They were in fine form spewing crap today.

[texas-reddmann.livejournal.com]

After listening to some of the blowhards today on my way to class, this seemed especially appropriate.

Comments

[blueduck37.livejournal.com]

Regarding Sen. Cornyn's admission that he expects Democrats to gain seats next year, Matt Yglesias writes (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/04/cornyn-admits-gop-likely-to-lose-more-senate-seats.php) that "After losing ground in 2006, you might have expected Republicans to start distancing themselves from the hugely unpopular president and his failed conservative policies. Instead, the caucus held remarkably firm behind Bush’s agenda. And then they lost a bunch of additional seats in 2008. At this point you again might have expected them to start acting conciliatory. But they haven’t been. Which might lead you to suspect that they have some kind of secret master plan to explain why this makes sense. But, clearly, they don’t—Cornyn acknowledges that his side is likely to lose more seats."

And this cartoon is a good representation of why.

[texas-reddmann.livejournal.com]

I find it disturbing that, in listening to both Hannity and Rush today, the overbearing theme seemed to be that we're doomed. And I can't help but wonder why they think doing nothing but name calling and predictions of death and destruction are going to improve their position as a political party in this country, when it has only brought them farther down year after year.

I think the current way of handling things is right. The best way to make an enemy into an ally is to talk about our differences and work them out, not scream back and forth. I think President Obama is right to try to dialogue with those countries that, while hostile to us, are not at war with us. Through diplomacy, we can hopefully make things better without resorting to "bomb 'em into the stone age 'cause they're calling us names!" I think we've also seen that President Obama is not afraid to take the military course of action, without fanfare, posturing or blustering. Just listen to the commanders on scene, let them do their jobs, and then do what needs to be done as effectivly as possible with a minimum of fuss and go back to work.

I like the messge he's sending. We're willing to talk, to reason. But don't threaten US lives to try to make us capitulate. A SEAL is not too far away...

[squidb0i.livejournal.com]

"I find it disturbing that, in listening to both Hannity and Rush today, the overbearing theme seemed to be that we're doomed"

Listening to defeated pundits trying to whip their zombie-like base into a frenzy, to the point of inciting them to riot or revolt, is disturbing indeed.

[lafinjack.livejournal.com]

But if we do NOTHING to INTERVENE, the MARKET will SELF-CORRECT in NO MORE THAN SIX MONTHS. Clearly, you HAVEN'T been LISTENING to ANYONE in the CONSERVATIVE RADIO BRACKET.

[texas-reddmann.livejournal.com]

Considering how well it self regulated itself, I'm highly skeptical...

[lafinjack.livejournal.com]

[texas-reddmann.livejournal.com]

Hmmm, my Stephen Colbert-esque snarky voice didn't transmit well over teh interweb...

[texas-reddmann.livejournal.com]

Wow. Let's try this again.

We're willing to talk, to reason. But don't threaten US lives to try to make us capitulate.

How is that militarism? As long as you don't start pointing guns at the heads of our citizens, we can talk. He's listening to them and their views, and will try to come to an acceptable middle ground. How is that "pandering to the Pentagon?" Hell, according to the talking heads, we're all gonna die because of it!

Or are we supposed to just let our citizens, captured by pirates while trying to do their job peacefully, get their heads blown off by a guy with an AK-47 because he wants a few million dollars "or else"?

Re: Warning: Anti-USA rant ahead!

[texas-reddmann.livejournal.com]

As someone who is at least honest enough to admit you are far to the left, or your side, I can at least respect you for that much. And I can respect your anti-Military stance, to a degree, but I don't think it's appropriate. I can respond to at least one of your questions, though:

was calling in Gen. Petraeus really necessary?

In a word, yes. As the commanding officer of Central Command, the area where the standoff took place, Horn of Africa, falls under his jurisdiction. The military operates on a fairly rigid chain-of-command, and orders are passed down through that chain. So the president doesn't just call the ship up and say go for it. He sets a general directive: "If the captain's life is in imminent danger, clear to fire." As the directive is passed down, more is added to it, such as "If a machete or gun is placed in such a manner that it appears they are about to use it, clear to fire, but if they're just waving it around for show then don't fire." If too many stipulations are put in place too early, without going through the levels of people with the experience to add sane conditions, then either there is too much leeway and some poor schmuck gets blamed down the line, or there are too many conditions and nothing gets done until it's too late.

As to your bias against the SEALs, I'm sorry you experienced that. The few times I ever interacted with them, the only ones I knew were pretty good guys, and I can't see them being quite so dickish, but there's asshats in every organization so I guess it shouldn't surprise me.

I also know about the history with Somalia, not only how it got that way but how badly we fuckered up last time we were there. I hope this time around goes a little better. All the same, if they want help to fix their various problems, kidnapping and piracy for ransom to buy more rocket launchers to pirate more vessels isn't the way. Back to the same answer...we can talk and try to help (diplomacy) or we can defend our citizens when you commit piracy, kidnap them, and point AK's at their head.

My final note: I won't argue the hypocrisy is there. He's a politician, and it's part of the job description. I have yet to see one not in some way shape or form. I have issues with his closing Gitmo to open the prison in Afghanistan (Bagram Air Base, and having been there, I feel bad for anyone sent there as a member of the military, much less as a prisoner), assuming he actually does that. If anything, I personally am more likely to believe he's working the back scratching of other politicians and political organizations rather than the "Corporate Oligarchy," and much less likely to be caring about the Pentagon revolving door. After all, if that were the case, he wouldn't have scrapped the F-22 project...too many companies with their hands in that particular cookie jar alone. Even with that in mind, I firmly believe that the appropriations setup has gone batshit insane and really needs some serious work.

Regardless, I can appreciate the far-left style stance more than the far right, if only for one reason: What little name-calling you do in your rants never goes towards Godwin's law, and you at least try to back up your arguments with ALL the facts, not the cherry picked ones. I can appreciate a difference of opinion when it boils down to personal interpretation of reality and not just what someone wants reality to be. You, and at least a segment of the anti-war people, I can show patience for and at least see the point of view, even if I don't agree with a total absence of military support.

Re: Warning: Anti-USA rant ahead!

[texas-reddmann.livejournal.com]

That's precisely what America's interests are. Many of the battles that the US have gotten into have been based on "business interests." No argument there, but all the same, I like the military there to protect our citizens, so it's a weird balance. As for the future, we'll see is the operative phrase, but I'm a little more optimistic than I have been in a long time of the Bushies's reign. As for Hillary, don't get me started on her. My issues with THAT opportunistic power whore have their own subscription.

Re: Warning: Anti-USA rant ahead!

[texas-reddmann.livejournal.com]

I trained with a group of SEALs while I was in, we practiced ship security and they practiced ship boarding. We lost. Badly. Actually, the first round I got their squad leader with a bright pink paintball, and I think that pissed 'em off. Scary is the operative word. But, when I think about it, our after-hours debrief did prove that while they can raid a ship like nobody's business, they can't play pool worth a damn. Darts, yes, but not pool. And they were happy to buy drinks...

[squidb0i.livejournal.com]

*honkhonk*

[rawbery79.livejournal.com]

*beepbeep*