Random Politics & Religion #00

In that same instance, it was the Republican base that demanded Obama bring home our troops from a warzone where too many US soldiers were dying, so he did just that.

Now he's being blamed for doing what was demanded of him.

Clinton did well for us financially. But he was a scumbag in every way you can imagine.

Not true, the draw down (and rightfully so) was in place before Obama took office. Facts are silly things.

The war in Iraq wasn't entirely unpopular, as many viewed the decision to invade Iraq as visionary, until it started costing US soldiers their lives. The most outspoken of the war's detractors suddenly became the republican base officials, generating demands that the troops return home, after the 2008 election. While it was part of his 2008 election platform, he used that platform to secure votes from both sides of the political spectrum, so it wasn't just the democratic camp voting for him on that issue.

I didn't say that the draw down was Obama's idea. I said that Obama saw a political opportunity and captured it.

If I remember correctly, the most outspoken people were stating that the method of leaving (leaving without any support to their infrastructure) was more damaging than the war itself.

Which is basically what happened.

Meanwhile your GOP is essentially comitting treason and it's all cool with you.

Well, the US couldn't really afford to go into that war in the first place, and as much as I agree there should have been some kind of support planned (upon entering, and exiting), it's easily argued it wasn't a financially sound idea.

So are you agreeing?

Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy.

“On 9-10 May of this year,” the May 14 memorandum explained, “Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow.” (Tunney was Kennedy’s law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) “The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.”

Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. “The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.”

Kennedy made Andropov a couple of specific offers.

First he offered to visit Moscow. “The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.” Kennedy would help the Soviets deal with Reagan by telling them how to brush up their propaganda.

Then he offered to make it possible for Andropov to sit down for a few interviews on American television. “A direct appeal … to the American people will, without a doubt, attract a great deal of attention and interest in the country. … If the proposal is recognized as worthy, then Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews. … The senator underlined the importance that this initiative should be seen as coming from the American side.”

Kennedy would make certain the networks gave Andropov air time–and that they rigged the arrangement to look like honest journalism.

Agreed.

I watched hockey the other day while eating maple syrup !

Very Canadian !

Careful, agreeing with a Canadian is very liberal thing to do.

No, I'm showing you what real treason looks like. Have a read.

Yeah, you should apologize to me for agreeing with you!

I feel like I need to expand on this statement.

Ramy, do you consider Obama a traitor?

Piss off you bloody wanker.

Sorry, that came across as rude. I meant it in the nicest, most Canadian way possible: PISS OFF YOU BLOODY *** HOSER!

100% Grade A Canadian.

Even your insults have apologies in it.

Frankly I think most politicians right now are -- if not treasonous -- then purposefully and knowingly abusing their offices and straying from the intended purpose of serving their constituents and the country.

As for Obama, or these senators, or any other political chicanery being literal treason, I think it's a bit more unclear. Hence my use of the term "essentially".

I think you've got a bunch of people playing grabass with the nation in both parties and all camps.

Pfft, what do you take me for, some kind of AMERICAN?!