Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2014 16:40:56 GMT -5
www.nytimes.com/2014/03/03/world/europe/pressure-rising-as-obama-works-to-rein-in-russia.html?_r=0"Mr. Rubio, who opposed authorizing force in Syria, agreed that that conflict had serious ramifications for American interests. But he said the showdown in Crimea was about freedom itself and the hard-fought American victory over totalitarianism in the Cold War. In that sense, even Republicans who opposed Mr. Obama in Syria were pushing for a hard line against Mr. Putin. “The very credibility of the post-Cold War world and borders is at stake here,” Mr. Rubio said in an interview." So here is the rhetoric from the right, such as it is. Somehow this situation is about a vague "freedom itself". How about my "freedom" from having my country sucked into another unnecessary confrontation? And even lamer, Putin is threatening our "victory over totalitarianism in the Cold War". I think "victory" is also in the eye of the beholder. Sadly, Rubio is one of the right-wing blowhards who might make a run for the White House in 2016. If there is still a White House. Sorry! Rubio is not a so called Right wing! He is more left in Repukes clothing! AKA Democrap! He support Amnesty for Illegal scums!
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Mar 7, 2014 23:43:53 GMT -5
Do the Republicans really care what's happening in the Ukraine? I seriously doubt it. But they are happy they have another club to hit Obama on the head with. Which is fine, but Obama has already had his last election. Do they think that convincing the voting public that Obama is the worst president ever going to translate into a GOP president in 2016? If so, I think they are assuming a lot. Hillary is not Obama. I think voters can tell the difference.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Apr 5, 2014 2:23:18 GMT -5
I heard little Bobby Jindal on the radio the other day, and I forget what he was talking about, but he mentioned the "liberal media" as a pejorative more than once. That attitude might make it hard for him to run for President as a uniter, not a divider.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Apr 30, 2014 23:20:47 GMT -5
blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/04/30/ted-cruz-u-s-needs-to-be-voice-for-freedom/?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird“I think it is a mistake to confuse war weariness with an unwillingness of the American people to defend our national security,” Mr. Cruz said. “I think there is a big difference between not wanting us to play role of the world’s policeman and not wanting to send in military to try to produce democratic utopians in distant lands, neither of which are tasks for which the military is particularly well suited for nor is it I think their job.” Mr. Cruz’s comments come as he continues to put foreign policy daylight between himself and Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.), another tea party-affiliated Republican with 2016 ambitions. Mr. Cruz called on the White House to be “an outspoken voice for freedom” even though he said “no reasonable person wants to see direct military conflict with Russia.” So that's Cruz's alternative to Obama's crappy foreign policies? He'll be more of a "voice for freedom"? Whoopie.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on May 15, 2014 14:41:48 GMT -5
The right's latest smear against Hillary..."brain damage". LOL. When a fat turd like Karl Rove makes the accusation, I say "hooray". If the GOP really wants to start getting anything but the old white male vote, I don't think this smear is going to do it. I think it might backfire with the young female vote the GOP needs to win. Especially when the GOP nominates some anti-reproductive-rights MALE governor or Congressman.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Jun 7, 2014 22:21:08 GMT -5
www.thepcmdgazette.com/news/rand-paul-lets-trade-5-democrats-not-5-taliban/"Sen. Rand Paul got a good response from his joke that was inspired by the Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl release, yet several liberals got upset. ABC news reported that Rand Paul received many cheers at the Texas GOP convention in Fort Worth when he said, “Mr. President, you love to trade people. Why don’t we set up a trade. But this time, instead of five Taliban, how ’bout five Democrats.” “I’m thinking John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi. Couldn’t we send them to Mexico?” The Mexico comment was referring to U.S. Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi, who says he accidentally crossed the border from California more than two months ago with some guns in his car. He legally owns the firearms, but they are unlawful to bring into Mexico. Paul’s remarks come as the potential presidential candidate tries to broaden his appeal to not only a wider swath of the Republican Party, but also to some Democrats."
I'm not quite sure how that joke could broaden his appeal to "some Democrats".
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Jul 6, 2014 0:02:14 GMT -5
So this is the supposed nightmare scenario for the Democrats...The GOP keeps the house, take the Senate in 2014. 2016 comes around, and Hillary loses because she is a crappy campaigner. So 2017 rolls around, the GOP has scored the trifecta, and liberals are wailing and crying and feeling sorry for themselves. What a bunch of wusses. They forget this is a long game, and the GOP will fall on their asses because they really have no solutions for the problems to come IMHO. The free market will not defeat global warming, nor will austerity solve the end of the globalization process. There's nothing else left to globalize, and problems are still growing. And all the rotten boomers like Rush Limbaugh will be on the golf course saying, "We've got ours, so screw the Millennials". Let's hope I'm wrong...
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Jul 6, 2014 14:01:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Jul 27, 2014 13:24:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Oct 6, 2014 21:30:57 GMT -5
www.nationalreview.com/article/389598/neocons-return-eliana-johnson"The neocons are back. That is, at least in Marco Rubio’s world. The Florida senator and potential 2016 presidential candidate has, since his election in 2010, regularly consulted with and sought the advice of top neoconservative writers and policymakers, several of whom served in the administration of George W. Bush. His loose circle of advisers includes former national-security adviser Stephen Hadley, former deputy national-security adviser Elliott Abrams, Brookings Institution scholar and former Reagan-administration aide Robert Kagan, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, and former Missouri senator Jim Talent." I guess if you liked GWB, Marc Rubio is your man. Not that Obama's foreign policy is much different.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Nov 5, 2014 19:04:05 GMT -5
www.nationalreview.com/article/392108/walkers-win-mario-loyola"The most important election in the country yesterday was the gubernatorial race in Wisconsin. In its historic implications, Scott Walker’s victory was on a par with the GOP’s winning control of the Senate, arguably as important as all the other gubernatorial and congressional elections put together. And the reasons have nothing to do with his presidential prospects. Walker has now proven that his reforms in Wisconsin are both a model for conservative reform and a winning electoral strategy. But those reforms still have a long way to go. The crucial question was whether Wisconsin’s voters were going to give him the chance to keep pushing." I beg to disagree, Koch puppet Scott Walker's reelection has everything to do with the GOP's choice for Prez in 2016, which is why he has been getting so much glowing press coverage post-election. I'm just wondering if he is going to be going up against Jeb Bush, another guy with fabulous connections. Could be fun.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Dec 8, 2014 22:55:16 GMT -5
Here's how 2016 will go down: Jeb will be the GOP nominee going up against Hillary. (Actually, I'm more sure about the Jeb part than the Hillary part). Jeb will win in a squeaker. Then you righties should chill out because you own the Congress AND the WH. But be careful what you wish for: We all know Jeb is a RINO, and the far right may revolt. Could be fun!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2014 1:13:14 GMT -5
Here's how 2016 will go down: Jeb will be the GOP nominee going up against Hillary. (Actually, I'm more sure about the Jeb part than the Hillary part). Jeb will win in a squeaker. Then you righties should chill out because you own the Congress AND the WH. But be careful what you wish for: We all know Jeb is a RINO, and the far right may revolt. Could be fun! If the Repukes made liberal Jeb run! It will piss off Regular American conservatives and Independents! as I said elections is Fixed. Why bother voting!
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Dec 9, 2014 12:55:17 GMT -5
Here's how 2016 will go down: Jeb will be the GOP nominee going up against Hillary. (Actually, I'm more sure about the Jeb part than the Hillary part). Jeb will win in a squeaker. Then you righties should chill out because you own the Congress AND the WH. But be careful what you wish for: We all know Jeb is a RINO, and the far right may revolt. Could be fun! If the Repukes made liberal Jeb run! It will piss off Regular American conservatives and Independents! as I said elections is Fixed. Why bother voting! You could put that in the "Democracy. Who needs it?" thread too!
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Dec 14, 2014 14:05:26 GMT -5
www.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/us/politics/gop-hopefuls-honing-attacks-against-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0"So to an unusual degree, given that she holds no office, Republican White House hopefuls are pitching their potential candidacies in relation to Mrs. Clinton’s, building their message around her strengths and weaknesses and making the case for why they are best suited to challenge her, according to those who have spoken to them. These people — donors, operatives and advisers — talked on the condition of anonymity to avoid publicly betraying the confidence of powerful officials who may seek the presidency. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, for example, has argued that his noninterventionist outlook on foreign policy would offer unique advantages in a head-to-head race against Mrs. Clinton. His argument: by 2016, Mrs. Clinton will be viewed as a champion of American military action abroad, alienating younger voters of both parties exhausted by a decade of wars. Given the hawkishness of his likely Republican rivals, he alone, Mr. Paul says, can appeal to such disaffected youth. It is a message Mr. Paul has delivered repeatedly, to the likes of David and Charles Koch, the billionaire conservative industrialists, according to a person familiar with their conversations." Rand almost had me there with his anti-interventionist message, until I read the last line. One more Koch toady. I suppose the Democrat will be the least bad, as usual. But I am happy to hear that younger voters may be turning against US imperialism overseas.
|
|