The Democrat Thread

[southsider2k5]

Tea Party Movement Spreads To Military

 

 

I believe if this had happened 3 years ago, they would have been branded as "unpatriotic" by a certain political party. I wonder how they will handle this now.

 

Well I am guessing they react the exact opposite of how the group that used to say Dissent is Patriotism react.

[bmags]

remember a few weeks back where we were talking about why the hell we learn things that are just empirically untrue yet get passed down anyways only for us to unlearn them...

 

well, i finally learned that in fact, robert E. Lee was not an abolitionist.

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/program/ID/175482

 

go to minute 55:00

 

I mean, I don't really care, it makes sense, but what's the point of perpetrating that memo unless to push forward that the civil war was more than about slavery, about some abstract claim to states rights?

[HuskyCaucasian]

Russian President: Obama a 'thinker... unlike other people'

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev told ABC's George Stephanopoulos that President Obama is a "thinker" unlike "other people." The Russian president seemed to be referring to President George W. Bush.

 

"I won't name anyone by name," he said.

[bmags]

it's not like medvedev is the brains behind the operation anyhow.

 

edit: funny thing about the book game change, made george bush seem way more calm and intelligent than one John Sidney McCain

Edited April 13, 2010 by bmags

[lostfan]

Tea Party Movement Spreads To Military

 

 

I believe if this had happened 3 years ago, they would have been branded as "unpatriotic" by a certain political party. I wonder how they will handle this now.

People in the military have this... superiority complex where they think they know a lot more things than they really do or that their thoughts on national security issues carry more weight than someone else. And then other people tend to validate it like "my active duty brother says that McCain is right about this..." Seriously, no one cares. Shut the f*** up. You're a citizen just like we are. That's why I hardly ever bring up the fact that I was in the military here. It doesn't actually count for anything except in certain narrow circumstances.

 

Also what the hell is that guy talking about? Disobeying presidential orders because his oath was to the Constitution and not the president? Apparently when he took the oath, he was looking at pretty butterflies or some s*** and otherwise just mumbling through it. This is the actual oath (typing from memory):

 

I _____ do solemnly swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

 

In the oath you solemnly swear to obey the orders of the President of the United States. That person is a politician, no? Last I checked, anyway.

[lostfan]

it's not like medvedev is the brains behind the operation anyhow.

 

edit: funny thing about the book game change, made george bush seem way more calm and intelligent than one John Sidney McCain

Should I read Game Change?

[Balta1701]

Should I read Game Change?

If you're into random political gossip leaked anonymously by a lot of people with unknown agendas and compiled into book form, sure.

[bmags]

Should I read Game Change?

 

Yeah, it's ridiculously entertaining. It's kind of shocking, actually, that more stuff doesn't leak. Shows how good campaign staffs are. I'm glad the book was written, but it's not an important book. It's just complete politico trash, but it's very entertaining.

[lostfan]

I'm reading "Economics without Illusions" right now. Not really a liberal or conservative book.

[bmags]

NO ONE ASKED

 

i'm about to read an urban planning book and then am currently reading philosophy intro books so i can understand what the hell sullivan and yglesias are referring to sometimes.

[KipWellsFan]

Should I read Game Change?

 

It's a really easy read, but I'll go along with what everyone else said. How did they get inside knowledge of all of these private conversations?

[bmags]

It's a really easy read, but I'll go along with what everyone else said. How did they get inside knowledge of all of these private conversations?

 

Let me give you my impression from being in journalism.

 

There is a LOT that we know, that we can't report. This was a book basically about all that. I'm sure this was all the gossip going on at the time that they knew was happening but you can't report this stuff in the paper.

 

and frankly, when thinking about that, it makes that NY Times article understandable, not right, of course, but i think you saw some reporters trying to show what they knew, but couldn't go on the record reporting.

[Balta1701]

Let me give you my impression from being in journalism.

 

There is a LOT that we know, that we can't report. This was a book basically about all that. I'm sure this was all the gossip going on at the time that they knew was happening but you can't report this stuff in the paper.

 

and frankly, when thinking about that, it makes that NY Times article understandable, not right, of course, but i think you saw some reporters trying to show what they knew, but couldn't go on the record reporting.

The problem I have wiht that type of journalism is...there's always motivation behind gossip. It's never unvarnished truth...it's the opinion of one side, and it's usually the angrier side who gets all the attention.

[bmags]

The problem I have wiht that type of journalism is...there's always motivation behind gossip. It's never unvarnished truth...it's the opinion of one side, and it's usually the angrier side who gets all the attention.

 

Well that's why game change isn't a good book, but I'm telling you why it was written.

 

edit: and that stuff about the fights...there's no journalism article you can write about like that that wouldn't just be seen as a hit job.

Edited April 14, 2010 by bmags

[bmags]

it's just too easy.

 

[BigSqwert]

What a bunch of dick wads.

[lostfan]

I remember reading comments on that article and people were writing stuff like "he just kissed his re-election goodbye!" lol... oh come on, seriously guys, this is some unimportant s***, and if Tom Coburn is not conservative enough for you, I don't know what to tell you. Like for real, you're gonna vote against somebody because he said Nancy Pelosi was a nice person whose politics he hated and said Fox got overheated with their rhetoric? lol... you shouldn't be allowed to vote, if that's how you treat it

[kapkomet]

I remember reading comments on that article and people were writing stuff like "he just kissed his re-election goodbye!" lol... oh come on, seriously guys, this is some unimportant s***, and if Tom Coburn is not conservative enough for you, I don't know what to tell you. Like for real, you're gonna vote against somebody because he said Nancy Pelosi was a nice person whose politics he hated and said Fox got overheated with their rhetoric? lol... you shouldn't be allowed to vote, if that's how you treat it

 

CNN got overheated with their rhetoric. MSNBC got overheated with their rhetoric. Oh wait, you never hear that from Democrats. That's part of the problem.

[lostfan]

What the f***'s that got to do with anything, we are talking about Tom Coburn and what he said about Fox, nothing else

[StrangeSox]

CNN got overheated with their rhetoric. MSNBC got overheated with their rhetoric. Oh wait, you never hear that from Democrats. That's part of the problem.

 

 

What the f***'s that got to do with anything, we are talking about Tom Coburn and what he said about Fox, nothing else

 

Seriously, kap, what the was the last relevant, meaningful post you had in the 'buster?

[kapkomet]

Seriously, kap, what the was the last relevant, meaningful post you had in the 'buster?

 

 

Oh, probablly never, to you.

[StrangeSox]

ib4 no u

 

 

oh, wait

 

edit: ss2k5 and others often have relevant posts. You just troll these days with one or two sentence non-sequitors or straw men.

Edited April 16, 2010 by StrangeSox

[kapkomet]

ib4 no u

 

 

oh, wait

 

edit: ss2k5 and others often have relevant posts. You just troll these days with one or two sentence non-sequitors or straw men.

 

 

Eyup. And others just troll these days with 1,000 word non-sequitors or straw men. I guess it depends on your point of view.

 

And for lf, the point is you don't see Democrats devouring their "own networks".

[BigSqwert]

And for lf, the point is you don't see Democrats devouring their "own networks".

 

Which networks do they have? Just because MSNBC has a couple of very liberal opinion shows doesn't mean it's a liberal network. They have Joe Scarborough and Pat Bucahanan on the air almost as frequently. I really don't see how you can compare the networks. It's not even close.

 

EDIT: And how many times must it be proven that Fox's regular news shows are just as, if not more, right wing than the opinion shows?

Edited April 16, 2010 by BigSqwert

[StrangeSox]

ib4 no u

 

 

oh, wait

 

edit: ss2k5 and others often have relevant posts. You just troll these days with one or two sentence non-sequitors or straw men.

 

 

Eyup. And others just troll these days with 1,000 word non-sequitors or straw men. I guess it depends on your point of view.

 

And for lf, the point is you don't see Democrats devouring their "own networks".