![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Doesn't _anybody_ on _either_ side actually _read_ the crap they puke forth unto
the 'net...? OK, so a lot of the limpdick beckerheads are in a tizzy: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...rpower-like/4/ because they claim Obama said: "It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower, and when conflicts break out, one way or another we get pulled into them," Obama said. "And that ends up costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure." Er, OK...so what's the big deal, you might ask? The left-wingnuts are defending it by saying that the "like it or not" bit goes not with being "...a...superpower," but with the getting pulled into conflicts and the costs of being so pulled. OK, fair enough, seems correct, and the quote above, as cited by the right-wingers themselves, would support that defense of Obama. OTOH, all of the left-wingnuts I've seen have used this version: "It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower. And when conflicts break out, one way or another, we get pulled into them." which would tend to support the beckerhead criticism of the remarks. So, what did he actually say? The WH release uses the right-wingnut version and the actual speech itself tends to support the WH release pretty clearly. So what started the whole silly flap? Apparently, it started when a beckerhead and an Obamaniac got into it on some cable news show and the only part addressed or mentioned was, "Whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower." (sic), with the BH calling such a remark "un-American" (which it would have tended to be had it been remotely accurate) and the OM basically defending it by saying that many in the US don't want the US to be "a dominate military superpower" (likely true enough, but there is no indication that Obama wants to be included in or in any way supports that "many" and IAC, is immaterial in this context) and neither of them OR the "news" staff checked out the whole thing. And apparently, none of the above-mentioned has bothered to check it out since OR even read their own "analysis" of it all. Sheesh, R |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 15, 12:32*pm, wrote:
Doesn't _anybody_ on _either_ side actually _read_ the crap they puke forth unto the 'net...? OK, so a lot of the limpdick beckerheads are in a tizzy: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...a-superpower-l... because they claim Obama said: "It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower, and when conflicts break out, one way or another we get pulled into them," Obama said. "And that ends up costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure." Er, OK...so what's the big deal, you might ask? *The left-wingnuts are defending it by saying that the "like it or not" bit goes not with being "...a...superpower," but with the getting pulled into conflicts and the costs of being so pulled. *OK, fair enough, seems correct, and the quote above, as cited by the right-wingers themselves, would support that defense of Obama. *OTOH, all of the left-wingnuts I've seen have used this version: "It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower. And when conflicts break out, one way or another, we get pulled into them." which would tend to support the beckerhead criticism of the remarks. So, what did he actually say? *The WH release uses the right-wingnut version and the actual speech itself tends to support the WH release pretty clearly. * So what started the whole silly flap? *Apparently, it started when a beckerhead and an Obamaniac got into it on some cable news show and the only part addressed or mentioned was, "Whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower." (sic), with the BH calling such a remark "un-American" (which it would have tended to be had it been remotely accurate) and the OM basically defending it by saying that many in the US don't want the US to be "a dominate military superpower" (likely true enough, but there is no indication that Obama wants to be included in or in any way supports that "many" and IAC, is immaterial in this context) and neither of them OR the "news" staff checked out the whole thing. *And apparently, none of the above-mentioned has bothered to check it out since OR even read their own "analysis" of it all. Sheesh, R Imbecile. g. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I will not read this.... I will not read this....
I will NOT read this Fred |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 17, 3:05*pm, "Fred" wrote:
I will not read this.... I will not read this.... I will NOT read this Fred Maybe not. But you will respond, nevertheless. Idiot. g. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 20:05:52 GMT, "Fred" wrote:
I will not read this.... I will not read this.... I will NOT read this Fred Aw, dude, it probably wouldn't have made yer head explode...well, much, anyways... TC, R |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 18, 11:30*pm, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 20:05:52 GMT, "Fred" wrote: I will not read this.... I will not read this.... I will NOT read this Fred Aw, dude, it probably wouldn't have made yer head explode...well, much, anyways... TC, R Idiot. g. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
For 'tripper, et al...(DON'T LOOK, FRED!!) | [email protected] | Fly Fishing | 4 | August 20th, 2008 06:55 PM |
Is that you, Fred? | Dave LaCourse | Fly Fishing | 0 | July 24th, 2008 10:11 PM |
Hey, Fred | Dave LaCourse | Fly Fishing | 0 | June 26th, 2008 10:39 PM |
Fred J Taylor | Alec Powell | UK Coarse Fishing | 3 | May 19th, 2008 07:09 AM |
For My Pal Fred | Dave LaCourse | Fly Fishing | 3 | February 17th, 2008 08:25 PM |