yeah, i know all that. i've bitched before on here about our years of foreign policy being predicated on the belief that 'the enemy of our enemy is our friend'. it's how afganistan got rid of russia, and how iraq fended off iran in their war. whoever russia backed guaranteed our involvement for the other side. didn't make sense then, and we're still suffering the repercussions of it now.
ron paul is non-intervenionist...that's fine. but when he criticized us going in and killing bin laden-well, i disagree. and warn pakistan ahead of time? that would be counter-productive.


anyone who voted for obama must surely be critical of pretty much every step he's taken the last two years. i don't know of really any domestic or foreign policy stances of the bush years that he's changed. tax breaks, continued. still in iraq? yep. afganistan? yes, and actually ramped up. gitmo still open? of course. economy any better? no.

i wonder how many folks wish that this idiot would run?

"[C]andidates need to get their message out via the news social media, be a fair and balanced reporters who will just allow the facts to get out there. Don't even participate in that goofy game that has been played now for too many years with the leftist lamestream media trying to twist the candidates' words and intent and content of their statements."—in an interview on Fox News' Hannity, May 18, 2011


she's quite the fox news shill. i wish those who suggested her to john mccain as a running mate had never been born. thanks a lot guys!

http://www.slate.com/id/2295128/


Fantasy Island
Are Republicans losing their grip on reality?
By Jacob Weisberg
Posted Friday, May 20, 2011, at 12:22 PM ET
At a press conference last week, someone asked Chris Christie for his views on evolution vs. creationism. "That's none of your business," the New Jersey governor barked in response.

further down:

Then there are all the mundane, material facts that Republicans choose to "doubt." The market in Obama lies has moved in rough parallel to the recent silver bubble. Over a period of months, the paranoid and foolish bought in, driving up the price. Republican candidates tried to find sly ways to signal skepticism about the President's American-ness and Christianity without sounding like complete imbeciles. Then Donald Trump, for whom that's not a problem, started buying in bulk. This infuriated the outflanked Sarah Palin, who used to have this wackadoodle territory to herself. Then President Obama released his long-form birth certificate, the bubble burst, and Trump was publicly ruined at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. With birther sentiment deflated, Palin has moved on to a new, no less idiotic slander, that William Ayers*, the former Weather Underground leader, might have written Obama's memoirs.

Gotta love Sarah...well maybe not, but she is always good for a laugh. I actually respect her for trying but she has one problem, she opens her mouth and has no idea what may come out. Maybe if she released a porn video folks would....well, you know!

Palin is done. Article coming out that even Roger Ailes thinks she's stupid. Michelle Bachmann will remain the Tea Party whackaloon slot-filler.

Which is good, as it will give us some entertainment until the election. Huntsman's a no go, as is Herman Cain in that regard.

I do think that most of the fight against health care was that Clinton put Hilary - a non-elected official - in charge of it. Even in the Bush HR years, Republicans had a social conciousness, consideration for the old and poor and needy.

I think that's a good point, the negative influence Reagan had on the party. Yeah, he was the turning point, after Nixon ... I think that, after the night of Watergate, the country was so happy to get "such a nice guy", who "tore down that wall", they didn't care - or simply didn't notice - that he brought the financial policy disasters and the evangelicals with him. We all loved the man, nearly no matter what he did.

The financial policies that remain are what continue to astound me, the years of viewing the bad results, yet the blind adherence to completely ineffective "Reaganomics". But, when you are only interested in making good policy for the wealthy, not the entire country, it's a good thing.