A Forum for Grinches and Ho-Ho-Hoes

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ironweed
Oh sure, but when I want to post my irrefutable evidence of AfghanPipelineGate you're quick to tell me to PM Hank with the charts and articles and stop cluttering the board.

Truly, that's not a subject-matter issue.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Juan Cole re the news from Egypt:

• Egyptian President Husni Mubarak is going to allow multiparty competition for the presidency. But note that only offically recognized parties can field candidates. This step excludes the Muslim Brotherhood, probably the only serious competitor with Mubarak's party. Will blog more on this later . . . I'm really sleepy and it is late. But just to say that while it is a step in the right direction, there is less to it than meets the eye and it is too early to get very excited. In a sense, Egypt's step now makes its presidential elections somewhat analogous to those in Iran, where candidates are vetted beforehand.

I read a blog the other day that predicted that Mubarak would do only as much as he had to, but that it didn't matter because given the disparity in money between the parties, he is sure to win reelection.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Hey club --

When Syria sent troops into Lebanon in 1976, it did so with U.S. support, and our Secretary of Defense was an up-and-comer named Donald Rumsfeld. Do you think he's had a real change of heart about whether the Lebanese ought to run their own affairs without outside interference?

I don't think it matters what he thinks.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I read a blog the other day that predicted that Mubarak would do only as much as he had to, but that it didn't matter because given the disparity in money between the parties, he is sure to win reelection.

Just a side thought, but, if ad money in an election is enough to buy a win, the electorate can't be TOO dissatisfied with current leadership. I mean, if Stalin gave the kulaks the vote, and then spent billions on cute ads, I suspect he still would have lost big-time.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by bilmore
Just a side thought, but, if ad money in an election is enough to buy a win, the electorate can't be TOO dissatisfied with current leadership. I mean, if Stalin gave the kulaks the vote, and then spent billions on cute ads, I suspect he still would have lost big-time.

Depends who was running against him and whether the voters knew there was someone running against him

I think you are right if both sides meet a minimum money threshhold to be a viable candidate. I'm not sure on the numbers, but I want to say that Mubarak has a 4 to 1 advantage.

And Mubarak is not Stalin by the way.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by sgtclub
And Mubarak is not Stalin by the way.

Yeah, that was partially my point. Democracy remains the goal, but the immediacy of the need is less when the ruler isn't actively using shredders on the Loyal Opposition.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by bilmore
Yeah, that was partially my point. Democracy remains the goal, but the immediacy of the need is less when the ruler isn't actively using shredders on the Loyal Opposition.

I may be illinformed, but in a relative sense Mubarak isn't at the top of my list of worst ME leaders. He has continued to maintain peace (and I think trade) with Israel, and Egypt isn't a top staging ground for terrorist.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I think you are right if both sides meet a minimum money threshhold to be a viable candidate. I'm not sure on the numbers, but I want to say that Mubarak has a 4 to 1 advantage.

Did you miss that Mubarak's biggest challenger, the Muslim Brotherhood, is barred from the election because it is not officially recognized?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Did you miss that Mubarak's biggest challenger, the Muslim Brotherhood, is barred from the election because it is not officially recognized?

I had not heard that. So this sounds like an Arafat-light election.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I had not heard that. So this sounds like an Arafat-light election.

That's what Vlaams Blok thinks about the Belgium elections, too.

(VB, a party, was "banned" by the ruling parties for "racism" - i.e., fighting immigration.)

[sgtclub]

Potential alliance of the EU, Russia and China:

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/...4038-2488r.htm

[bilmore]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Potential alliance of the EU, Russia and China:

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/...4038-2488r.htm

EU and Russia just need another big customer to replace Saddam.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by bilmore
EU and Russia just need another big customer to replace Saddam.

Isn't that what Iran is for?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

From the front page of today's WaPo:

• The Senate's top Republican said yesterday that President Bush's bid to restructure Social Security may have to wait until next year and might not involve the individual accounts the White House has been pushing hard.

If they can't get Congressional Republicans on board now -- and it increasingly appears they can't -- it's certainly not going to happen in an election year.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
From the front page of today's WaPo:

• The Senate's top Republican said yesterday that President Bush's bid to restructure Social Security may have to wait until next year and might not involve the individual accounts the White House has been pushing hard.

If they can't get Congressional Republicans on board now -- and it increasingly appears they can't -- it's certainly not going to happen in an election year.

I think it's dead. I'm not sorry. Of all the things to expend capitol on, this ain't at the top of the list.

Now we can move on to the invasion plans.