What a short memory yoy got grandma >>> To be critical of George Bush's administration is to be critical of America?
That was the Left's talking point for awhile AS YOU KNOW VERY WELL... >>> What did Bush have to do with any of the admirable American accomplishments you list? I had about as much to do with the Marshall Plan to re-build Europe after WWII, or the development of the Internet, as George Bush did. >>> Oh, the danger from AQ is NOW passed? <<<Unlike Chamberlain Obama has entered the stage AFTER the danger was confronted and averted>>>> Did you REALLY say that? AQ is suddenly the ONLY dangerous Islamic militant organization? The ONLY threat to our security and the world's? I see you have just learn what I was saying to you for years... But yes, now Islamic nations are confronting milant Islam because they threaten them... When Bush did it, the same said governments just winked at their activities... A very different and far more dangerous situations which you refuse to acknowledge... As I pointed to confronting AQ before others did just how does the Marshall Plan come into play??? I know, you claim I said that and then mock me for what you said I said... Sounds like straw-man mockery to me.. On Oct 10, 11:12 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > jgg, > > What did Bush have to do with any of the admirable American > accomplishments you list? I had about as much to do with the Marshall > Plan to re-build Europe after WWII, or the development of the > Internet, as George Bush did. To be critical of George Bush's > administration is to be critical of America? And you folks want to > call President Obama arrogant???? Are you listening to yourself? > > Oh, the danger from AQ is NOW passed? <<<Unlike Chamberlain Obama has > entered the stage AFTER the danger was confronted and averted>>>> Did > you REALLY say that? AQ is suddenly the ONLY dangerous Islamic > militant organization? The ONLY threat to our security and the > world's? > > On Oct 10, 9:49 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > It says so much of the emptiness of the Left for ideas... And the > > inability of so many to get over their irrational hatred of Bush -- so > > irrational that they are unable to accept contrary facts as facts... > > But this, like the passion to put on trail witches in Salem in in 1692 > > will pass and be seen in history as just anothe r mass phobia and > > madness... > > > Bush, like Obama are flip sides of each other, both have good and bad > > aspects... They reflect America, who once again addresses difficult > > world problems (many time ones which few wish to address), ask for > > little, and then remember American Idealism... Bush saw the nature > > of AQ's challenge, and confronted it -- this time BEFORE the evil > > became obvious to Europe... Obama, is acting like Wilson, full of > > idealism which will be rejected be the cold realities of geo-politics > > of other countries interests and lust for power... Unlike > > Chamberlain, Obama has entered the stage AFTER the danger was > > confronted and averted... > > > As Peggy Noonan writes > > > >>> How to redeem this? That is a hard question, but here is one idea. The > > >>> president will deliver a big speech in Oslo Dec. 10: white tie and > > >>> tails, a formal, bound statement. The world, as they say, will be > > >>> watching. He should deflect the limelight. (Can he?) He should make his > > >>> subject bigger than himself. (Is there a subject bigger than himself?) > > >>> He has been accused of traveling through the world on an extended > > >>> apology tour. That isn't fair, but the tag is there. How about an > > >>> unapologetic address, a speech, with the world's elites leaning forward > > >>> and listening, about the meaning of America? A speech that shows a > > >>> grounded and sophisticated love for his country and its great > > >>> traditions and history. Not a nationalistic speech, not a prideful one, > > >>> but a loving one. > > > For instance: The Peace Prize judges won't see it this way, but > > America has gone to Europe twice in the past century to fight for > > peace. This is an old concept, and has to do with killing killers so > > they can't kill anymore. It cost America a lot to do this, and we kept > > no territory, as they say, beyond the graves where our soldiers lie. > > America then taxed itself and gave its wealth not only to its allies > > but to its former adversaries, to help them rebuild. We didn't > > actually have to do this. We did it to make the world better. We did > > it to foster peace. (They should give us a prize.) > > > America hasn't just helped the world, it literally lit the world with > > its inventions, which are the product of its freedoms. The lights > > under which the Peace Prize judges read, and rejected, the worthy > > nominations? Why, those lights were invented by an American. The > > emails the committee members sent to each other, sharing their banal > > insights on leadership? They came through the Internet. Who invented > > the Internet? It was a Norwegian bureaucrat with a long face and hair > > on his nose and little plastic geometric eyeglasses? Oh wait, it was > > Americans. The members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee are healthy > > because they have been inoculated against diseases such as polio. Who > > invented the polio vaccine, an enfeebled old leftist academic in Oslo? > > Nah, it was a man named Jonas Salk. He was an American. > > > Europe's elites experience Mr. Obama as a historical accident that > > needs and deserves their encouragement. Actually he was elected with > > 69.5 million votes, and you know, they were cast by Americans. Go > > figure. > > > Mr. Obama should get the spotlight off himself and put it on the great > > thing that yielded him up and made him possible. America is > > misunderstood these days, and he could perform a public service by > > helping people understand it better. > > > Love, after all, never harms the world, and as an added practical > > bonus such a speech would obscurely embarrass the committee, which > > won't be able to criticize the thoughts of its hero. That would be > > pleasurable for Americans, and therefore helpful to Mr. Obama. > > > This might to some degree redeem this wicked and ignorant award, this > > mischievous honor. > > > On Oct 9, 6:37 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > jgg, > > > > Hmmmmm, so about the only requirement to be considered a man of peace > > > is to NOT be Geroge Bush? Sure dosent say much for the administration > > > of George Bush, does it? > > > > On Oct 9, 11:45 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Our Egyptian man on the street nailed it > > > > > ""They are handing him the Nobel Peace Prize because he isn’t George > > > > Bush." > > > > > By that standard, you are eligible for the Nobel Peace Prize.... > > > > >http://jaltcoh.blogspot.com/2009/10/only-possible-explanation-why-pre... > > > > > On Oct 9, 11:25 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > frankg, > > > > > > It's really rather simple. .Compared to the man he replaced Obama can > > > > > win a Nobel Peace Prize simply by going 9 whole months w/o invading > > > > > someone. > > > > > Kinda like a 300 lb. man appearing to be skinny by standing next to a > > > > > 600 llb. man. > > > > > > On Oct 9, 9:46 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > The continuation of the 'smoke and mirrors' presidency continues. > > > > > > The > > > > > > height of his mantle continues to get elevated without his ever > > > > > > doing > > > > > > anything. Just amazing. > > > > > > > On Oct 9, 7:53 am, "d.b.baker" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Headline of the day: > > > > > > > > London Times: "Absurd decision on Obama makes a mockery of the > > > > > > > Nobel > > > > > > > peace prize" > > > > > > > > [Q] - Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and > > > > > > > partisan > > > > > > > intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a > > > > > > > way > > > > > > > of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush > > > > > > > Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black > > > > > > > president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re- > > > > > > > engage with the world... > > > > > > > > The pretext for the prize was Mr Obama’s decision to “strengthen > > > > > > > international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples”. Many > > > > > > > people > > > > > > > will point out that, while the President has indeed promised to > > > > > > > “reset” relations with Russia and offer a fresh start to relations > > > > > > > with the Muslim world, there is little so far to show for his fine > > > > > > > words. > > > > > > > --http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article68... > > > > > > > > On Oct 9, 7:27 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > What's left? The 2010 Oscars for Barack and Michelle as best > > > > > > > > actor and > > > > > > > > actress? > > > > > > > > > On Oct 9, 6:24 am, "d.b.baker" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Well, it was either him or Roman Polanski.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
