Thinks the Tea Party may be the best thing that has happened to Colorado dems in a long time. Maybe obama knows exactly what he’s doing.
Thinks the Tea Party may be the best thing that has happened to Colorado dems in a long time. Maybe obama knows exactly what he’s doing.
See Brendan’s RT tweet below. The Dems are still swimming against the current with Maes and Buck. If Al Franken can win despite his level of moronism, I’d consider it pretty early to be celebrating Obama’s political genius here.
I don’t know about that, Andrew. While the Dems didn’t vote in large numbers in the primary, I still don’t think that Buck stands a chance against Bennet. I think Norton could’ve. But the creepy crazy Tea Partiers came out and voted for Buck. The general election voter won’t.
Moreover, I think that radicalizing the Right is great for Obama. The moderate middle is not going to swing for raving Tea Partiers ranting about Obama’s birth certificate and socialism in lieu of a legitimate platform, particularly if Israel is messing up shit with Iran. I mean, in that instance, do you want Obama in the White House or Palin? I’m willing to think the majority of voters would say Obama.
Pingback: Going to Sydney next week, what to wear? | mens business suit, women, boy
The Dems are still swimming against the current with Maes and Buck.
With Buck, sure. I disagree with Becky on this — Bennet is by no means a shoo-in. Indeed, Nate Silver’s most recent Senate update gave the Dems just a 31% chance in a Bennet-Buck matchup. That’s better than their odds in all the other matchups, but Buck certainly stands more than a “chance.” In this political environment, he’s the clear favorite.
Maes is another story. He’s a wingnut, and against the popular and well-respected Hickenlooper (I’m constantly hearing conservative attorneys saying they like & respect Hick), he’d be a distinct underdog even without Tancredo in the race. With Tancredo in there, he’s totally, 100% doomed.
particularly if Israel is messing up shit with Iran
So you would prefer Israel wait until after they are nuked to worry about Iran?
I’manutjob has made it very clear that he will use the nukes once he gets them…..
gahrie – yhou are forgetting Teh Narrative … Palin is the ignorant extremist who threatens world peace … Ahmedinajad is a peaceful leader of a country who only wants to see innocent Palestinians settled where their forebears never owned property … (but, then again, there *I* go again, understanding the history of the Middle East) …
Al, I’m not aware of anyone in the US that thinks Amadinnerjacket being in charge of Iran is a good thing, though those that understand the politics realize he’s only nominally in charge, which might well be part of the problem. Or that he is some how a “peaceful leader” or anything of the like. I could be wrong, but I would venture that anyone that would say that is not really paying attention. A friend of mine who’s family is from Iran was very hopeful that the protests around the election would turn into a real and substantive change in direction for the country. Unfortunately that did not happen. I’m still hopeful, but not particularly optimistic, that change can and will come from within in Iran.
Now, if Israel wants to go to war with Iran because they think it is in their best interest that is their prerogative. Whether it is reasonable to support this cause is another matter. Whether it is a wise course of action is also another matter. I think that is certainly a question open to debate. There are reasonable arguments on both sides.
Al, the politics and history of the middle east (of which Iran is not even technically a part) are often over simplified by those that think they understand. It would be un-wise to do so. It’s how we got into this mess with Israel versus the Palestinians in the first place.
There are solutions to the problems in the middle east, but both sides need to be willing to come to the table and find the solution. It’s difficult to come to the table and achieve lasting peace while you are constantly shooting each other. There can be no peace until both sides let go of an awful lot of hate and resentment. This probably means there can be no peace.
If it is true that there can be no peace, then the best course of action for Israel is, indeed, to bomb Iran. This is not the best course of action for the US. Israel lacks the luxury of time. The US can wait for the instability in Iran to lead to revolution, moderation and modernization. So on this point of policy we must differ. The instability caused by the attack will be bad for the US. And the entrenchment of the hard line fundamentalists in Iran will be re-doubled by the action. Making it less likely that the people of Iran will be able to bring about change.
And while we are talking about things on a more macro level, Palin being President for a situation as complex as this does indeed absolutely scare the shit out of me because her first instinct is to shoot first and ask questions later. That’s fine if you are Chair of the Joint Chiefs, but if you are the President, that only leads one way, and it’s not a way we should be heading as a nation. Had Kennedy shot first asked questions later, we’d all be dead or never born. I think that’s a fairly simple fact of history. It’s not smart to play Russian Roulette in the middle of a Mexican Standoff.
wants to see innocent Palestinians settled where their forebears never owned property
I suppose in the sense that Native Americans never owned property here… sure.
Jim Kelly #8 – not even close …
The Middle East has consistently had a strong sense of human ownership of real property … Native American beliefs in many tribes were that the land was owned by the Great Spirit and was only borrowed by humans, indeed it could not be owned by humans … the two are as alike as chalk and cheese …
In the Middle East, in the past 2000 (yes, two thousand) years, there has *never* been a political entity called Palestine or anything close …
At the close of the Ottoman Empire, most of the land in that area belonged to absentee landlords in Cairo and Damascus and other Ottoman cities … those who actually lived on the land did so at the sufferance of the actual owners, and could be (and were) evicted at any time for any reason …
Since the founding of Israel, Arabs in Israel can now own real property, can vote, actually do have their own elected representatives in the Israeli Parliament (Knesset) …
After the First World War, the Palestinian Mandate was supposed to become both a Jewish Homeland and an Arab Country … a large part of the Palestinian Mandate became Jordan (the Arab Country) and the rest was supposed, per the Balfour Doctrine, to become the Jewish Homeland … then the Labour Party became the Government in the UK and they reneged on the Balfour Declaration … at that time, those living on the land didn’t own it, nor had their ancestors owned it under the Ottoman Empire and Islam …
Those are well-documented historical facts …
@Alasdair
“Palin is the ignorant extremist who threatens world peace … Ahmedinajad is a peaceful leader of a country ”
You do realize that one can simultaneously believe that Palin is an idiot who would make a terrible leader AND think Ahmedinajad is a Very Bad Guy ™ as well right? If you were previously unaware of this blatantly obvious reality, well now you know. If you still don’t believe its possible I would suggest seeking help as you have either a psychiatric or other mental impairment.
In the Middle East, in the past 2000 (yes, two thousand) years, there has *never* been a political entity called Palestine or anything close …
Uh… yeah there has been? You know that the Romans renamed the region Syria Palaestina, correct? And that the region’s moniker as Palaestina/Palestine was carried through rulers from the Byzantine Empire up to the Ottoman Empire, which renamed the administrative unit. Although even that isn’t precisely true, because even in Ottoman correspondence it was referred to as Palestine. And this wasn’t just a regional thing, either, it was a name for the administrative unit.
And I have a feeling you know precisely what went on in the middle of the 19th century when the Ottoman Empire sought to create land ownership records (far from having a “strong sense of human ownership of real property” the land was “owned” by the community that lived on it up until this point) and basically administrators just registered themselves as the owners rather than assign ownership to the people who lived there.
To be honest it’s pretty disgusting to me that with the historical record showing that rich Ottomans trying to screw these people out of their land, you’d then use that injustice to prop up another injustice later.