Politics As Usual

[the Spartan]

Originally posted by Skeks in the city
a man such as yourself has only "known" women who have done those things.

Dude, puhleeease, the veiled sex-in-the-kitchen with paigow references are so 2001.

[Skeks in the city]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Imperial Hubris: Has anyone read it?

seems to advocate almost a racial war. My darkest fears go there, I'm certainly not ready to agree with him. But if you can't agree with the main point, as I'm sure most of you can't, isn't it a little silly to gloat about some policy opinion?

He argues that obl, al quaeda, and the rest vehemently hate a number of US policies: aid to Israel, US troops in the middle east, pressure on Arab states to keep oil prices low, support for arab states that suppress Islam like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, support for non-arab states that suppress Islam like Russia, China and India.

He further argues that hatred of these policies is so deep and so widespread among Arabs that the US' only option to pursue these policies is the military option. He paints a grim picture. His implicit argument is that America needs to grow up and decide whether these policies are worth the candle.

[SlaveNoMore]

Atticus Grinch
"This day and age" means the one we live in, right? Play out the tape.

"People of America, I have used illegal drugs. They were illegal when I used them. But I have no criminal record. Why is this so? I wasn't arrested, so I wasn't convicted.

"Presently, federal judges are sentencing people like myself, committing no crime I myself haven't committed, to prison sentences ranging from 18 months to 50 years.

"I would now like to introduce my drug czar and my new drug policy . . . [drumroll] . . . ."

What on earth could such a person say, other than that he was legalizing drugs? If 43 admitted to doing coke tomorrow, how could he possibly maintain leadership over a system that puts coke users and traffickers in prison, and often deprives them of their right to vote or hold office?

43 can't even say, "I did drugs, and it was wrong and I'm sorry" at the same time people are sitting in federal prisons for dealing and doing coke.

So why ask the question.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Skeks in the city
He argues that obl, al quaeda, and the rest vehemently hate a number of US policies: aid to Israel, US troops in the middle east, pressure on Arab states to keep oil prices low, support for arab states that suppress Islam like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, support for non-arab states that suppress Islam like Russia, China and India.

He further argues that hatred of these policies is so deep and so widespread among Arabs that the US' only option to pursue these policies is the military option. He paints a grim picture. His implicit argument is that America needs to grow up and decide whether these policies are worth the candle.

Yeah, I kind of got that. but what do we do to support China or Russia? And if you take what he wants, in totality, its for us to leave everywhere where we could stem the anti-US jihadi movement. Its like "trust us. If you just leave so we can completely engulf the entrie area, we'll leave you alone, en after we finish cleaning up over here. Honest."

He think the US should grow-up and believe that?

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
So why ask the question.

You do realize that the hypocrisy of the situation remains the same whether or not Bush admits to past coke use? (Hint: hypocrisy means "irony for people still capable of outrage.")

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Gattigap
I think other posts have mentioned that the Anon was to help get it published without dozens of layers of gov't prescreening, and that he didn't really care about being subsequently identified as anon.

It appears that he's anonymous by the CIA's choice, not his own.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
No. Post it. I refuse to "register" with WaPo

The version I saw was on Salon, which will force you to view an infomercial for a political cause you can't abide or a product or service targeted to your well-shaven demographic.

Bullfuckingshit. Wilson went there to determine if the claims of Iraq trying to purchase Uranium from Niger was credible. Nothing more, nothing less.

Back at the time, we were much more worried about the prospect that the Iraqis were trying to build nuclear weapons. Now that we know they weren't, we can worry about why the President said something in the State of the Union that the DCI says he should not have.

The story was whether the 16 words were truthful. And they were.

No. He went to Niger long before that.

Why won't you digest page 66 [for the 3rd time] and admit that the CIA had the speech and cleared it????

The CIA told the White House not to say it months earlier, and the DCI is on record as saying that line should not have been in the speech. Why can't you digest this?

You claim that my views are saturated by reading Sullivan. This ridiculous statement shows you've swallowed Marshall's pill.

Hyperbole in the defense of liberty is no vice.

[Skeks in the city]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Yeah, I kind of got that. but what do we do to support China or Russia? And if you take what he wants, in totality, its for us to leave everywhere where we could stem the anti-US jihadi movement. Its like "trust us. If you just leave so we can completely engulf the entrie area, we'll leave you alone, en after we finish cleaning up over here. Honest."

He think the US should grow-up and believe that?

Not so much that. It's more that we'll have to compromise on a number of these fronts. I haven't read the book though, so I can't be sure what he'd recommend we compromise on. But he does feel that failing to compromise on any of these policies will require that we use a great deal of military force.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
You do realize that the hypocrisy of the situation remains the same whether or not Bush admits to past coke use? (Hint: hypocrisy means "irony for people still capable of outrage.")

He's got you there Slave. clinton had that moratorium on prosecution for pot when was Prez.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
You do realize that the hypocrisy of the situation remains the same whether or not Bush admits to past coke use? (Hint: hypocrisy means "irony for people still capable of outrage.")

Which is why I like the way you put it, though you may believe it damns me to hell or sumthin sumthin.

This nation is completely hyprotical in the war on the poor. Fiscal conservatives should be outraged for the spending that almost entirely ignores one half of the equation. Minority rights activists should be outraged because minorities are disproportionately represented in the half of the equation that isn't ignored. States righters should be outraged because this entire question belongs in the arena of the states, not the federal government.

Instead, its a huge yawn to most of the country. Hey, its just more than a million black people we've thrown in jail for this crusade. Who really cares, right?*

Hello


*That is not directed to you Atticus. I know you care.

[Hank Chinaski]

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...=1090121780592

France: Sharon unwelcome after call on Jews to immigrate
By HERB KEINON
France informed Israel Monday that Prime Minister Sharon, whose office has been planning a visit to France, is not welcome in light of his call to French Jews to immigrate to Israel.

Israeli diplomatic officials said that Maurice Gourdault-Montagne, French President Jacques Chirac's personal diplomatic advisor, spoke to Israeli diplomat Jacques Revah and informed him that as a result of Sharon's call to French Jewry to leave France, "there is no reason to see Sharon." Revah is filling in for vacationing ambassador Nissim Zvili.

Israeli diplomatic officials said although no date had yet been set for a visit, such a visit was in the planning stage.

Gourdault-Montagne, according to Israeli officials, detailed for Revah all the steps that France had made to fight anti-Semitism, as well as the recent overtures it had made to Israel - including rolling out the red carpet for President Moshe Katsav during his visit earlier in the year.

Attempts by Revah to put Sharon's comments in the context of an overall call Sharon always makes to Diaspora Jewry to immigrate, and that his comments came in response to a question and were not part of his prepared speech, fell on deaf ears. Efforts by Revah to stress that Sharon, during his comments, praised the French government for fighting anti-Semitism also did nothing to mollify Paris' anger.

Sharon, during a speech to the leadership of the United Jewish Communities on Sunday, called on France's 600,000 Jews to immigrate to Israel "immediately."

"If I have to advocate to our brothers in France, I would tell them one thing: move to Israel, as early as possible," Sharon said, in response to a question about anti-Semitism in France and in Europe.

Sharon's comments came a week after a 23-year-old woman shocked France by first claiming she was the victim of an anti-Semitic incident on a train, and then admitting that she made the whole thing up.

Although this particular woman was not attacked, in the first six months of 2004 there were - according to French Foreign Ministry statistics - 135 physical attacks against Jews. By comparison, in all of 2003 there were 127 such attacks.

While praising the French government for taking steps to fight anti-Semitism, Sharon said, "We see the spread of the wildest anti-Semitism there."

Sharon said that he calls on Jews from around the world to immigrate to Israel, but that this is especially critical now for French Jews. "That's what I say to Jews all around the world, but there I think it's a must, and they have to move immediately."

a Jerusalem Post poll shows most agree the French should move


http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...&category=JPmn

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
He's got you there Slave. clinton had that moratorium on prosecution for pot when was Prez.

He was fair about it --- you could always study hard and become a Rhodes Scholar, or, if academic performance is an issue for you, just get rich parents who could fly you to a country with non-draconian drug laws.

[sgtclub]

"If they don't have the guts to come up here in front of you and say, 'I don't want to represent you, I want to represent those special interests, the unions, the trial lawyers... if they don't have the guts, I call them girlie men," Schwarzenegger said to the cheering crowd at a mall food court in Ontario.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...514EDT0020.DTL

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...514EDT0020.DTL

Speaking of representing the special interests:

As usual, the California budget is overdue (June 30 is the deadline) and everyone is bickering.

The kicker is that no one's even arguing about the budget at this point. We've actually got agreement on the budget document itself, but Arnold refuses to consider it unless Democrats agree to also toss in two completely unrelated anti-labor measures. And if they don't agree, he's threatening to campaign against a "target list" of vulnerable Democrats this fall.

So to summarize: everyone agrees on the budget. The only holdup is that Arnold is demanding some extra goodies on the side to please his corporate contributors, and if the Dems don't give it to him he's going to campaign against them.

from Political Animal

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Classic GOP for you -- this party can have a big "sex scandal" where the participants are married to each other and the sex never happened. Talk about uptight. geez.

Personally I have my doubts. Okay, if he takes her to one sex club and she refuses to have public sex with him, then maybe I buy her story. But supposedly he does this again and again, in different cities. Puh-lease. Either she fucked him in public, or Mr. Ryan is as stubborn as Ralph Nader.