The Atlantic - Latest Comments in Throw The Damn Ball

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Sammy — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:20:28 -0000

Correction and addition:

Don't READ much do you Dave?

No li-berry in your neighborhood?

You can purchase used history books on line if you can't use the google.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Sammy — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:18:36 -0000

Don't rad much do you Dave?

No li-berry in your neighborhood?

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Sammy — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:16:05 -0000

You are aware are you not that Ronald Reagan made a deal with the Iranians to hold the hostages until inaguration day? Do you have any knowledge of what lead up to this?

In this day and age there is really no excuse for ignorance. Don't speak of thing you obviously have no knowledge of. It does not make you look good.

Try using the google for:

- reagan guns for hostages

- iran contra

- arms for hostages

- oliver north + selling military equipment to Iran

- nicaragua + oliver north

Or go to your local li-berry.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Sammy — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:01:18 -0000

John McCain is a bitter old man who cannot accept the fact that a BLACK MAN is the President of these United States. His goal is to try to undermine President Obama in any way he can.

Period.

End of story.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Sammy — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:58:07 -0000

John McCain is a bitter old man who cannot accept the fact that a BLACK MAN is the President of these United States. He is wasting the years he has left destroying whatever legacy was he is supposed to have built. He has not offered a single solid solution to any of the problems we face in this country. That is because he has no solutions. His goal is to try to undermine President Obama in any way he can.

McCain, and those other clown who call themselves republicans are asssisted in their undermining campaign by what passes for journalism and journalist (99.9999% WHITE)on CBC, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC (except for KO, RM, and ES) and by FOX ( who sadly, has a few HOUSE NEGROs on staff), also can't bear the thought that the President is a black guy. These excuses for journalist are not trying to hide the facts that their main goal is the undermine the President and try to discredit him. Dick and Liz Cheney (22 times in 12 days) on every TV show, day and day after day. Even Fred Thompson and old Mitt are give free air time to get a little bashing time in.

Every day we see the faces of very same republicans who have obstructed the President since day on network and cable TV? Ever notice how the TV microphones are always grouped together and waiting for the republicans to stomp out of the House or Senate? Now just how do you suppose the republicans know that those microphones are waiting just for them?

How many time has you seen the H.A.C.K.S (99.9999% WHITE)on CBC, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC and FOX actually ask a hard probing question of their republican masters? It would not surprise me one bit if the republicans gave the gasbags host the list of question they are permitted to ask. And surely you are aware of that the networks edit interview and news tape to cast the President and the Democrats in a bad light?

So don't ask why McCain is given free reign to the TV airwaves. McCain, the republicans and what passes for main stream media in this country are trying to undermine the Presidency of President Obama.

It seem tham many of you clearely are not aware that grampy WAS NOT the only American POW held captive in Vietnam. Continuing to parrott the "HE was a pow hero" meme does not make it so.

Officially, 661 recognized prisoners were returned; some 100 of those have since died. All endured sickness, starvation, and torture. SOME OF THEM WERE EVEN BLACK, though you would never know that. Most of them went on to live full productive lives.

These returning 661 POWs were/are just as much of a hero as grampy. One thing that sets them apart from grampy is that they did not spend their lives as Noun Verb POW. Nor did they have an admiral father who made sure that the records dealing with POWs were sealed.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

strangelet — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:02:59 -0000

Ummm...I am a Sufi convert of two years and it is simply terrible for muslims to see that evil old man John McCain trying to use Neda Soltani's death as a club to beat Obama with.

He is no different from that other evil old man Khameni.

Khameni is saying that Neda was shot by western agitors as a photo-op or that she was in MEK.

They are exactly the same.

Two evil old men trying to exploit Neda's death for politcal gain.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Josh Jasper — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:39:59 -0000

Oops. Should be a close bold bracket after "Shah". I need to remember the preview button.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Josh Jasper — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:38:45 -0000

Cold war advocacy of what? Dude, we backed the Shah. I know most Americans only have a limited grasp of history, but I'd hope McCain would remember that we have a history of messing up horribly in Iran, that popular sentiment hasn't forgiven us for that screw up, and acting like it never happened is the last thing anyone sane should do.

I think he's just using it as a political football, or he's gone senile.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

BreakerBaker — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:44:37 -0000

Except for the landslide part.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

adrock — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:42:59 -0000

Yeah, a pick six analogy - and an accurate one.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Guest — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:00:36 -0000

I’ll try.

“They got that because they got America neck-deep into a war in Vietnam, and then actively (and successfully) worked for the defeat of our ally there.”

Well, it is true that during the Johnson Administration, the US’ involvement in Vietnam escalated into a full-scale war. But do you remember the policy prescription of Barry Goldwater, the GOP’s standard bearer in 1964? It most certainly wasn’t a troop withdrawal. It was a call to use nuclear weapons…surely that was the right answer???

And one can only assume that by ally, you are referring to the corrupt South Vietnamese government and its feckless military. And by working for defeat, you must mean the Democratic Congress’ refusal in 1974-1975 to waste any more money on a country on the verge of collapse for well over a decade. I mean, surely you’re not talking about the anti-war protestors. You do understand the difference between the Party’s establishment and a leftist political movement, don’t you? I think a certain night in Chicago in 1968 would serve as a very vivid illustration.

“They got that because they let Iran invade the sovereign territory of our embassy and hold American citizens hostage for over a year.”

By Democrats, I take it you mean Jimmy Carter. Ok, what was Carter supposed to do in order stop the takeover of the embassy? Yes, he could have fully evacuated the embassy before granting the Shah entry to America, instead of ordering a partially evacuation. But how was he to ultimately stop the takeover itself?

And what piece of foreign policy genus would you have prescribed that would have freed the embassy hostages? An arms-for-hostages deal perhaps?

“They got that because most of them voted against the first Gulf War, one that was backed by the UN and possibly the largest coalition in history, and was a against a third world dictator.”

If their fear was an Arabic Vietnam, what difference did it make if Hussein was a third-world dictator? The fact that their fear was ultimately misplaced is besides the point here.

“They got that perception by sending troops into Somalia without the tanks the troops had requested…”

Any citations for this? I know they had some number of armored infantry.

“and then yanking them out after suffering 18 casualties”

And the Republicans were in favor of keeping them in? Not Sen. Dole, Sen. Helms, Sen. Hutchinson, Sen. McCain, Sen. Kempthorne, etc. No, they were following the example of Pres. Ronald “I Won World War 2 by Making Movies” Regan. That example being set when he ordered U.S. forces from Lebanon after the attack on U.S. Marines that killed 241 servicemen. They were gone in 4 months.

Clinton actually increased troop levels and didn’t withdraw them until 6 months later, worried about the message a withdrawal would send to other nations involved in Somalia.

“They got that by some of them voting for the war in Iraq and then going wobbly when the war got hard.”

What weasel words are these! “Some of them”? Name names, provide pro-war and anti-war quotes and show context. The US still has over 100,000 troops in Iraq, with a Democratic majority in both Houses of Congress and a Democratic President.

What you call “going wobbly when the war got hard” I would call reassessing the situation when it became clear that the Bush Administration was nothing more than a collection of criminally negligent jack-asses with an aversion to the truth as it exists in the real world and more concerned with looking tough than with human life. Perhaps certain Democratic pols voted as they did in 2002 out of cowardice but perhaps others were fooled. Bush/Cheney 2000-2003 fooled a lot of people.

“They got that by Harry Reid claiming the war was lost before the surge.”

The war is already lost, if one were to remember the promises of the GOP, that Iraq would be a pro-western, pro-Israel, pro-America liberal, secular democracy. And the surge did not quiet things down. The bribing of Sunni militiamen did. Once the “Sons of Iraq” stop getting checks and they aren’t fully integrated into the Iraqi Army, things will get noisy again. Either Iraq will be in chaos once more or P.M. Nuri Al-Maliki will pull his Saddam Hussein Jr. routine.

“They got that for calling a highly competent general a traitor in a full page ad in the NY Times.”

Well, that’s just a stupid lie. MoveOn.org did that, not the Democratic Party. The Democratic-controlled US House and US Senate approved resolutions overwhelmingly condemning the MoveOn.org ad.

“Hope that helps.”

Yes, it proves that you are just another disingenuous conservative. A pity. America needs honest, intellectual conservatives very badly.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

eric k — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:15:56 -0000

The main difference is in the Cold War, Poland, Hungary, Lithunia etc were under the thumb of a hostile foriegn power, so when we supported the Pols vs the Soviets we were saying that they should have the right to self determination.

In this case it is an intra country political debate, so Obama is handling it exactly right, support the principles of free expression, right to peacefully protest and elect their own leaders, but don't pick sides in the election.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Jingo Killah — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:45:06 -0000

"weak on defense?"

I think that can be laid on Carter's doorstep. The hostage crisis in '80 was probably my first political experience. Botched rescue attempt, lame negotiations. Carter was a 'peacenik'. 444 days. The hostages were released on Reagan's first day. That humiliation, followed by history's coolest bellicose administration, pretty much cemented the reputation of GOP strength and Dem weakness.

PS 'coolest' is strictly an objective assessment. I despised ol' flappyneck.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

BreakerBaker — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:36:38 -0000

Actually, that's the USS Indianapolis.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Jingo Killah — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:33:46 -0000

It's a tattoo on his ass that he showed us when he was drunk. You don't easily forget moments or images like that.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Jingo Killah — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:30:19 -0000

Yeah. The same could not be said for Kerry.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

anna perez — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:29:41 -0000

Message to "Crash" McCain (how many planes was it?), "Deferrment" Dick Cheney and the rest of the right wing pundits safely holed up in their studios and offices: I AM NOT MARGARET DUMONT! My eyes aren't lying and I don't believe you (at least not anymore.) You all may still live happily in "Freedonia" but those millions of Iranians don't and niether do I (at least not anymore.)

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Craig — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:26:34 -0000

I'm not really sure what value there is in responding to that query from the perspective of an especially poorly-informed wingnut.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

keith — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:21:22 -0000

Well, they didn't totally hate that team of the 90's. Cheney was H.W.'s Sec of Defense.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

DaveinHackensack — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:12:32 -0000

The kid asked for reasons why Dems were considered weak on defense, and I offered some. It wasn't meant to be a comprehensive argument about the merits of different approaches to foreign or defense policy.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Craig — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:08:17 -0000

Yikes. That is just a crapload of half-truths and distortions, untangling that mess would take more effort than I have the strength for right now.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

Craig — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:03:48 -0000

@sv:

Yes.

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

sv — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:45:00 -0000

dirty fuckin hippies?

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

sv — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:44:37 -0000

what's DFH?

Re: Throw The Damn Ball

DaveinHackensack — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:22:05 -0000

"It's been my experience over time that it's never the guy talking shit that's the problem, it's the quiet guy in the back that's the most dangerous if something goes down."

Democrats didn't get the perception of being weak on defense because people thought they were the quite tough guy in the back of the bar. They got that because they got America neck-deep into a war in Vietnam, and then actively (and successfully) worked for the defeat of our ally there. They got that because they let Iran invade the sovereign territory of our embassy and hold American citizens hostage for over a year. They got that because most of them voted against the first Gulf War, one that was backed by the UN and possibly the largest coalition in history, and was a against a third world dictator. They got that perception by sending troops into Somalia without the tanks the troops had requested, and then yanking them out after suffering 18 casualties. They got that by some of them voting for the war in Iraq and then going wobbly when the war got hard. They got that by Harry Reid claiming the war was lost before the surge. They got that for calling a highly competent general a traitor in a full page ad in the NY Times.

Hope that helps.