CNN's Zakaria: Obama Foreign Policy a 'Bold Gambit,' Hopes It 'Pays Off'

Photo of Matthew Balan.
  • Bookmark and Share

Fareed Zakaria, CNN Anchor | NewsBusters.orgCNN’s Fareed Zakaria gave President Obama’s diplomacy-first foreign policy a ringing endorsement on his program on Sunday, lauding it as a breath of fresh air: “Obama is betting that America has matured, and that we recognize that...without the cooperation of other countries, America cannot be secure at home or prosperous. It’s a bold gambit. Here’s hoping it pays off.”

Zakaria also slammed the Democrat’s critics on the right, hinting that conservatives were out of touch: “Obama’s talk at the U.N. was well received all over the world, except in the right-wing stratosphere in the United States. There, he was accused of selling out America, mounting a coup against the country, siding with dictators, and wishing America would perish. If you heard or read the speech, you would be hard pressed to find a single word that Obama said that fits these descriptions. But that is the nature of political attacks in America these days. They are totally divorced from reality.”

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

The CNN anchor led his program with this commentary about the President’s speech at the United Nations, which served as a preview of sorts of his Monday column in the Washington Post. Zakaria expounded on his critique of conservatives in the column. Instead of placing them in the “stratosphere,” he located them in a completely opposite (and much more negative) realm.

At his United Nations debut, Barack Obama urged global cooperation to combat nuclear proliferation, climate change and other problems that go beyond the borders of any one country. The speech was well received around the world, except in one place -- America’s right-wing netherworld, which quickly began whipping people into a frenzy. For Michelle Malkin, the speech was evidence that Obama was “the great appeaser,” though she went on to say, “From the sound of it, you’d think you were listening to Thomas Jefferson.” (That’s bad?) For Rush Limbaugh, Obama’s speech was “basically a coup against America.” At the National Review’s Web site, a debate -- an entirely serious debate among serious people -- broke out as to whether the speech proved that Obama actually wanted the world’s tyrants to win, in the tradition of past intellectuals who admired Mussolini and Hitler. This is the discourse of American conservatism today: Obama is bad because he loves “death panels” and Hitler.

Malkin used that moniker for President Obama during a recent segment on Sean Hannity’s program on Fox News, but she didn’t use the Jefferson line- Hannity did. The anchor questioned the executive’s commitment to act in support of oppressed people the world over: “Then there were the whoppers that he unloaded [during the U.N. speech] about his eagerness to stand up for human rights around the world. From the sound of it, you would think you were listening to Thomas Jefferson.”

After giving his summary of the President’s speech, the CNN anchor continued that the Democrat’s vision is “an experiment to see if we can find areas of common agreement in the world, and then forge cooperation. It is also an experiment, not just in global politics, but in American politics. Obama is taking a chance that being cooperative with the world- talking to other countries with respect- will not be seen in America as weak.”

Zakaria then lamented what he saw as the state of American foreign policy before the Obama presidency, hinting that conspiracy-minded conservatives were behind it. He contrasted this with the “bold” vision of the President:

ZAKARIA: For 30 years, it has been impossible for any American politician to advocate partnership with the world. That is seen as vaguely communist, or it incites conspiracy theories about the Bilderberg group. Obama is betting that America has matured, and that we recognize that in today’s world, without the cooperation of other countries, America cannot be secure at home or prosperous. It’s a bold gambit. Here’s hoping it pays off.

The anchor worded it this way in his Washington Post column: “Obama is gambling that America is mature enough to understand that machismo is not foreign policy and that grandstanding on the global stage won’t succeed. In a new world, with other countries more powerful and confident, America’s success -- its security, its prosperity -- depends on working with others. It’s a big, bold gambit. I hope it works.”

Zakaria seems to be returning to his default position about President Obama as the “hope of the future,” after earlier this year commenting that the Democrat was “failing in his role as leader of the free world.”

The transcript of the relevant portion of the segment, which led the 1 pm Eastern hour of Sunday’s Fareed Zakaria GPS program:

FAREED ZAKARIA: Obama’s talk at the U.N. was well received all over the world, except in the right-wing stratosphere in the United States. There, he was accused of selling out America, mounting a coup against the country, siding with dictators, and wishing America would perish. If you heard or read the speech, you would be hard pressed to find a single word that Obama said that fits these descriptions. But that is the nature of political attacks in America these days. They are totally divorced from reality.

Obama is certainly trying to strike a new path, telling the world that the United States is willing to cooperate, join international institutions, abide by treaties it has signed- pay its dues. But in return, he has repeatedly and specifically asked that countries now must do their part to deal with outstanding problems. It’s an experiment to see if we can find areas of common agreement in the world, and then forge cooperation. It is also an experiment, not just in global politics, but in American politics. Obama is taking a chance that being cooperative with the world- talking to other countries with respect- will not be seen in America as weak.

For 30 years, it has been impossible for any American politician to advocate partnership with the world. That is seen as vaguely communist, or it incites conspiracy theories about the Bilderberg group. Obama is betting that America has matured, and that we recognize that in today’s world, without the cooperation of other countries, America cannot be secure at home or prosperous. It’s a bold gambit. Here’s hoping it pays off.

—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

NEWS FLASH! SARKOZY: PART OF THE RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!

Quote from the article: FAREED ZAKARIA: Obama’s talk at the U.N. was well received all over the world, except in the right-wing stratosphere in the United States. There, he was accused of selling out America, mounting a coup against the country, siding with dictators, and wishing America would perish. If you heard or read the speech, you would be hard pressed to find a single word that Obama said that fits these descriptions. But that is the nature of political attacks in America these days. They are totally divorced from reality.

SARKOZY:

President Obama dreams of a world without weapons ... but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite. Iran since 2005 has flouted five security council resolutions. North Korea has been defying council resolutions since 1993. I support the extended hand of the Americans, but what good has proposals for dialogue brought the international community? More uranium enrichment and declarations by the leaders of Iran to wipe a UN member state off the map.

Seems to be a few

Who thought the whole speech was fantasy land naivete. Which it was ...

Sacre Coeur! Sarkozy disagrees!!!

Who is it that now cares what a French Prime Minister has to say? Bring back "Freedom Fries"!!!

Zakaria and his ilk are the

Zakaria and his ilk are the only critters divorced from reality...he always has been, I can't believe his silly show is still on CNN Sunday's.

Who the heck listens to the nit-wit?

People like him live in another universe, thinking the majority of people do...

Newsflash Fareed...we don't.

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

Divorced from reality - agreed, bt

These "enlightened" elitists expect you to abandon your self-interest and start working for their idea of the greater good ... as they define it. The hidden agenda in these "globalists" is that they will identify what the greater good is, and they only want our obedience. Some arrogant cardinal once said that all he wanted out of his parishioners was to "pray, pay, and obey." I get the same feeling from Obama. 

  • The American tradition, unlike Europe and elsewhere, is that government is not a vehicle to empower enlightened leaders to mold us into their vision of some greater good. Instead of funneling all people in one direction, our tradition is to allow individuals to do what they want.
  • The Obamas and Zakarias of the world believe that collectively, we will all be better off if we ignore our own self-interests and follow their enlightened direction to a common good. But that isn't the American way.
  • That's why we react so viscerally to governments who want to spread the wealth. Collectively, they assure us, we will all be better off. No. They can't run a post office, never mind shaping our sacrifices into a greater good.
  • They can't grasp that when they expect us to follow their plan to the greater good, they want us to abandon our self-interest for the sake of their political theories.

From our beginning, this country rejected that fantasy as a disguised lust for power. That's why we left England in the first place. Like the "spreading of the wealth," the king and parliament demanded sacrifices from us so that they could decide where it was best used. That was the essence of the revolution, and history proved us right.

These guys do not understand America. It becomes more apparent every day. To them, America is just a big country that's rich and selfish. They think we're the dummies. They think we're naive and immature. They have no idea what the Founders actually fought for, or the advanced (that's right, advanced) political philosophy that guided them.

These globalists are like political adolescents. They're convinced they know better. And they expect the world to be handed to them. Unfortunately, in Obama's case, that's what's happened. But he's still a political adolescent. 

Yet another Obamaton heard from...

“Obama is betting that America has matured, and that we recognize that...without the cooperation of other countries, America cannot be secure at home or prosperous. It’s a bold gambit. Here’s hoping it pays off.” 

I'll bet Zacharia's hoping it'll pay off...Heaven forbid that his Obamessiah may end up a failure. Zacharia's a known Obama cheerleader, so this sentiment is not a surprise, just par for the course.  

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

"Bold Gambit" my a__. It's defeat, retreat and run for the hills

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

just another example of total denial

I hear this all the time from black folks calling in to holler racism and white hate. It's not about white folks or racism. It is, however all about so very many minorities and air headed whites placing all their hopes into President Obama as The Annointed One.

If he fails it is not because he is a lieing POS, America hating, Marxist sock puppet for Soros and company. No, rather it has to be someone else's fault. White racism MUST be the cause. Otherwise their faith has been misplaced and badly abused. It'll be a crushing blow to find out that once again a person of color has used them and then kicked them to the curb.

It's a pity really when we have so many truly qualified candidates of color. I'm not sure the psyches of all these low income, low expectation minorities will ever recover when Barry goes down in flames. This is going to set things back for decades.

mature? or naive?

You know, it's funny how certain words get tossed about like maturity and stuff like that, particularly among the liberals.  When I hear them talk "maturity," I think of the UN inspectors, particularly one that Rush dubbed "Inspector Clouseau."  Anyone remember him?  He did some evening talk show, maybe BOR, talking about the inspections, how (in)effective they were, and so on.  To the hoity-toity types, he was "mature."  People like him are the kind that say we shouldn't go in shooting or anything like that, nevermind the fact that Iraq was launching missiles at our planes from time to time.

The problem is, it's people like him that ALLOW the bad guys to build up, or fool the inspectors and those like him.  Kinda like the head of the IAEA or whatever that agency's called, those people got fooled too.

To me, my idea of maturity is the old adgage that Reagan used and should still be used "trust but verify."  And if they screw up, make them pay for it!  People that run Iran and NKorea, those guys are nothing more than bullies getting their way while the "mature" folks say "don't do anything to sink to their level."  If that keeps up, those bullies WILL get their way to the level that we CAN'T do anything about it.

Don't get me wrong.  I don't like violence, but I damn well won't turn the other cheek if someone hit me without any sort of provocation.  Its like not shooting the fox that's going after the hens in the henhouse, even though all the hens will get wiped out.  Then the fox goes elsewhere to someone else's henhouse.  So what did you get in the end?  A bunch of dead hens!  Fat lotta good that did ya, huh?  How's that maturity working for ya?

People, we need to stop deluding ourselves with this nonsense about being "as mature" as Europe or something stupid like that.  That's just plain naive.  It's also a death sentence.

-Jon

jon... Death sentence

jon...

Death sentence indeed.

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

jon...Naive and stupid...Dontcha know that...

all us Americans are just a bunch of war-mongers and only believe in "cowboy diplomacy"?...

The day that America truly embraces this asinine, huggy-kissy, kumbaya Euro-style "maturity" crap, will mark the beginning of the end of this country.  

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

"Cowboy diplomacy' worked out so well in Iraq, PraireSky

"Cowboy diplomacy' worked out so well in Iraq, PraireSky.  We gotta try some more of that!

Huh?

Saddam is back in power?? 

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason

Yeah, actually it has...

Saddam Hussein is dead, Al-Qaeda is out of Iraq, the country is an ally of the US, and it has it's first free, democratic government in its history. Are things perfect in Iraq? No...Things aren't perfect in any country, but they're a damn sight better than they were before 2003.  

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

Al Qaeda was not in iraq before US troops got there, Prairie

Al Qaeda was not in Iraq before US troops got there, Prairie.  You are aware of that fact, right?

Despite beliefs to the contrary, the fact remains that Al Qaeda was never more than 2-5% of the total insurgency in Iraq.  We always were, and still are, fighting a civil war there.

And Iraq being "free and democratic", ROTFLMAO!  Where'd you get that propaganda from?  Even the Bush Administration wasn't brazen enough to make such a nonsensical claim.

Yeah the military calls

Yeah the military calls that a "killing field". Not that you would know! You were probly trying for the poontang the real men were fighting for!  You should change your name to Jodie!

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

Democratic, you are right

Democratic, you are right they are the same as we are.  They are not a democracy they are a republic with democratic processes in electing leaders.  It is not Al Quada specifically but any entity that wants to destroy my country.  Sadam would still be in power if he had not acted stupidly and the people of Iraq would still be enslaved.

Yup Dan

That's exactly right. Saddam is the only one responsible for his demise. 

"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest

Al Qaeda was not in Iraq before US troops got there

Liar.

Doesn't matter, though, as our UN authorized mission had nothing to do with AQ, and everything to do with removing Hussein from power.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

Show us your facts, rdhelm

Show us your facts, rdhelm.  Where's the Hussein tie to Al Qaeda?

I hear crickets. 

Oh, Neal Boortz must have told you!  ROTFLMAO!

You don't need facts, you just know, don't you?  What an idiot!

http://www.weeklysta... -Dav

http://www.weeklysta...

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, rdhelm

This is your proof???  The Weekly Standard reports in 2003, that according to an unnamed "administration official"... Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha!

I am well aware that we went to war based on the speculations of unnamed officials in the Bush Administration, as reported by The Weekly Standard, Washington Post, and the biggest cheerleader of them all, the New York Times.

Here's from the horse's mouth:

August 23, 2006 CNN     Bush admits there were no weapons of mass destructions in Iraq and that Iraq had no ties with Al Qaida.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM

Yes, Bush and Cheyney kept the charade up for as long as possible, continually lying and obfuscating, but even they gave up after awhile.  It's time you gave up also, rdhelm.

Where is your link

Where Bush said Iraq was responsible for 9/11? Where did he say that Saddam was linked to AQ? It's starting to seem that you are an expert on fellatio...er...I mean fallacious arguments.

 "If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest

Double-Zero.. Missed this one..

Where Bush said Iraq was responsible for 9/11? Where did he say that
Saddam was linked to AQ?

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason

What charade, 000?

AQ was not the reason for going into Iraq. Regime change was, as I have previously noted.

It had nothing to do with AQ or WMDs, and you know it.

Stop trying to rewrite history, or find the audio file that, to this point, no one else has been able to, and that would be the one where GWB is saying that the reason for invading Iraq was because of AQ or WMDs.

He didn't say that. Not once. Ever. 

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

Regime Change must have been the secret reason, rdhelm

Regime Change must have been the secret reason, rdhelm.  Now you "find the audio file" where GWB said that was the reason.  Go on "liar" (as you're so quick to accuse) back up your lie.

Ya got nuthin.

You and yours rewrote and are still rewriting history about the war in Iraq.  What a sap!

All of Bush's reasons for going to war turned out to be false (or lies if you aren't a kool aid drinker):

From 1-28-03 State of the Union Address:  “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”

At the United Nations on Sept. 12, 2003 Bush said that previous U.N. inspections revealed "that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents."

On Oct. 7, 2003 Bush said that Iraq "possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons."
 

From the Christian Science Monitor  3-14-03:

"The Impact of Bush linking 9/11 and Iraq 

WASHINGTON – In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11.

Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi president. Still, the overall effect was to reinforce an impression that persists among much of the American public: that the Iraqi dictator did play a direct role in the attacks. A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was "personally involved" in Sept. 11."

And by August of 2003, due to the Bush Administration's frantic propaganda push:  a whopping 70% of Americans believed Hussein was personally involved in 9/11 attacks according to USA Today.

Here's an example of Bush "reinforcing the impression" that Hussein was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.  On 6/17/04 he gave this dissembling denial :   "This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaeda. We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. For example, Iraqi intelligence officers met with (Osama) bin Laden, the head of al-Qaeda, in the Sudan. There's numerous contacts between the two."  Gee whiz, I wonder why so many saps still believed Hussein destroyed the Twin Towers.

It didn't matter that Al Qaeda and Iraq were sworn enemies.

And still, even in September 2006, a Zogby Poll showed 46% believed a link between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 terrorist attacks? 

The incessant propaganda push promoting these lies, long after they were debunked, by the Bush Administration, Fox News and talk radio charlatans kept Americans believing pure propaganda.

I’ll bet there’s still a large number of readers of Newsbusters that still believe the myths of  WMD’s and Hussein links to Al Qaeda and 9/11.  Go on be honset, let's here from you. 

I don't need to find the audio files, dumbass, as I read the UN

resolution that passed, and duly authorized our move into Iraq, along with all the other nations that participated in same.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

Dave

Is Goldfinger still yapping on about our liberation of Iraq?

 

Shy,

Apparently 000 here is trying to convince us that GWB just jumped up one morning and decided to remove S. Hussein from power of his own volition.

Never mind the violations of about 16 UN resolutions Saddam  ignored, mostly while Billy Jeff was busy playing "Hide the Cigar" while Osamas camel-washing goons were using Americans for target practice.

Please use this as a teaching tool for your descendants under the heading of "History Revisionism."

007moron is, well, a moron.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

Dave

"Camel-washers" ???

Come come, the proper term is Towel Heads. :)

 

Regime Change must have been the secret reason, rdhelm

Regime Change must have been the secret reason, rdhelm.  Now you "find the audio file" where GWB said that was the reason.  Go on "liar" (as you're so quick to accuse) back up your lie.

Ya got nuthin.

You and yours rewrote and are still rewriting history about the war in Iraq.  What a sap!

All of Bush's reasons for going to war turned out to be false (or lies if you aren't a kool aid drinker):

From 1-28-03 State of the Union Address:  “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”

At the United Nations on Sept. 12, 2003 Bush said that previous U.N. inspections revealed "that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents."

On Oct. 7, 2003 Bush said that Iraq "possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons."
 

From the Christian Science Monitor  3-14-03:

"The Impact of Bush linking 9/11 and Iraq 

WASHINGTON – In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11.

Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi president. Still, the overall effect was to reinforce an impression that persists among much of the American public: that the Iraqi dictator did play a direct role in the attacks. A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was "personally involved" in Sept. 11."

And by August of 2003, due to the Bush Administration's frantic propaganda push:  a whopping 70% of Americans believed Hussein was personally involved in 9/11 attacks according to USA Today.

Here's an example of Bush "reinforcing the impression" that Hussein was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.  On 6/17/04 he gave this dissembling denial :   "This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaeda. We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. For example, Iraqi intelligence officers met with (Osama) bin Laden, the head of al-Qaeda, in the Sudan. There's numerous contacts between the two."  Gee whiz, I wonder why so many saps still believed Hussein destroyed the Twin Towers.

It didn't matter that Al Qaeda and Iraq were sworn enemies.

And still, even in September 2006, a Zogby Poll showed 46% believed a link between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 terrorist attacks? 

The incessant propaganda push promoting these lies, long after they were debunked, by the Bush Administration, Fox News and talk radio charlatans kept Americans believing pure propaganda.

I’ll bet there’s still a large number of readers of Newsbusters that still believe the myths of  WMD’s and Hussein links to Al Qaeda and 9/11.  Go on be honest, let's here from you. 

"mature? or naive?", jontorlin? Consider "Impecillic" instead!

Are you kiddin me!  The Inspectors said there were no WMD's in Iraq.  And you're making fun, along with Rush, about how incompetent they were?

No, there were no WMD's in Iraq.

Those aluminum tubes that couldn't be for any purpose but making nuclear weapons were, actually, for a purpose far removed from making nuclear weapons.

There was no tie to Al Queda and Sadddam Hussein.

There was no Yellow Cake Uranium from Niger in Iraq either.

Why is it we invaded again?  And how smart is Rush?

Instead, the countries that were real threats to us, North korea and Iran, were ignore for the last eight years.

 

Just how long will you be stuck in the past?

I would call you a moron but then I would have to apologize to every moron who preceeded you.

And BTW I am sticking my neck out here but when during King George's presidency did Iran and NK launch Long range missiles?

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

It's okay to call out Stupid, mightymouth

It's okay to call out stupid, mightymouth.

I'm willing to bet that many reading this blog are still stupid about those facts I just pointed out.

There's no end in sight for the stupid.

Just FYI, 007...Since you brought up...

"stupid," the correct spelling is imbecilic, not impecillic... 

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

So to the crux of the

So to the crux of the matter. You are saying that George Bush was wrong in trying to kick every despots ass while your president bows and kisses every despots ass? Is that what you are saying ohoh7? 

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

Saddam Hussein was no threat to the US, mighty

Saddam Hussein was no threat to the US, mighty.  No matter how much you click your high heels together and wish otherwise, that fact remains.

"George Bush was wrong in trying to kick every despots ass", you ask?  He nuzzled the ass of one, third world, and third rate, dictator.  And who else???  LOL!

And how about that Bin Laden guy.  Did Bush kick his ass?  LOL!

In 1938 Hitler was no threat

In 1938 Hitler was no threat because he signed a treaty.  A posionous snake is always a danger.

Saddam Hussein was no threat to the US

Neither was Kaiser Wilhelm nor Adolf Hitler, you government-schooled imbecile.

Your point?

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

Dave

Hahahaha...

I can't take any more liberal zombie nonsense. Seriously. I can't.

 

Shy, neither can I

These idiots are too stoopid to exist.

If humans were in fact the "animals" they claim, and therefore subject to natural law, these lefties would have been removed from the gene pool long ago.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

007 - no threat.. ??

But you do clearly understand that Bush's view on Saddam being a threat was passed on from the Clinton administration before him. And, Clinton administration was clearly on record after the Iraq invasion in still supporting Bush in that view and in their view that Saddam still had WMD.'s

Heck, Sen. Carl Levin still believed in Nov., 2005 that Saddam had nukes:

'Hardball with Chris Matthews' Nov. 7, 2005

Senator Carl Levin (D) of Michigan, a member of the Intelligence Committee

 

- look there was plenty of evidence that Saddam had nuclear weapons, by the way.  That is not in dispute.  There is plenty of evidence of that.

And in 1997, Sec. Cohen said, " Iraq has secretly stockpiled enough deadly poison gas to kill everyone on Earth."

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin stated on November 12, 2002, "The security of the United States is under threat from people like Saddam Hussein who are capable of using chemical and biological weapons."

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. Senator John Edwards (D).

Bill Clinton, July 22, 2003 :

We should be pulling for America on this. We should be pulling for the people of Iraq.

Bet you never heard the national media report that, nor would they ever ask Clinton about it again. The press did not want intellectual and reasonable dialog in the conversation of Bush and Iraq. Censorship ruled the era.

(;~/ gary

Bush's biggest regret is Iraq Intelligence failure, Garyhall.

Blather all you like about what Carl Levin said in 2005, it doesn't change the facts.  And Bill Clinton didn't use faulty intelligence as an excuse to go to war with Iraq, George Bush did that:

October 8, 2004 San Diego Tribune WASHINGTON – President Bush and his vice president conceded yesterday in the clearest terms yet that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction. 

April 7, 2006  In a speech before the World Affairs Council of Charlotte, NC, on  President Bush stated that he "fully understood that the intelligence was wrong, and [he was] just as disappointed as everybody else" when U.S. troops failed to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. 

ABC interview, 12/08 "The biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq," Per George Bush.

August 23, 2006 CNN     Bush admits there were no weapons of mass destructions in Iraq and that Iraq had no ties with Al Qaida.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM

And you are so full of it with this quote "Bet you never heard the national media report that, nor would they ever ask Clinton about it again. The press did not want intellectual and reasonable dialog in the conversation of Bush and Iraq. Censorship ruled the era."

If you ever read a newspaper you would have read many, many reports of Bill Clinton's support, as well as Hillary and many other Democrats who supported George Bush's war.  What an idiot - turn off wing nut radio for a few minutes and open your eyes to the real world.

007

Put a sock in it. And return all those gadgets in the condition they were given to you. You know how Q is.

 

007

As 007 obsesses and wastes everyone's time here, including his/her own, here are the facts:

GREAT THING:Tyrant and dictator Hussein is out of power, and now dead.

GREAT THING: Iraq is now a struggling but hopeful democratically-run sovereign state.

GREAT THING: A country smack-dab in the middle of the M.E. -- neighboring several key and troubled M.E. countries -- is no longer a dangerous, unstable nation under the heels of a despot.

GREAT THING: Many bad players and terrorists who were foreigners trying to break the will of the U.S. stirring up the insurgency in Iraq -- hundreds, if not thousands -- were killed by the truckloads. We basically created a roach motel for these vermin.

As for intelligence and what mistakes were made on WMD's or some such, who gives a flying fudge, when the mission was vital, necessary, *LEGALLY WAGED*, and a SUCCESS ??? Clueless lemmings like 007FartFace that have Bush/All-Evil-Republicans Derangement Syndrome, that's who... Libtards who somehow think they're clever being Monday Morning Quarterbacks.

 

000moron.

While Clinton was (LMAO) CIC, this nation, or its interests, was attacked FIVE TIMES by Osama and his illiterate camel-washers.

While GWB was CIC, they only hit us once.

What say you, you beta-male, panty-waste, enemy-coddling puke p*ssy of a troll?

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

While GWB was CIC, they

While GWB was CIC, they only hit us once

Yes, because we were sleeping, but we awoke.  They tried many other times but we were vigilant.  Now we have gone back to sleep.

Thanks, Dan, but I still cannot help but notice...

...the crickets gathering around my post on the part of this idiot troll.

Shocker, that is.

:-)

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

You're right, 000moron

"And Bill Clinton didn't use faulty intelligence as an excuse to go to war with Iraq, George Bush did that:"

Billy Joe Bob Bubba Clinton sat on his worthless ass playing hide-the-cigar with a fat-assed, brainless intern while Osama's camel-washing goons attacked this country 5 times on his watch, which finally culminated in the attacks of 9/11, which we know were being planned long before Clinton left office.

About the only thing Billy Jeff could manage militarily was to drop bombs on the direct descendants of the Chetniks-the people who saved several hundred of our downed pilots in WW II, at great risk to themselves and their families.

He also managed to turn tail and run from Somalia when thnigs got a little too hot for his spineless, cowardly ass.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

→ 007memo is lying again.

Memo, if you weren't so busy planting your proboscis so far up the collective liberal colon, you would know this from Bill Clinton's own lips, 12/16/98:

I have ordered a strong, sustained series of air strikes against Iraq. They are designed to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors.

So, memo, you can admit one of the following:

  1. Bill Clinton murdered Iraqis to take the heat off the Lewinski investigation.
  2. Bill Clinton also lied about WMD
  3. George Bush and Bill Clinton both lied about WMD

The one claim you cannot make is that Bush, unlike Clinton, took action against Saddam's WMD program.

Your loyalty and subservience to liberalism is no excuse for the lie you're telling now.

You have no excuse for spouting those talking points without first investigating the facts.

I'm done with your pathetic mewling little butt!

Cool...with regret, I must disagree.

"So, memo, you can admit one of the following:

  1. Bill Clinton murdered Iraqis to take the heat off the Lewinski investigation.
  2. Bill Clinton also lied about WMD
  3. George Bush and Bill Clinton both lied about WMD"

Speaking only for myself and not on behalf of 'memo' or anyone else...

1.  No.  That was the nonsense peddled primarily by misguided, "to-hell-with-everything-else Impeach the Bastard" Republicans

2.  er...that would be also be a "negative" [as in "there was and is no evidence of Clinton lying about WMDs"]

3.   Strike three.  No evidence of either lying about WMDs, i.e. knowing there were no WMDs and falsely claiming otherwise

 

"The one claim you cannot make is that Bush, unlike Clinton, took action against Saddam's WMD program."

And it is a claim you should not make either.  Clinton most definitely took action against Saddam's WMD program.  For example, it was an actual, superseding objective of the 1998 Iraqi air strikes, as opposed to the fictional #1 above. 

Jer

→ Really Jer?

And it's not a claim I made.

But the claim made by 007memo was that Bush went to war under the false pretense of WMD while Clinton did not.

If I was unclear, forgive me, but sending cruise missiles into Iraq is an act of war in my book.

My point is that both Bush and Clinton believed WMD existed, and both acted on that intel.

[IOW] Condemn both for lying, if you will, but you cannot condemn just one. 

Time out, Cool... I need

Time out, Cool...

I need a clarification regarding "The one claim you cannot make is that Bush, unlike Clinton, took action against Saddam's WMD program."

Does "you" refer specifically to 007 and his alleged anti-Bush bias preventing him from making or admitting what you assert is a factual statement [Bush acted, Clinton did not]...or does "you" mean "one"--a reasonable, objective and honest person--would be making a false statement by claiming Bush acted while Clinton did not, or do you mean something else entirely?

Help.  My brain hurts.

Jer

→ After further review

What I'm saying is that 007memo's claim that Bill Clinton did not engage in an act of war against Iraq, is a lie.

Clinton did send in missiles. 

Jer,   President

Jer,

 

President Clinton, Madeline Albright, Sandy Berger, and others also thought Saddam had WMD.  See SNOPES - these Statements & see Acsa.net too

Free.. You are correct. 

Free..

You are correct.  This was never the issue from my perspective.  It was whether or not it was strategically desirable to pre-emptively invade Iraq at the time we did and devote the majority of our resources to that effort, rather than allow the inspectors to continue the search for WMDs. 

Jer

 

Jer

Then perhaps this might help you out:  The Invasion of Iraq: Still The Right Thing To Do

→ Mine either

I was wondering if the President thought all Arabs looked alike.  9-11 was carried out primarily by Saudis.

I knew we had the "right" under the terms of the ceasefire to continue the Gulf War, but I questioned the wisdom of it. 

Well, 007, you do seem to know stupid intimately : ) You have

proven this through many of your posts on NBs.

Want to send us NBs into a coma or cause us to stroke? 

Try using facts or even logic . . .  

 

The facts versus your propaganda, pahuber

The facts versus nutty propaganda, pahuber.  No contest.

You can't find a fault with the facts I use.

The next fact I see you use

The next fact I see you use will be the first.

007memo now = 007 myrmidon

And make no mistake, the [real] 007 would have considered this nadless troll a p*ssy to the tenth power.

LOL-Perhaps even to the 20th power.   :-)

I'll leave it up to this idiot to figure out what "myrmidon" actually means, as it is well beyond the monosyllabic words this turd was exposed to in government school.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

007

Look memo, it's not that we can't find fault with your facts. It's that we can't find you using any facts. 

"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest

If its OK to call out

If its OK to call out stupid, then it is most certainly OK to call out that liar, Obama, anytime and anyplace he opens his mouth, now isn't it?

Instead, the countries that

Instead, the countries that were real threats to us, North korea and Iran, were ignore for the last eight years.-007

Right, and it's a bang-up job El Presidentissismo is doing at jerking them back into line, isn't it?  Isn't that why he's punting on Afghanistan?

Delay of game by Bush, motherbelt.

It was delay of game by Bush, motherbelt.  Who'd have thought that Bush could have drug out the war in Afghanistan for 6 long years and then dump the problem on the next President?

What is it we're fighting for over there that would result in any difference if we fight for another 6 years?

Come on, 1.. 2... 3... what are we fighting for?

"Come on, 1.. 2... 3... what

"Come on, 1.. 2... 3... what are we fighting for?"

What a cliche, not that we can expect much more from those who quote the songs of their Vietnam War-era forebearers. I'll tell you what, at least in the case of Afghanistan- making sure those who died- not just on 9/11, but in 1998 in East Africa, and in 2000 on the USS Cole, along with all those in the coalition who have died in the line of duty since late 2001- didn't die in vain.

Sniff, sniff

Ugh, it smells like memo, (the spanish meaning), has been dropping his BS bombs again. 

"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest

It made sense to attack Afghanistan, Matthew

It made sense to attack Afghanistan, and perhaps be there for a year or two or more, Matthew. But the war's management by the Bush Administration has been disasterous.

Just one example, of many (nevermind that the central government isn't functioning there):   In 2008, Afghanistan supplied 90% of the world's heroin. The Taliban is able to distribute heroin to US cities at will, and reaps massive profits for use in supporting their terrorist organization.

Do the terrorist mules smuggling heroin into the US just drop off their drugs and go home?  They have no interest in hanging around and plotting a terrorist attack or two I guess. And I guess they can only smuggle heroin, no bombs. Why would they do that? Yes, Bush kept us real safe, didn't he?

The war on terrorism is the same joke as the war on drugs.

007

You don't "manage" wars. No one ever "managed" a war. CIC's don't "manage" wars. They plan for them, then they wage them, then they do all they can to win them. People die in the process and it's not pretty. I am indebted to every soldier who has fought for this country.

Wars are not LLC companies. Wars are wars.

Get a clue about life.

 

Get a clue about Bush's incompetence

"Get a clue about" Bush's incompetence.

You've got your fellow kool aid drinkers here, but the rest of America recognizes Bush's reign as disasterous.

double oh seven

"The rest of America".... drank the kool aid that is the mainstream media. Unbeknownst to your blissfully ignorant self, you are part of that "rest of America".

And because the MSM has been so effective -- see: 007braindead -- NewsBusters found it's very urgent calling.

 

You don't "manage" wars. No

You don't "manage" wars. No one ever "managed" a war

Actually Vietnam came really close to being a managed forever war; managed by the politicians at home ... hmmm sorta like this one is turning out.

007, you must be a movie

007, you must be a movie actor, 'cause you're so far removed from the intelligence community it's laughable.

"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me

Then what were the hundreds

Then what were the hundreds of thousands of state of teh art chemical suits doing and the doses of anti nerve agents?  During the first Gulf War lots of our soldiers were exposed to WMD.  WMD wasnt the only reason and not the main reason just the one that the SCM latched onto.

Duck Dan

Shawn 228 will be here shortly. 

"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest

Ah, yes.  The famous Hans

Ah, yes.  The famous Hans Blix.  Here's the recurring exchange:

Blix:  We are coming to inspect Site A.

Saddam:  You may inspect Site Z.  You may inspect Site A in two weeks.

Blix:  Works for me.

If Blix were on "CSI", he'd start investigating after they'd cleaned up the crime scene. 

"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me

Hans Blix...He was...

a joke, wasn't he? I remember watching him and his useless, incompetent pronouncements about the WMD hunt, and getting so frustrated and angry that a dolt like him was in any position of authority about that whole situation.  

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

Ah, Hans Blix~~

he wasn't really all that forceful with anyone, was he?

OH, LANGUAGE WARNING!

Hans Blix couldn't find an ass in an ass-field

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

How do you harvest that field?

LOL Dave.  That's the funniest thing I've seen all day. Thanks for the laugh.

Captain Kirock,

LOL-Hell, even I get one right once-in-a-while.  :-)

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

It has dawned on me, we are

It has dawned on me, we are being told how to live by people whom never grew up American..This guy, the worthless garbage in the White House and all his czars.

 

They aren't American..we are led by foreigners..that's it for me.. 

Zach is a naturalized

Zach is a naturalized citizen, but he did grow up in Mumbia India to a Muslim family.

therfore he doesn't have any

therfore he doesn't have any values of any American I know..

It has dawned on me, jkwtrading, you're from another planet

"It has dawned on me", jkwtrading, that you and people like you who believe in fantasies, are from another planet.

You believe "garbage" conspiracy theories pulled from the wing nut stratosphere. You have a responsibility, if you want to become a real American citizen, not to be so stupid.

Oh, if only you realized

Oh, if only you realized just how ignorant you are.  Go back to Kos before you embarrass yourself further.

"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me

It's probably just one of ILTKenedy or NWAHs multiple accounts.

Trolls indeed...

Neither Obama or this piece

Neither Obama or this piece of crap on TV are American..they do not rule me ...do you like them?

 

I want hunting season to start for liberals. 

Wow, jkw, scary.

You must find many kindred spirits here since no one's calling you out on your wing-nut job, paranoid hysteria.

Do you hear voices, too?

Do you hear voices,

Do you hear voices, too?

Dang I can hardly stand your posts and if I had to hear your voice then God help me.

LOL this guy is probably ILTK incognito! Both are certified

insane  :)

Kos, What planet is that?

Kos, What planet is that?

KOS...

Oh thats the planet of Unicorns and lollipops and rivers of chocolate where everone jumps and sings kumbya. You know the place where Our Great Leader is King and he and the dumbocrats will take care of us all and provide big screen TV's and cars that use wind and not gas and cows that don't fart and children that sing happy songs to our great leader and bad guys that are no longer bad guys and peace and harmony because our great leader says so. So it is said, so it is written, all hail the TOTUS!!

parenthetically(are you really this dumb?)

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

 MM... I'm late to the

 MM...

I'm late to the party.

Thank you.

I feel the same. ..just couldn't have expressed it so well.

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

LOL BT!

...a thank you and a really good evening to ya Lynn!

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

Oh Mighty One... You as

Oh Mighty One...

You as well...just checking in while I can to see what condition my condition was in.

Got to close out soon, so glad I caught an old friend here before I did so.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

neither this announcer or

neither this announcer or his president are American..

 

They do not have values of the USA and it shows everyday.. 

Bet this was news to Clinton as well

 wow, they're even throwing Clinton under the bus these days.

 "For 30 years, it has been impossible for any American politician to advocate partnership with the world"

 

WWW.GS2AC.COM. 2nd Amendment Grass Roots Action in the Bay Area, CA. We're not all "Breakfast Cereal" folks here! :)

Fareed is wrong as

Fareed is wrong as usual. 

The Indians are not happy that Obama shut them out of US engagement with Asia.  This editorial gives a good perspective on their viewpoint: http://www.dailypioneer.com/205327/Nightmare-presidency.html

Obama's foreign policy thus

Obama's foreign policy thus far: 

1.  Apologize for American imperialism.

2.  Talk big about Iran and nukes but don't do anything about it.

3.  Give the queen of England an iPod loaded with Obama speeches.

4.  Give the PM of England DVDs of your favorite movies that wont work in European players.

5.  Declare that victory is not the objective in Afghanistan.

6.  Take photos with the daughters of the Spain PM and release them to the public.

7.  Bow down to the Saudi king.

8.  Call Israel's existence an "occupation" and receive large applause at the U.N.

...what else am I missing?  Help me out...

I think you've summed it up

I think you've summed it up pretty well there. 

 

"President Obama is learning on the job and it shows."  --Boris Epshteyn

9.  Ignore the PM of

9.  Ignore the PM of England's requests for a meeting (five times) until you find you need his support because of Iran.

deerjerkydave...GREAT! The only thing...

that I would add to your fabulous list is the following...

"Obama's foreign policy thus far: 

1.  Apologize for American imperialism.

2.  Talk big about Iran and nukes but don't do anything about it.

3.  Apologize for American imperialism. 

4.  Give the queen of England an iPod loaded with Obama speeches.

5.  Apologize for American imperialism. 

6.  Give the PM of England DVDs of your favorite movies that wont work in European players.

7.  Apologize for American imperialism.  

8.  Declare that victory is not the objective in Afghanistan.

9.   Apologize for American imperialism.

10.  Take photos with the daughters of the Spain PM and release them to the public.

11.  Apologize for American imperialism.  

12.  Bow down to the Saudi king.

13.  Apologize for American imperialism.  

14.  Call Israel's existence an "occupation" and receive large applause at the U.N.

15.  Apologize for American imperialism.  

...what else am I missing?  Help me out..."

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

PS, you missed Obama apologizing to the Japanese...

...for America allowing our battleships to get in the way of their bombs and torpedoes on the morning of December 7, 1941.

After that, he will be apologizing to cheese for our having landed on the moon.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

You missed...

Check out hot chick's @** with Sarkozy. (Is that the right one?)

And tell the world that victory is a concept of the past. (Help me on this one. My mind is fading.)

Same old Z-dude

I see Zakaria is still touting the same philosophy he had in Munich back in 1938.  That's when Britain and France had 'matured' in their dealings with Nazi Germany.

I think Biden also watched that on TV.  ;-) 

 

 

Oh really?

"For 30 years, it has been impossible for any American politician to advocate partnership with the world."

There is no "world" of which you speak, one entity in which complete cooperation is possible. There are several "worlds" several countries, each with their own goals, ideals, and values. Some of those countries are cooperative with us and are our allies, and some are not. 

Every President has proposed that we continue cooperating with those countries that share out goals and values and that we NOT cooperate with those countries whose goals and values are in opposition to our own. This has been going on since the first president took the Oath of Office.  The last 30 years has been no different than the first 200.

You may not be aware of this (as you may be too mature to understand) but "cooperation" in the "world" is reliant upon a series of allegiances where treaties are drawn and followed between countries (and, sometimes, those treaties are even negated due to the relevant situations). This is known as a partnership, and every President has advocated continuing existing partnerships and forming new ones when appropriate, or severing existing ones when necessary.

You see, this is how the REAL world operates, maybe you should visit it sometime as you just may learn something.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

Because diplomacy has been SOOOOO effective

in preventing Iran and N. Korea from pursuing nuclear weapons.  All those years of "meaningful dialogue" and negotiations have really yielded results.  Oh right, they're closer than ever to obtaining nukes, and don't give a damn what the "world" thinks about it.

Hopes it pays off?

Hey dude, hope in one hand and crap in the other, see which one fills up first! 

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

MM

"Hey dude, hope in one hand and crap in the other, see which one fills up first!"

One of the best emperical methods for testing the validity of an idea...

"Reason and persuasion are the only practical instruments against error.  To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged" - Thomas Jefferson

FF

I sense that you and I are pretty much on the "same page". As it were!... 

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

MM

I'd say you're right.

I was going to say, "why don't you "sense" in one hand and crap in the other..." but didn't want to trash a nice comment for a joke.  ;)

 

"Reason and persuasion are the only practical instruments against error.  To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged" - Thomas Jefferson

LOL!

You're killing me dude! Rock Scissors!

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

NICE!

Confirms our blood brotherhood! We should meet... bring your best knife!

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

Zakaria Creeps Me Out

Not one of his best, but if you've seen Eddie Murphy's "The Golden Child", doesn't Zakaria look like that one customs guard/soldier during the Tibet airport scene? The one Eddie says to, "And you, you don't even know what you did, and you're smiling."

Brrrr. Creepy.

"If you heard or read the

"If you heard or read the speech, you would be hard pressed to find a
single word that Obama said that fits these descriptions. But that is
the nature of political attacks in America these days. They are totally
divorced from reality.”

you guys have done a lot of gripping, but neither the Original poster or commentators have been able to combat this suggestion.  Point for the Z man.

 

 

The speech to the UN

The speech to the UN contradicts the speeches he has made prior to it.  Duh is selling out America and that is the point.  He makes speeches and not much else, well he is bent on destroying the USA and is doing a good job of it.  Do you deny this is happening?

Zakaria is one of my

Zakaria is one of my favorites--scholarly, knowledgeable, articulate.  I wish there were roundtable sessions in which he and the likes of George Will, Dick Cheney, Richard Haas and Henry Kissinger would discuss and debate international affairs and the overriding foreign policy issues of the day.  Instead, we get far too much Hannity/Beck vs. Maddow/Olbermann. 

Jer

'Doubling down on stupid is

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

Time for a new tagline,

Time for a new tagline, bt.  You've worn that one out.

Jer

'Doubling down on stupid is

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

The queen of the snappy

The queen of the snappy come-back.  :-)

'Doubling down on stupid is

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

'Doubling down on stupid is

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

and

And 3 meets 4 ....

And then C ..... if you can figure that one out.... in answer to your rather shocking question. :)

 

Really Jer?

You must base this on something else this DipSh*t has said. I doubt, like most moonbats his debating skills are up to snuff. Particuraly if he is defending the colossal Charlie Foxtrot the Dems are trying to pass as "Legislation"(name your bill) on the American People. You know, normally I am not personal on these threads but I have to say you guys(democrats) SUCK as lawmakers! As a matter of fact... your bic pen privaleges are REVOKED AS OF NOW! 

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

No problem...since I'm not

No problem...since I'm not a lawmaker, I don't take your comment personally.  But, regarding Zakaria's debating skills, they leave snuff in the dust.  They snuff snuff.

Jer

Jer

If you ask me, he's just another nice, PC, affirmative action-esque pick by CNN to make sure they've got every ethnicity covered. Everything that seems to come out of his extremely teethy mouth is gut-wrenchingly lame.

Granted, I haven't had cable for a few months now. :p

 

LOL-I think Jer is just rattling some cages here

Too funny.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

Dave

I'm sure Free's a HUGE fan of Fareed Zakari.

 

Shy,

LOL-Who gives to flips and a snort what a guy named Fareed Zakaria thinks about anything, anyway?

Hell, he ain't even from here.  :-)

And then there is that Gawd-awful yeller tie he is sporting in that video.

Hurl, choke and puuuuuuuuuuuuuuuke.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

Dave

Considering what we are gravely stuck with now in the White House -- a punk kid from Chicago with zero governing experience, and a complete dimwit a heartbeat away from the presidency -- this puff pastry had the b*lls to say these things about Sarah with a straight face:

"I'm really not looking at this as a game. I'm looking at this as a serious matter of governance."

"This is way beyond anything we've ever seen from a national candidate."

"We are dealing with very, very difficult issues.... the most scary answer in the Katie Couric interview (the foreign policy stuff was funny)... was on the economy. It was absolutely clear she simply did not understand any of the issues involved... she did not understand the questions."

 

Talk about projection. Hearing these nuggets just made my jaw drop.

 

"I'm sure Free's a HUGE fan

"I'm sure Free's a HUGE fan of Fareed Zakari."

Probably not...but that's offset by the fact that Pop Tech now absolutely worships the guy.

Jer 

yeah he is a pretty face

If you look at his picture on this piece he is a picture of beauty.  but if you compare it to the one above in the hot story bar in that picture he looks like he is morphing into a lizard man.

"The ultimate result of shielding men from the effect of folly is to fill the world with fools."

Herbert Spencer's "State Tamperings with Money Banks"

Zakaria is one of my

Zakaria is one of my favorites--scholarly, knowledgeable, articulate.

Yeah if he were halfrican then he might be president as you just described the SCM veiw of Duh One.  Explains a lot.

Who knows, Dan...If you

Who knows, Dan...If you possessed the academic credentials of Zakaria, the same adjectives might even be applicable to you.

Jer

What "foreign policy"? I

What "foreign policy"?

I haven't seen any foreign policy...has anyone else?

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.

Obama can do no wrong Filters

"If you heard or read the speech, you would be hard pressed to find a
single word that Obama said that fits these descriptions. But that is
the nature of political attacks in America these days. They are totally
divorced from reality."

Hey "Z" man,  Only those with Obama colored glasses can not see the truth.

Remember if you wear brown colored glasses you are more likely to step into a pile of Sticky brown stuff.

"The ultimate result of shielding men from the effect of folly is to fill the world with fools."

Herbert Spencer's "State Tamperings with Money Banks"

Great write!!!!

I also heard the speech our President gave to the UN, the world recognizes that here we have a leader, a world leader. I believe deep in his heart, even Rusty Limbaugh admires our President.

 

       

 

blatherskite

blatherskite

Rusty Limbaugh admires the teleprompter

not the empty suit mouthing the words. 

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

OOPS!!!

Looks like I hit the DITTOHEAD / PINHEAD's nerve..

 

    "The world loves the empty suit."    ~ Rusty Limbaugh  

 

kengie - cr@p in a bag...

...your posts are like the old Halloween trick of putting cr@p in a brown bag, lighting it, and leaving it on a doorstep, and ringing the bell...then snickering in the bushes when they try to stomp it out.   Grow up.

v

...an error was made in 2008

Blinks...

The world? Who is the world? Do you mean UN ambassadors? How do you know what the entire world thinks? 

What is there to admire about Obama? Seriously? The guy is a serial liar. He spent twenty years in a racist church. When convenient, he jettisons people that helped him get to where he is. I'm waiting for your defense of this immoral behavior. And that's just the tip of the iceberg! 

-----
Random-jumbled-thoughts.blogspot.com

No Surprise Here. Zakaria's Their Token al Qaeda Member.

Like all of them at CNN, he has a total disconnect with America, and hates Jews.

This is an interesting

This is an interesting situation.  The same poorly educated and histrionic poster who went by the label "BarryBonds" on other posts is now referring to himself/herself as "007memo".  Notice the same misspelling and poor grammar patterns.

Ya know, I was thinking the

Ya know, I was thinking the same thing reading another thread.  The forced "LOLs" and "I gaze down on you from my superior perch" attitude just drips from both of them.

It's a struggle not to respond to their every ill-informend, emotional utterance.  But it's not worth it.  Like every know-it-all college grad that has the world by the short hairs, they gotta learn on their own.

If they can believe that theories and opinions, repeated often enough become "facts," then there's no sense pummeling them with actual facts.  They gotta figure it out themselves.

"BarryBonds" is gone...

...and like other trolls, he comes back with a not-so different name.  Almost like they want to be recognized as it's some badge of courage or such.

v

...an error was made in 2008