Sarah Palin

[classicman]

whatevah

[monster]

Originally Posted by classicman

puhlease -

Originally Posted by classicman

whatevah

Govenor Palin, is that you?

[Sheldonrs]

Obama - less experience; better judgement

McCain - More experience, bad judgement and temperment

Biden - More experience, sometimes trips over his own thoughts

Palin - Stupid fucking cunt!

[Sundae]

I think you mean Diagnosis Murder.
Although thinking about it, Dick Van Dyke does a lot more chatting and trotting about and having people try to kill him than any real medical procedures. Probably because he knows he's "venerated" enough to botch it.

Venerated does mean old and creaky, doesn't it?
(I do know what it means really. Incontinent.)

[monster]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

I think you mean Diagnosis Murder.
Although thinking about it, Dick Van Dyke does a lot more chatting and trotting about and having people try to kill him than any real medical procedures.

No, I don't, but if it fits under the umbrella we can surely include it Don't watch much TV/movies, cannot stand Dick Van Dick so definitely did not see that.... sounds like I didn't miss too much. I went through a phase of reading medical-based thrillers and they're all the damn same story, though....

[Pie]

Because she also has no brain *and* no education.

1. She can't figure it out for herself. (Obama & Biden can)
2. She hasn't experienced it for herself.(Biden & McCain can)
3. No one has told her the answer. (Obama, Biden & McCain)

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Pie

Because she also has no brain *and* no education.

1. She can't figure it out for herself. (Obama & Biden can)
2. She hasn't experienced it for herself.(Biden & McCain can)
3. No one has told her the answer. (Obama, Biden & McCain)

Dammmmmm.... sounds just like a description of Obama.

[Undertoad]

with a specialization in International Relations

And he still doesn't know why the POTUS doesn't meet with the leader of Iran?

/voting for him anyway

[dar512]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

And he still doesn't know why the POTUS doesn't meet with the leader of Iran?

/voting for him anyway

I don't have a degree in international relations. Tell me.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

And he still doesn't know why the POTUS doesn't meet with the leader of Iran?

/voting for him anyway

He doesn't know why because there is no legitimate reason for us not to meet with the leaders of sovereign nations, especially when we want favors from them...like not exercising their sovereign right to develop any weapons they choose.

Here's how sane people like Obama and I do it. First you try to talk. Only when that fails, do you take actions against them like embargoes. As a very final, last resort when all other avenues have been exhausted, then you exercise military force. You never place Americans in the line of fire unless everything else has been tried first.

[Undertoad]

It's a principle of international relations that when the President meets with heads of state, it makes them more powerful and gives them a gravitas (although I hate that word) that they might not deserve. Meeting with Ahmadinejad would give Ahmadinejad greater power within his country and region. We prefer to see him isolated and less powerful to affect what happens in his region. Actually meeting with him would cause him to be seen as a serious power broker, which he actually isn't. (In Iran, more power is vested in the religious leaders who *actually* have final say.)

This is doubly true in cultures where dialogue is seen as weakness... such as it is in the Middle East.

For example, after Nancy Pelosi (third in line for POTUS) met with Syria's Assad, he then spent some time shutting down dissidents, because it was believed that he could:

Even Syrians outside the inner circle of activists seem shaken by the conviction, shortly after Ms. Pelosi’s return to Washington, of Syria’s best-known human-rights lawyer, Anwar al-Bunni. Mr. al-Bunni was convicted of “spreading information that could weaken national morale” and “joining an international organization without proper authorization,” for which he was given a five-year prison sentence.

This principle is not well understood, and so when Obama said in a debate that he would meet with certain foreign leaders without any preconditions, it was a gaffe. Since then the Obama campaign has changed that to "negotiate" not "meet" but since people don't really grasp the principle behind it, it remains debate fodder. There's nothing wrong with negotiating with such leaders, but the negotiation happens at the State Dept level, and with brokers, not the actual POTUS. I remain convinced that Obama is merely covering up the gaffe at this point, and if he becomes Pres, the folks at State will explain the principle and business will continue as usual.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

It's a principle of international relations that when the President meets with heads of state, it makes them more powerful and gives them a gravitas (although I hate that word) that they might not deserve.

Did you notice how the Venezuelan nut Chaves has gravitas in South America because he neither meets nor negotiates with the Bush administration?

[Radar]

There's a new thing going around the net. People are replacing the words of Hitler in the movie "The Downfall"

Here's one I like. They also do one against Obama.

[Undertoad]

That appears to be an entirely different argument.

[Pico and ME]

I'm sure that depends on viewpoint or on which side of the line you are standing on.