If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Foreign Policy)   Here are five points on which Condoleezza Rice aligns more with Barack Obama than Mitt Romney. Awkward   (foreignpolicy.com) divider line 75
    More: Interesting, obama, state sponsors of terrorism, political convention, North Korea, nuclear powers, Russian President, foreign policy, foreign aid  
•       •       •

2667 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Aug 2012 at 11:28 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



75 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-30 02:23:36 PM  

Millennium: Churchy LaFemme: Biggest difference between Condi and Obama?

OBAMA DIDN'T IGNORE OSAMA.

Osama was outside the scope of Condi's responsibilities: she was Secretary of State, not of Defense of or Homeland Security. If you're going to make baseless accusations, at least get your players straight.


She was in the NSA at the time she and Bush received the "Osama/Al-Qaida intent on attacking the US" memo which she claimed did not explicitly demonstrate the planes-into-buildings scenario, thus she could not have foreseen that event to prevent it. Bush, on the other hand, dismissed the report with, "You covered your ass, you can go now." He should never have been president.
 
2012-08-30 02:24:11 PM  

KellyX: SecretAgentWoman: That woman must have to go home each night and shower in bleach just to be able to stand the stench she mires in each day.

Just looking at that photo in the article she's the darkest thing in there and looks angry for having to be there.

Must really suck for her to have to put up with all those racist and homophobic assholes.

Wonder what she complains about to her lesbian lover at night?


"God, I really hate those dicks!"
 
2012-08-30 02:30:19 PM  

ReluctantPaladin: #4 Russia

Putin is a dangerous, power hungry prick and the sooner his fingers are pried loose from that country the better for everyone, espescially the Russian people. I think that he is truly on his downward last term, unfortunately he'll go the distance but there's no way that he'll stay in power (or even pulling strings) past this term. Too many of the Russian people are tired of him and his cronyism, the demonstrations from the last election would seem like a school debate compared to what would happen if he tried to run again.

That said, Georgia got exactly what it deserved in 2008. They tried to force a russian leaning, marginally independent block back into its fold instead of Russia's, against the will of those citizens. Its simply the mirror image of Kosovo, Russia responded an beat the shiat out of them. NATO and the West was right to stay out of this, no matter how much McCain may have been drolling over the possibility.

/end threadjack


But this is the best, non-boob-related threadjack I've seen in YEARS.
 
2012-08-30 02:30:23 PM  

dericwater: Millennium: Churchy LaFemme: Biggest difference between Condi and Obama?

OBAMA DIDN'T IGNORE OSAMA.

Osama was outside the scope of Condi's responsibilities: she was Secretary of State, not of Defense of or Homeland Security. If you're going to make baseless accusations, at least get your players straight.

She was in the NSA at the time she and Bush received the "Osama/Al-Qaida intent on attacking the US" memo which she claimed did not explicitly demonstrate the planes-into-buildings scenario, thus she could not have foreseen that event to prevent it. Bush, on the other hand, dismissed the report with, "You covered your ass, you can go now." He should never have been president.


I always like to point out that Condi Rice was slated to give a speech on 11SEP2001. It's now classified, but she was expected to speak about how missile defense (the kind that we spend $30 billion on before a single successful test happens) would be the most important national defense strategy for the US in the 21st century.

And this after the Clinton people's warnings about terrorism/OBL were brushed off by the incoming Bushes (who instead wanted - with John Ashcroft's help - a War on Porn).
 
2012-08-30 02:30:28 PM  

what_now: Tyrone Slothrop: Ah yes, the woman who was National Security Adviser during the greatest security failure in our history, and was then promoted.

Well...I'd argue that honor goes to Pearl Harbor, myself. After all, 9/11 was just 4 planes.


Pearl Harbor, at the time, was not part of the United States (Hawaii became the 50th state after the war). The US military knew that Japan was up for something, but there was a lot of miscommunication among the military. Also, back then, the military was not a professional organization as it is now.
 
2012-08-30 02:33:28 PM  
img713.imageshack.us

But sure, keep listening to Condi Rice.
 
2012-08-30 02:33:58 PM  

Dr Dreidel: dericwater: Millennium: Churchy LaFemme: Biggest difference between Condi and Obama?

OBAMA DIDN'T IGNORE OSAMA.

Osama was outside the scope of Condi's responsibilities: she was Secretary of State, not of Defense of or Homeland Security. If you're going to make baseless accusations, at least get your players straight.

She was in the NSA at the time she and Bush received the "Osama/Al-Qaida intent on attacking the US" memo which she claimed did not explicitly demonstrate the planes-into-buildings scenario, thus she could not have foreseen that event to prevent it. Bush, on the other hand, dismissed the report with, "You covered your ass, you can go now." He should never have been president.

I always like to point out that Condi Rice was slated to give a speech on 11SEP2001. It's now classified, but she was expected to speak about how missile defense (the kind that we spend $30 billion on before a single successful test happens) would be the most important national defense strategy for the US in the 21st century.

And this after the Clinton people's warnings about terrorism/OBL were brushed off by the incoming Bushes (who instead wanted - with John Ashcroft's help - a War on Porn).


The GOP: always fighting the wrong wars, on the wrong side.
 
2012-08-30 02:44:46 PM  

dericwater: the "Osama/Al-Qaida intent on attacking the US" memo which she claimed did not explicitly demonstrate the planes-into-buildings scenario


You can read it online, you don't need to try to muddy it with "she claimed". The memo was pretty much a scary title followed by a page of "bin Laden still an asshole".

The real intelligence failings had little/nothing to do with that memo.
 
2012-08-30 02:47:35 PM  

Millennium: Churchy LaFemme: Biggest difference between Condi and Obama?

OBAMA DIDN'T IGNORE OSAMA.

Osama was outside the scope of Condi's responsibilities: she was Secretary of State, not of Defense of or Homeland Security. If you're going to make baseless accusations, at least get your players straight.



She still won't have sex with you.
 
2012-08-30 03:10:11 PM  
In religion there are typically two types of ministers. One is the type that stays in the church, preaches on monday and (while there for everyone) usually only speaks to those with religion. The other is the type that goes out and spreads the word to those without the faith. Challenges them and tries to impress upon them their ministry.


Now, I'm not man of god... but it seems to me that politics have become more like religion for many in this country. I'm not saying it is the case, but it could certainly be possible the Condoleezza saw the errors of the administration she was in and while she may have and might again vote for B.O. she has decided instead of switching parties to try and lower the derp level of her own for the betterment of everyone.

Just something to think about. I don't agree with everything the woman has said, but I find I can agree with her much more than any of those other clowns on the RNC stage this week.
 
2012-08-30 03:12:12 PM  

MurphyMurphy: In religion there are typically two types of ministers. One is the type that stays in the church, preaches on monday and (while there for everyone) usually only speaks to those with religion. The other is the type that goes out and spreads the word to those without the faith. Challenges them and tries to impress upon them their ministry.


Now, I'm not man of god... but it seems to me that politics have become more like religion for many in this country. I'm not saying it is the case, but it could certainly be possible the Condoleezza saw the errors of the administration she was in and while she may have and might again vote for B.O. she has decided instead of switching parties to try and lower the derp level of her own for the betterment of everyone.

Just something to think about. I don't agree with everything the woman has said, but I find I can agree with her much more than any of those other clowns on the RNC stage this week.


preaches on sunday even :P
 
2012-08-30 03:17:01 PM  

dericwater: what_now: Tyrone Slothrop: Ah yes, the woman who was National Security Adviser during the greatest security failure in our history, and was then promoted.

Well...I'd argue that honor goes to Pearl Harbor, myself. After all, 9/11 was just 4 planes.

Pearl Harbor, at the time, was not part of the United States (Hawaii became the 50th state after the war). The US military knew that Japan was up for something, but there was a lot of miscommunication among the military. Also, back then, the military was not a professional organization as it is now.


Umm, what? The military was not a professional orgnization in 1941 after nearly a century of taming the west, and numerous incursions into Pacific and Latin American territories?

That's your analysis? Really?
 
2012-08-30 03:24:48 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: She's a smart, pragmatic non-zealot.


She is a zealot when it comes to foreign policy. She was one of the major architects of the Iraq war (along with Cheney and Rumsfeld) the planning for which started before Bush even got elected.

Watch the Frontline episode "Bush's War" it's extremely enlightening as to why (ideologically) we ended up in the mess we made in Iraq.
 
2012-08-30 03:29:19 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: Lionel Mandrake: She's a smart, pragmatic non-zealot.

She is a zealot when it comes to foreign policy. She was one of the major architects of the Iraq war (along with Cheney and Rumsfeld) the planning for which started before Bush even got elected.

Watch the Frontline episode "Bush's War" it's extremely enlightening as to why (ideologically) we ended up in the mess we made in Iraq.


She's still a neoconservative. She believes any amount of lying, cost, and death is acceptable in order to advance what she views as a noble goal (establishing a "base of democracy" in the middle east, whatever the hell that was supposed to mean).
 
2012-08-30 03:33:02 PM  
Did she come out last nite?? I didn't watch the whole speech.
 
2012-08-30 04:02:38 PM  

The Martintuckian: Did she come out last nite?? I didn't watch the whole speech.


It was ridiculously awkward.

She told a heartbreaking story of growing up under racism in Birmingham and how they always told her that she couldn't even eat at the lunch counters and a poor black girl could never possibly have hope to be the next President but she grew up and became...the secretary of state. Vote Romney!
 
2012-08-30 04:24:48 PM  

Diogenes: BeesNuts: Diogenes: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Diogenes: Beyond not walking in lockstep, I thought she sounded like a better candidate than Romney himself. More like someone who I could trust and respect even when we don't see eye-to-eye. Someone who was inclusive. Someone who had a vision. Someone who truly made herself into the woman she is today.

She is very impressive. I would vote for her over almost all the politicians in Washington. Really and truly she would be a third parties dream. I couldn't see voting for Romney or Obama over her. She specks a handful of languages and is a concert pianist, I know that is not really skill need for leadership but it specks to her intelligence and dedication. I think that is her problem, she's to damn smart to run for President. You'd have to be a power hungry egotist to go through the ringer for that job.

I didn't say I want her to be Prez. But it was a good speech and I think she'd be a superior candidate to Romney.

I'd consider it.

Given the current climate in which I have a hard time imagining myself pulling the lever for a republican for anything higher than dogcatcher at the moment... that's saying something pretty significant.

Given the current climate it's a moot issue. She'd never get the GOP nomination.


This is a perfectly cromulent point. Perhaps the reasons I can't bring myself to entertain a republican ticket are the same reasons Rice will never get the nod.
 
2012-08-30 04:48:40 PM  

MFAWG: dericwater: what_now: Tyrone Slothrop: Ah yes, the woman who was National Security Adviser during the greatest security failure in our history, and was then promoted.

Well...I'd argue that honor goes to Pearl Harbor, myself. After all, 9/11 was just 4 planes.

Pearl Harbor, at the time, was not part of the United States (Hawaii became the 50th state after the war). The US military knew that Japan was up for something, but there was a lot of miscommunication among the military. Also, back then, the military was not a professional organization as it is now.

Umm, what? The military was not a professional orgnization in 1941 after nearly a century of taming the west, and numerous incursions into Pacific and Latin American territories?

That's your analysis? Really?


The Army and Navy were considerably less professionally integrated in the 1930's (the lead up to Pearl Harbor) than they are now. There is a lot of interservice rivalry even today, of course, but in 1940, the Army was still doing everything they could to discredit the Navy and vice versa. Several of the communications breakdowns prior to Pearl Harbor were directly related to the fact that the two branches didn't want to talk to each other; and often wouldn't unless given direct orders from the President to do so. For instance, in terms of signal intercepts, the Navy was reporting to FDR on even days, the Army on odd days (seriously!), and any relay of such intel was done only AFTER the President got the report. This lag meant each branch was not privy to intel the other branch had. Meanwhile, at Pearl, Kimmel and Short cordially disliked each other and took every chance they had to not talk to each other, either professionally or personally. They were quite literally doing things that would detrimentally impact the other if an attack occurred--and which did, tragically, on December 7th.

Since then, this kind of internecene rivalry has been strongly discouraged in the military; so you could say they are more "professional" now than they were then. Sadly, this same kind of jealousy still exists between the CIA, FBI and NSA, which directly led to the 9/11 attacks catching everyone by surprise.
 
2012-08-30 06:54:24 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: REALLY?!? You mean that there is someone in the Republican party that doesn't walk lock step with the Presidential Candidate?!

Are all the Democratics brainless zombies that do and believe exactly the same as Obama?

Wait, never mind no need to answer that.


Yes, if there's one thing Democrats are known for, it's their lockstep behavior and inability to have differing viewpoints. I mean, look at their voting record!

The Stealth Hippopotamus: She is very impressive. I would vote for her over almost all the politicians in Washington. Really and truly she would be a third parties dream. I couldn't see voting for Romney or Obama over her. She specks a handful of languages and is a concert pianist, I know that is not really skill need for leadership but it specks to her intelligence and dedication. I think that is her problem, she's to damn smart to run for President. You'd have to be a power hungry egotist to go through the ringer for that job.


[boxxy_wags_finger.gif]
 
2012-08-30 06:55:17 PM  
*throws a couple of <br>s up there*
 
2012-08-30 06:59:30 PM  

Dr Dreidel: And this after the Clinton people's warnings about terrorism/OBL were brushed off by the incoming Bushes (who instead wanted - with John Ashcroft's help - a War on Porn).


I have a bit of gallows humor in response to this, but it would forever ruin any political aspirations I might have later in life.

/as if they weren't already dashed long ago...
 
2012-08-30 11:07:29 PM  
Big Tent.
 
2012-08-30 11:08:52 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: REALLY?!? You mean that there is someone in the Republican party that doesn't walk lock step with the Presidential Candidate?!

Are all the Democratics brainless zombies that do and believe exactly the same as Obama?

Wait, never mind no need to answer that.


Political parties are poison to democracy and to good government. Things would be a lot better if candidates were all independents and not answerable to a party.
 
2012-08-31 02:10:11 AM  
you people do realize that to be a republican, you dont have to agree with everything "republicans" have as a platform, right? Same thing works with democrats.

It means you are human. Condeleezza Rice is a HUMAN with an actual brain. Just like you.

/ make your own decisions. If Romney or Obama decide what you believe about every issue, you should just be put down.
 
2012-08-31 04:04:45 AM  

I sound fat: you people do realize that to be a republican, you dont have to agree with everything "republicans" have as a platform, right? Same thing works with democrats.

It means you are human. Condeleezza Rice is a HUMAN with an actual brain. Just like you.

/ make your own decisions. If Romney or Obama decide what you believe about every issue, you should just be put down.


There was a time when that was true. It is no longer true, sadly.

RINO/DINO is not just a sarcastic pejorative. People really believe it.
 
Displayed 25 of 75 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report