dems will run a superstar in 2012 and wipe him out.

Caroline Kennedy?

King_Chief_Fan
01-20-2010, 02:36 PM
Someone said it earlier as best as you can sum it up... they watched the Libs take over the democratic party... and then you have the many things that Big O promised yet has failed to deliver. The democrats are their own worst enemy at this point...

my thoughts exactly.... It doesn't take much to look better than what is in office now

HerculesRockefell
01-20-2010, 02:37 PM
What have the Dems changed about themselves since '06?

It appears you're now going to attempt to run against George Bush for the 3rd straight cycle. You had no agenda in '06 except that the bums needed to be thrown out, Obama ran on Hope/Change and really didn't say what he was for, and his numbers continually drop once he actually defines his positions, and now it appears you're content with claiming that the Reps have no platform either.

Seriously, it's funny you guys claim that the Reps have no defined platform, when that's how you took power in the first place and it looks like there's a real chance you lose the House because people now have realized they don't like your policy positions.

NewChief
01-20-2010, 02:48 PM
One fundamental thing changed:

They became the minority, opposition party and changed their "angle." To see whether they've really changed or not, we'll have to wait a little bit.

Der Flöprer
01-20-2010, 02:56 PM
You know what's really scary? Who's next? What dipshit are we going to put into office next that's not going to change anything? We're so fucked...............

ROYC75
01-20-2010, 02:56 PM
It's the economy, stupids...

BINGO, reason I am calling for new blood in all the elections. Out with the old and in with he new, it's can't be any worst. Unless Obo hypnotizes them as they hit DC and become a new collections of progressive Obots.

vailpass
01-20-2010, 02:56 PM
One fundamental thing changed:

They became the minority, opposition party and changed their "angle." To see whether they've really changed or not, we'll have to wait a little bit.

But not near as long as you all thought 6 months ago huh?

ROYC75
01-20-2010, 02:59 PM
Honestly nothing of note has changed. The people though after eight years of Republican :BS: and one year under Obama's pseudo-socialistic principles have changed. Americans are finally standing up and paying attention once again to the leaders of this nation and holding them accountable.

I blame all politicians that have held office within the last 40 years, period ! Same old crap, year after year, just a R or an D on the end of the name.

ROYC75
01-20-2010, 03:02 PM
a 2 year guy. He will lose in 2012.

Republicans are the same. They think that because voters are ticked off thats good for them and in a way it is but when you drill down their policies and politics are not okay with the majority.

You are underestimating a lot of Republican voters. Many independent voters as well as conservative Dems.

The conservative movement is back in flow of things, all this Liberal crap is bad, always has been bad for the country. Both sides of the isle, Liberal, Progressives, whatever you want to call them. Wouldn't surprise me at all if the progressives call themselves something else by November just to save their butts.

The Mad Crapper
01-20-2010, 03:05 PM
You are underestimating a lot of Republican voters. Many independent voters as well as conservative Dems.

The conservative movement is back in flow of things, all this Liberal crap is bad, always has been bad for the country. Both sides of the isle, Liberal, Progressives, whatever you want to call them. Wouldn't surprise me at all if the progressives call themselves something else by November just to save their butts.

BRC is also mistaking the loyalty to Teddy as loyalty to the Dem party. The Massholes kept voting for him because of his seniority and power he weilded he was able to bring back alot of money to Mass.

But that's over so they will vote for whoever they think will get closer to restoring that power, and right now, Scott Brown has the lead.

fan4ever
01-20-2010, 03:08 PM
a 2 year guy. He will lose in 2012.

Republicans are the same. They think that because voters are ticked off thats good for them and in a way it is but when you drill down their policies and politics are not okay with the majority.

God that's funny. You just got your ass kicked in MA. and it's REPUBLICAN policies the majority don't like. Tell me another one.

wild1
01-20-2010, 03:13 PM
Most people are both very stupid and very self-serving. If their wallet is ok, the people in power are ok. The public even accepts a certain amount of corruption as part and parcel to the "sausage-making" that goes on in Washington.

So they sent the Democrats to Washington in the fall of 2008 to fix these problems, but they've done nothing to fix any of it and meanwhile have provoked the electorate grievously trying to ramrod a hugely unpopular health care bill through, using what amounts to open bribery, and brandishing all kinds of legislation that will amount to huge tax increases when the public is in no mood for it right now.

The public accepts a certain amount of corruption but what we've seen in the past year is beyond the pale. Add that to zero in terms of economic results, and the tax-raising attitude that Democrats don't care that you're suffering, they're going to take care of their own agenda - and you have a public that would have already been mad rushing out to the ballot box in a fury to throw out the b-stards.

Amnorix
01-20-2010, 03:25 PM
Spin all you want this was a huge loss to the left. You really and honestly don't know what you're talking about if you think the election there was not referendum on Obama and his shrinking approval rating~

Of course it was a huge loss. I didn't say otherwise.

But what I'm telling you is that Brown didn't run tying Coakley to Obama. He did make mention of Healthcare, that I won't deny. That was a reasonably big issue. But he tied Coakley to alot of LOCAL politicans and political issues that have not gone well for hte Democrats. Coakley herself was a boring candidate.

What makes me laugh is when you say "the election there". For me, it's HERE! I heard all the ads on the radio and tv. It wasn't like Brown beat up Coakley using Obama the way all the Democrats beat up all the Republicans in '06 and '08 by tying them to Bush. It wasn't remotely like that.

Amnorix
01-20-2010, 03:26 PM
Why?

He'll need AT LEAST, to be a moderate along the lines of Susan Collins and the other senator from Maine whose name I have blanked on, to have any shot at reelection.

And even then it might not be enough.

Amnorix
01-20-2010, 03:27 PM
Because it's a very, very liberal state, or "Taxachussetts" as you would call it.

We actually have a LESS than national average total tax burden here. We stopped being Taxachusetts over 10 years ago...

memyselfI
01-20-2010, 03:35 PM
They changed seats at the table. Got the Dems to fall into their tarp, er, trap and then watched and waited until they woke up and wondered WTF happened to their party and the policies.

Brilliant strategy, IMO.

Cannibal
01-20-2010, 03:35 PM
We actually have a LESS than national average total tax burden here. We stopped being Taxachusetts over 10 years ago...

I don't think of the state as Taxachusetts. I was repeating the stupid Republican talking point. Similar to when they refer to dem candidates as "Massachusetts Liberal".

wild1
01-20-2010, 03:36 PM
Of course it was a huge loss. I didn't say otherwise.

But what I'm telling you is that Brown didn't run tying Coakley to Obama. He did make mention of Healthcare, that I won't deny. That was a reasonably big issue. But he tied Coakley to alot of LOCAL politicans and political issues that have not gone well for hte Democrats. Coakley herself was a boring candidate.

What makes me laugh is when you say "the election there". For me, it's HERE! I heard all the ads on the radio and tv. It wasn't like Brown beat up Coakley using Obama the way all the Democrats beat up all the Republicans in '06 and '08 by tying them to Bush. It wasn't remotely like that.

I saw a focus group last night with some voters, and most had voted for Obama. About half of them voted for Brown and many were naming health care as a key issue. Another question was that when asked if they were satisfied with Obama thus far, none of them raised their hands to say yes.

So I definitely think there were national forces at work, although Coakley's gaffe-a-day final stretch run was certainly not helpful.

redsurfer11
01-20-2010, 03:47 PM
Honest question.

I mean, they lost the Presidency in a landslide, and they gave Democrats huge majorities in both chambers.

Agenda.

Ideas.

Ideology.

Rhetoric.

Tone.

Attitude.

Approach to politics.

Anything. I'm serious.




The GOP didn't change. The Democrats did. They turned into COMMIES.

NewChief
01-20-2010, 04:03 PM
Most people are both very stupid and very self-serving. If their wallet is ok, the people in power are ok. The public even accepts a certain amount of corruption as part and parcel to the "sausage-making" that goes on in Washington.

So they sent the Democrats to Washington in the fall of 2008 to fix these problems, but they've done nothing to fix any of it and meanwhile have provoked the electorate grievously trying to ramrod a hugely unpopular health care bill through, using what amounts to open bribery, and brandishing all kinds of legislation that will amount to huge tax increases when the public is in no mood for it right now.

The public accepts a certain amount of corruption but what we've seen in the past year is beyond the pale. Add that to zero in terms of economic results, and the tax-raising attitude that Democrats don't care that you're suffering, they're going to take care of their own agenda - and you have a public that would have already been mad rushing out to the ballot box in a fury to throw out the b-stards.

I think this is a fair assessment.

RedNeckRaider
01-20-2010, 05:30 PM
Of course it was a huge loss. I didn't say otherwise.

But what I'm telling you is that Brown didn't run tying Coakley to Obama. He did make mention of Healthcare, that I won't deny. That was a reasonably big issue. But he tied Coakley to alot of LOCAL politicans and political issues that have not gone well for hte Democrats. Coakley herself was a boring candidate.

What makes me laugh is when you say "the election there". For me, it's HERE! I heard all the ads on the radio and tv. It wasn't like Brown beat up Coakley using Obama the way all the Democrats beat up all the Republicans in '06 and '08 by tying them to Bush. It wasn't remotely like that.

I will concede to you as you were at ground zero and I had to rely on sound bytes. I still think this speaks to the overall public realizing Barry is in over his head and needs to be checked. I have a hard time believing this was just a vote against Coakley and Coakley alone. I do think the left will hang her out to dry and try to paint it as her failure alone~

|Zach|
01-20-2010, 05:45 PM
I will concede to you as you were at ground zero and I had to rely on sound bytes. I still think this speaks to the overall public realizing Barry is in over his head and needs to be checked. I have a hard time believing this was just a vote against Coakley and Coakley alone. I do think the left will hang her out to dry and try to paint it as her failure alone~

Do you even read the posts you respond too?

The Mad Crapper
01-20-2010, 05:48 PM
I will concede to you as you were at ground zero and I had to rely on sound bytes. I still think this speaks to the overall public realizing Barry is in over his head and needs to be checked. I have a hard time believing this was just a vote against Coakley and Coakley alone. I do think the left will hang her out to dry and try to paint it as her failure alone~

It was all about Obama last night. Let the O-bots recite their cue cards Axelrod handed out this morning. It keeps them amused, but don't try and argue with them. I mean, doctors don't try to cure the insane, they just treat the symptoms.

|Zach|
01-20-2010, 05:51 PM
It was all about Obama last night. Let the O-bots recite their cue cards Axelrod handed out this morning. It keeps them amused, but don't try and argue with them. I mean, doctors don't try to cure the insane, they just treat the symptoms.

I feel like I'm on acid.

ROFL
.

The Mad Crapper
01-20-2010, 05:54 PM
.

I feel like I'm on acid ie I feel like I am tripping because I don't believe what just happened. Sheesh.

|Zach|
01-20-2010, 05:57 PM
I feel like I'm on acid ie I feel like I am tripping because I don't believe what just happened. Sheesh.

Oh, I know what you meant.

LOCOChief
01-20-2010, 06:51 PM
Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin all are favorites still so nothing has changed.

You know really, what is the problem with Romney? They do all share one obvious characteristic and I'm wondering if this is the reason.

Honest question.

HonestChieffan
01-20-2010, 06:56 PM
http://chicagoboyz.net/wp-content/uploads/brown-change.jpg

HonestChieffan
01-20-2010, 06:58 PM
You know really, what is the problem with Romney? They do all share one obvious characteristic and I'm wondering if this is the reason.

Honest question.

I sorta like Romney but I have reservations. Mass Health Care is a huge money suck and its going to put the state in real trouble. And he is pretty much to the left side of republicans. Not as bad a Lindsey Grahamcracker or McCain but still to moderate for me. And hes too old line.

Bwana
01-20-2010, 07:10 PM
.

Chocolate Hog
01-20-2010, 07:33 PM
You know really, what is the problem with Romney? They do all share one obvious characteristic and I'm wondering if this is the reason.

Honest question.

All these "Republicans" are aginst government ran health care. What did Mitt Romney do when he was the governor of Massachusetts?

patteeu
01-20-2010, 08:33 PM
All these "Republicans" are aginst government ran health care. What did Mitt Romney do when he was the governor of Massachusetts?

He catered to his liberal constituency and worked pragmatically with his dem legislature. Anyone expecting Goldwater conservatism in MA state politics is smoking dope.

MarcBulger
01-20-2010, 08:58 PM
Went from 40 to 41 Senators...Ask me again after the Nov elections...

DJ's left nut
01-20-2010, 09:04 PM
You know really, what is the problem with Romney? They do all share one obvious characteristic and I'm wondering if this is the reason.

Honest question.

He's a mormon and Republicans are too stupid to get out of their own way.

He'll never win a primary despite being easily the best Republican candidate because the religious right won't vote for him.

He lost to John McCain. John. McCain.

By no measurement was McCain a better Presidential candidate than Romney but the religious whackos in the party couldn't get past his ideology.

DJ's left nut
01-20-2010, 09:09 PM
All these "Republicans" are aginst government ran health care. What did Mitt Romney do when he was the governor of Massachusetts?

Once again - billay proves himself ignorant.

The Republicans that are against 'government run' healthcare are against federally run healthcare.

Most don't give a large rat's ass what the individual states choose to do because that's between them and their citizens. Romney ran a state that clearly favored government run healthcare. That's their right, the people of MA will pay that particular bill and they'll deal with the consequences. I would have absolutely moved from the state had I lived there, as is my right.

But when you pass it on a federal level, where the hell am I going to move to?

That's certainly more nuanced than I'd expect you to understand.

dirk digler
01-20-2010, 09:17 PM
He's a mormon and Republicans are too stupid to get out of their own way.

He'll never win a primary despite being easily the best Republican candidate because the religious right won't vote for him.

He lost to John McCain. John. McCain.

By no measurement was McCain a better Presidential candidate than Romney but the religious whackos in the party couldn't get past his ideology.

I think Romney is going to be the nominee and certainly right now he is the top dog. As I learned yesterday and pointed it out his people ran Brown's campaign so that is a huge thing IMO. Plus he has done something the other potential candidates haven't done, he has kept his mouth shut for the most part.

morphius
01-20-2010, 09:24 PM
It seems that either party given full control will find a way to mess it up so badly that the public is forced to take notice and appropriate action.

Bearcat2005
01-20-2010, 09:28 PM
It seems that either party given full control will find a way to mess it up so badly that the public is forced to take notice and appropriate action.

government spending grows at a slower rate compared as a percentage of gdp when it is divided.

donkhater
01-20-2010, 09:39 PM
Most commentators last evening and this morning misread the results of this election. Most telling was the predictable response by Republicans saying it was a referendum on Obama.

In a way they are right, but only in the sense that he is in charge of the current administation.

The majority of people in this country are looking for change. Not take care-of-me-for-life-change, but remember-that-we-live-in-a-free-country type of change. Common sense change.

Bush, et.al. was crony central. War-mongering, privelage-seeking crony central.

Obama--not much difference. Only his cronies are labor and the watermelons.

THAT is why the Tea Party movement is what it is. Both parties are too arrogant enough to read the mood of this country properly.

NewChief
01-20-2010, 09:46 PM
Most commentators last evening and this morning misread the results of this election. Most telling was the predictable response by Republicans saying it was a referendum on Obama.

In a way they are right, but only in the sense that he is in charge of the current administation.

The majority of people in this country are looking for change. Not take care-of-me-for-life-change, but remember-that-we-live-in-a-free-country type of change. Common sense change.

Bush, et.al. was crony central. War-mongering, privelage-seeking crony central.

Obama--not much difference. Only his cronies are labor and the watermelons.

THAT is why the Tea Party movement is what it is. Both parties are too arrogant enough to read the mood of this country properly.

I agree with this to an extent. I think the Tea Party movement might actually be viable if they show that they'll take on the Republicans as readily as they take on the Democrats. That's my whole issue with this new found conservative fervor. It's suddenly kindled... but it seems to just be an assumed persona to attack Obama. If it's genuine, and they're willing to level it equally against Republicans (as you did in your post), then they might actually have some validity beyond just a new talking point for the GOP.

Dylan
01-20-2010, 10:55 PM
O's year of foreign-policy fumbles

By Peter Brookes
anuary 20, 2010

Let me be clear (as President Obama loves to say): After a year in office, there isn't much for this White House to brag about foreign policy-wise, in spite of rhetorical flourishes and grandiose promises.

Unfortunately, the Obama administration's campaign-style, "biography based" approach to international affairs just isn't making the grade, especially on today's weighty issues.

Iran: Tehran's nuclear (weapons) program advances despite our drawing of a line in the sand, after line in the sand -- after line in the sand. News that Tehran has made strides in developing nuclear weapons, not just enriching uranium, only darkens the outlook.

Obama's response? Keep on threatening tougher sanctions, even though we can't get Moscow or Beijing to agree to them -- while making plans to inevitably accept Tehran into the Mushroom Cloud Club.

And what about his snubbing of Iran's heroic dissident movement? Shameful.

North Korea: Pyongyang remains as troublesome as ever, immune to Obama's charms. It will likely light off another nuke this year -- and shoot more missiles in our direction. The "Norks" won't even return to the negotiating table.

China: The president's trip to Beijing last fall was a flop: He made no progress on opening the Chinese market to ease our $200-plus billion trade deficit, a would-be bennie to our still-stumbling economy.

Nor was Obama's personal intervention enough to get Beijing, the world's largest greenhouse-gas producer, onboard at the Copenhagen climate conference (not that it disappointed those who saw that treaty as an economic-growth killer).

Meanwhile, China's military build-up proceeds apace, scaring neighbors witless -- and now there are reports of Beijing extending its reach with its first permanent military base abroad, this one in the Arabian Sea.

Russia: Washington-Moscow ties are increasingly cold, despite White House affections. Sensing weakness, Russia is now holding America's European, anti-Iran missile-defense system hostage to strategic-arms-control reduction talks -- an Obama priority.

Worse, Washington cuddles with Moscow despite Russia's occupation of Georgia's South Ossetia and Abkhazia; we've even put Georgia's (and Ukraine's) NATO membership on ice to appease the Bear.

Obama's Russia policy has left other former Soviet states nervous, too. Skipping ceremonies on the 20th anniversary of the Berlin Wall's fall only bolstered the sense of indifference New Europe now feels from the New World.

And what exactly is it that we've gotten in return from the Kremlin?

Venezuela: Strongman Hugo Chavez continues to be problematic, cutting deals for Russian nuclear reactors and more arms, allowing narcotics traffickers to cross his country, harboring Colombian FARC terrorists and bankrolling the Latin American, anti-Yanqui Left.

And don't forget Chavez's "axis of unity" with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Bad actors keep entering the region via regular Venezuela-Syria-Iran flights.

The White House's reaction? We sent our previously expelled ambassador back to Caracas.

But it's not all horrible news.

Iraq: While the situation is fragile and violence persists (at much lower levels), the Bush surge is working. Critical elections come this spring and US combat troops are due out this summer.

Terror: While the "Crotch Bomber" shows the Obama team hasn't improved the homeland-security system, they've maintained the Bush-era Predator drone strikes on al Qaeda overseas -- an approach that's still working.

Unfortunately, Obama's outreach to the Muslim world (e.g., the Cairo speech) basically has had no positive effect.

AfPak: It's too early to give a grade on this with a new strategy just in place, but the fight against the terrorists on both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border remains a challenge. The question is: What will the prez do if he doesn't get his quick victory?

Egged on by media fawning, Obama wrongly assumed he could turn Obama-chic abroad into foreign-policy results. Oops: Turns out countries (and groups like al Qaeda) act to promote their own interests, uninfluenced by anyone's popularity.

The world needs US leadership to deal with big problems. More than that, this country needs traction on these issues -- something, regrettably, that Obama has yet to deliver.

Peter Brookes is a Heritage Foundation senior fellow and former deputy assistant secretary of defense. peterbrookes@heritage.org

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/year_of_foreign_policy_fumbles_pdxWhEUXv2hbJwf39SaXmJ#ixzz0dDivHBy9

Chocolate Hog
01-20-2010, 11:21 PM
Once again - billay proves himself ignorant.

The Republicans that are against 'government run' healthcare are against federally run healthcare.

Most don't give a large rat's ass what the individual states choose to do because that's between them and their citizens. Romney ran a state that clearly favored government run healthcare. That's their right, the people of MA will pay that particular bill and they'll deal with the consequences. I would have absolutely moved from the state had I lived there, as is my right.

But when you pass it on a federal level, where the hell am I going to move to?

That's certainly more nuanced than I'd expect you to understand.

Government is still Government stupid fuck. I'm "ignorant" when you don't agree with me go sit on a rusty nail. Like anyone whos name is "Djsleftnut" is brilliant. lol @ you trying to play it off like it has to do with Romneys religion is that why he lost New Hampshire & Florida too? Moron. So what you're saying is it's ok for Republicans to pass be government projects but when it's a Democrat it's wrong? I wonder why nobody takes the Tea-Party movement seriously.

Chocolate Hog
01-20-2010, 11:24 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2007-08-28-3422242271_x.htm

More proof Djsleftnut is nothing more than a uneducated cock bag. Hows that for fiscal conservatism?

Dylan
01-20-2010, 11:25 PM
Unfortunately, there are not enough wealthy people in this country to pay for a total welfare state. No?



Excerpts:
He could have changed the world.

Instead, Obama completely squandered his historic opportunity and is now poised to become the shortest-lived political dynasty in history.

Voters asked for no more back-room dealmaking. Obama's Democrats delivered a monstrous health-care bill that nobody wants, doesn't lower costs and bankrupts the country -- all drafted in secrecy.

Voters demanded an end to Washington corruption. They got sweetheart deals for labor unions and massive payoffs to lawmakers.

Voters begged for fiscal restraint. They got fiscal insanity.

One year ago, people marveled at the magic of Obama.

But the only magic trick he managed to pull off was to rescue the Republican party from the ash bin.

It is the only way to explain Scott Brown's stunning win last night in Massachusetts.

Especially to fill the seat of Ted Kennedy, who was by far more passionately committed to Democratic health-care efforts than anyone else in Congress.

churt@nypost.com



Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/bam_wake_up_smell_the_disaster_tbfkStZ753r5LTnvMM9pwI#ixzz0dDln8uzd

donkhater
01-21-2010, 08:21 AM
I agree with this to an extent. I think the Tea Party movement might actually be viable if they show that they'll take on the Republicans as readily as they take on the Democrats. That's my whole issue with this new found conservative fervor. It's suddenly kindled... but it seems to just be an assumed persona to attack Obama. If it's genuine, and they're willing to level it equally against Republicans (as you did in your post), then they might actually have some validity beyond just a new talking point for the GOP.

In a way they did, NewPhin. Many former Republicans were very disappointed in the last administration (yours truly included). While I may not have endorsed Obama, I certainly didn't vote for McCain either. Many either voted third party or stayed at home last fall.

The Mad Crapper
01-21-2010, 08:27 AM
He could have changed the world.

Instead, Obama completely squandered his historic opportunity and is now poised to become the shortest-lived political dynasty in history.

Voters asked for no more back-room dealmaking. Obama's Democrats delivered a monstrous health-care bill that nobody wants, doesn't lower costs and bankrupts the country -- all drafted in secrecy.

Voters demanded an end to Washington corruption. They got sweetheart deals for labor unions and massive payoffs to lawmakers.

Voters begged for fiscal restraint. They got fiscal insanity.

One year ago, people marveled at the magic of Obama.

But the only magic trick he managed to pull off was to rescue the Republican party from the ash bin.

It is the only way to explain Scott Brown's stunning win last night in Massachusetts.

Especially to fill the seat of Ted Kennedy, who was by far more passionately committed to Democratic health-care efforts than anyone else in Congress.




http://thepeoplescube.com/images/Medal_Order_of_Obama_160.gif
FRAUD