Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
Don't you listen to host? There is no center any more. We're all rightists.
Seriously, in the not-too-distant past there was a phenomenon involving the "Reagan Democrats" that was supposed to kill the Democratic party. Obviously, that didn't happy. It's possible (not necessarily probably) that there will be "Obama Republicans" in this cycle. That said, I see no signs of either party imploding in the future.
|
Thanks for that, _Jazz.... I always appreciate a good mocking....but why not save it until you're responding to someone who doesn't know WTF they are talking about.
I live, today in a country where the headlines blare, "OBAMA IS MOST LIBERAL SENATOR".....but _Jazz..... this is what I see:
<h3>Washington 1796</h3>
Quote:
http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/documen...ranscript.html
[Page 23]
In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than that permanent inveterate antipathies against particular Nations and passionate attachments for others should be excluded; and that in place of them just & amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest....
....The Government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the Nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition and other sinister & pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the Liberty, of Nations has been the victim. [return to top]
[Page 24]
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favourite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels & Wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification: It leads also to concessions to the favourite Nation of priviledges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the Nation making the concessions--by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained--& by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom eql priviledges are withheld: And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favourite Nation) facility to betray, or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition corruption or infatuation....
|
<h3>Eisenhower 1956</h3>
Quote:
http://www.eisenhowermemorial.org/pr...ments/2063.cfm
...The real point is that Britain, France and Israel had come to believe--probably correctly--that Nasser was their worst enemy in the Mid East and that until he was removed or deflated, they would have no peace. I do not quarrel with the idea that there is justification for such fears, but <h3>I have insisted long and earnestly that you cannot resort to force in international relationships because of your fear of what might happen in the future.....</h3>
....Of course, nothing in the region would be so difficult to solve except for the underlying cause of the unrest and dissension that exists there -- that is, the Arab-Israel quarrel. This quarrel seems to have no limit in either intensity or in scope. Everybody in the Moslem and Jewish worlds is affected by it. It is so intense that the second any action is taken against one Arab state, by an outsider, all the other Arab and Moslem states seem to regard it as a Jewish plot and react violently. All this complicates the situation enormously.
As we began to uncover evidence that something was building up in Israel, we demanded pledges from Ben-Gurion that he would keep the peace. <h3>We realized that he might think he could take advantage of this country because of the approaching election and because of the importance that so many politicians in the past have attached to our Jewish vote. I gave strict orders to the State Department that they should inform Israel that we would handle our affairs exactly as though we didn't have a Jew in America. The welfare and best interests of our own country were to be the sole criteria on which we operated...</h3>
|
<h3>Obama 2007</h3>
Quote:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/200707...eadership.html
Renewing American Leadership
Barack Obama
From Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007
....For more than three decades, Israelis, Palestinians, Arab leaders, and the rest of the world have looked to America to lead the effort to build the road to a lasting peace. In recent years, they have all too often looked in vain. Our starting point must always be a clear and strong commitment to the security of Israel, our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy.....
....REVITALIZING THE MILITARY......
....We should expand our ground forces by adding 65,000 soldiers to the army and 27,000 marines. Bolstering these forces is about more than meeting quotas. ......
....I will not hesitate to use force, unilaterally if necessary, to protect the American people or our vital interests whenever we are attacked <h3>or imminently threatened.......</h3>
|
<h3>Obama 2008</h3>
Quote:
http://www.barackobama.com/2008/05/0...to_celeb_1.php
At 60, Israel Has Much to Celebrate
Yediot Ahronot | May 09, 2008
By Barack Obama
....The 60th anniversary is also an ideal time to celebrate this special relationship between our two countries. Washington and Jerusalem not only share ideals and values, but we share common interests. The bond between Americans and Israelis remains unshakable. It is a tie that every American president (whether Democrat or Republican) has and will continue to uphold.
Our unique relationship rests on a deep reservoir of friendship and support that crosses political divides. It permits us to work together in many ways, from bilateral cooperation on counter-terrorism, to joint military exercises with other regional allies, to science and technology collaboration. As president, I would further deepen our already strong bilateral ties, particularly in the areas of defense, science and energy.
Still, there is no greater gift America can give to Israel--no better way we can salute our Israeli friends on this important anniversary -- than to redouble our commitment to help Israel achieve its goal of true security through lasting peace with its neighbors. The United States does Israel no favors when it neglects opportunities for progress in Arab-Israeli peacemaking.
Israelis can always count on the United States to stand with them against any threat, from as close as Gaza or as far as Tehran, and to ensure that Israel has the means to defend itself. Israel has real enemies, and we will face them together.......
|
Can you FEEL, the LOVE?
The "most liberal" US senator, _Jazz, in the US in 2008, had been making noises for the past year, that position him on the right of the republican president of 1956..... could it possibly be that you don't have an accurate frame of reference to position your own political views?
You've been subjected to all of the government/media blather that I have, in our life experiences in the good ole USA. How do you think Obama got to be so far positioned to the right of Eisenhower.... Israel worship, commitment to use of force in the face of perceived imminent threat, and a pledge to increase US ground troop strenght by 92,000 ? Could the answer be that Obama is simply a mirror held up to reflect the increasingly rightist perspective of you and of many others who don't notice that they haven't questioned enough of the BS flung at them.... ala pentagon PSY-OPS 2008.... and "are we going to wait until there is a mushroom cloud on our horizon?"...circa 2002?
Is Obama, correct, _Jazz? Are ALL of Israel's perceived "enemies", out enemies? Would Wahington or Eisenhower have put this in writing:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Obama
...Israelis can always count on the United States to stand with them against any threat....
|
...you think so???? Really ???
Is it wise foreign policy for Obama and other politicians to describe Israel as "the only democracy" in the ME, considering that the Iranians have attempted....they aren't they are'nt there yet, but they are miles ahead of any Arab country in that region, to hold democratic elections? What do you suppose the reaction "the average Iranian" is, to statements excluding their progress towards democracy?
Could we "right wing" US majority be our own worst enemy....how do you think Eisenhower would answer that question, today?
Quote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ben-co...u_b_99345.html
.....Although politicians, including Obama, routinely refer to Israel as 'the only democracy in the Middle East', the existence of free and fair elections in Palestine is simply ignored. The overwhelming election of Hamas in 2006 was certified by the U.N, then rejected out of hand by the U.S and Europe. Obama supports democracy, but only when the vote goes the way he wants it to.....
|
It is the democratic party that is "done for". The party that uses that as it's DBA, has drifted to the right of IKE.... in my lifetime! Look what the "move" has accomplished for the average US income earner, compared to his counterpart in France, in Denmark, in Germany, or in Canada or Britain. The results of exercising the power of the vote, if quality of life is a yardstick, comes down to one sentence. If you are the average income earner and holder of average asset levels in the US....better not get sick, or think about retirement. Sad.....that it is what it is....and that your don't see it.
The average household in the US, _Jazz, has income of about <a href="http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ThematicMapFramesetServlet?_dBy=040&geo_id=01000US&ds_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_&tm_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_M00700&_MapEvent=displayBy">$48450</a>, little in the way of retirement assets, and slightly negative net worth. Add that household's share of the national debt obligation to the mix.....
Look it up if you doubt where the AVERAGE household is. What is the exercise of the vote for, if not to make a better result than that?