Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Will all the anti-war Obama voters, please STAND?!?! (Page 3)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: Will all the anti-war Obama voters, please STAND?!?!
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[Big Grin]
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rumsfeld as Lurch, Condi as Spot their pet dragon, Ari Fleisher as Thing... and suggestions for Cousin It?
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What goony vintage sitcom would serve for Obama's current cabinet?
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kenmeer livermaile:
What goony vintage sitcom would serve for Obama's current cabinet?

That'd be a much easier question if we cast Biden rather than Obama as the lead. Biden's a natural for the generic sitcom dad who's a good guy and means well but says something really dumb and gets into hot water for most of the episode.
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Aye, but we need a more uniquely themtic sitcom.


Gomer Pyle, for example, except its character cast is too small.

Gilligan's Island? Sure that was Dubya's nickname, but times HAVE changed. [Wink]

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And I'm starting to feel more and more left out. Obama and Biden, I can sorta imagine them as caricatures thanks to the '08 race. Hillary Clinton... well, we've had damn near sixteen years of caricatures of her.

But the rest of the Obama crowd? I'm lost. They just haven't had enough time to filter into the international consciousness, so I barely know who they are in the first place let alone how to exaggerate them.

So all I can say is "not the Addams Family". No administration has ever been so loving, and I doubt this one will break the mould.

Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Family Ties? I can see Tim Geithner in Michael J Fox's role in that show.
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, I like Giligan Island.

Robrt Gates as the Skipper (he may be the seasoned officer with years of DC experience but it's Gilligan's show).

Energy Sec Chu as the Professor.

The Howells as Hillary and Bill Clinton.

The radio as Obama's press secretary.

Wild natives as the press.

And you're right,Rallan, it's a failed exercise. Too soon to cast a parody.

I suspect that when the time is ripe, we'll find The Andy Griffith Show fits pretty swell.

I kinda like Hillary as Aunt Bea, and Geithner as Floyd the Barber.

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Greg Davidson, thanks for your post of June 19, 2009 01:19 AM. It was wonderful satire.
Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
edited: it's not worth it

[ June 20, 2009, 06:02 PM: Message edited by: Greg Davidson ]

Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
For maximum irony points you could cast them as "That's My Bush" characters.
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Greg - not if you don't derive any amusement from it. There's certainly no other point. [Smile]
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yo Greg, re: your "it's not worth it" editing: Ron L may have been referring specifically to your McCain/Obama comparison?
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Kenmeer, I gave your interpretation of Ron's comment some thought. I do think that McCain tended to express a cartoon view of history (not to be confused with Larry Gonnick's Cartoon History of the Universe series, which is actually quite insightful). Whether it's "Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" (not clever even as a joke) to appearing to be unclear on Sunni/Shia differences, he did not give me confidence in his judgment (although I will say that he had more sophistication than Bush, and didn't always descend into the cartoon world of the "Axis of Evil").
Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Greg: I agree. I was just riffing off your earlier McCain/Obama crack and what I (hoped) was Ron L's response to it.
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mormegil
Member
Member # 2439

 - posted      Profile for Mormegil         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Pyrtolin, what's the useful idiot's rationale for justifying Obama's weaseling on closing Guantanamo, ending rendition, repudiating torture, rolling back the surveillance state, warrant-less wiretaps, and the ability for the Federal Government to deem anyone they want a terrorist for indefinite detention?
I am curious, how many people who voted for Obama *really* expected him to give up all the power Bush grabbed and he inherited?

Because I sure didn't. I was thinking my pessimism may have been in error when I heard he wanted to close Gitmo, but stupid me, I thought that would mean actual trials and sentencing for the inmates, instead of just moving them to another facility somewhere else.

I'm unsophisticated, but if we're going to lock someone up forever because they're dangerous, what's the problem with actually having a trial where the evidence is heard, finding them guilty, and giving them an actual sentence?

Anyway, apart from saying he'll close Gitmo, what's Obama done to undo Bush's damages, so far? What has he said, as President, that he would do? (As opposed to what he promised to do on the campaign trail.)

Posts: 800 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Obama is slow and cautious. Not only is that a change from Bush, but it also is a reason why he hasn't fixed everything already. If you only get one reversal, you better make sure you know exactly which direction you want to go in. On Gitmo he also has to grapple with Congress, which caved into fear-mongers who evidently felt that the American maximum security prison system was inadequate.

On the other hand, after 8 years we actually have Pakistan taking responsibility for fighting the Taliban, divisions becoming evident in Iran, a grudging agreement to a two-state solution in Israel, etc.

Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cherrypoptart:
I called this one a long time ago.

Dems only oppose a war if there is a Republican in office.

Well, if you needed any proof of that statement, here it comes, Byron York lays it out the reality:
quote:
Now, even though the United States still has roughly 130,000 troops in Iraq, and is quickly escalating the war in Afghanistan -- 68,000 troops there by the end of this year, and possibly more in 2010 -- anti-war voices on the Left have fallen silent.

No group was more angrily opposed to the war in Iraq than the netroots activists clustered around the left-wing Web site DailyKos. It's an influential site, one of the biggest on the Web, and in the Bush years many of its devotees took an active role in raising money and campaigning for anti-war candidates.

In 2006, DailyKos held its first annual convention, called YearlyKos, in Las Vegas. Amid the slightly discordant surroundings of the Riviera Hotel casino, the webby activists spent hours discussing and planning strategies not only to defeat Republicans but also to pressure Democrats to oppose the war more forcefully. The gathering attracted lots of mainstream press attention; Internet activism was the hot new thing.

Fast forward to last weekend, when YearlyKos, renamed Netroots Nation, held its convention in Pittsburgh. The meeting didn't draw much coverage, but the views of those who attended are still, as they were in 2006, a pretty good snapshot of the left wing of the Democratic party.

The news that emerged is that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have virtually fallen off the liberal radar screen. Kossacks (as fans of DailyKos like to call themselves) who were consumed by the Iraq war when George W. Bush was president are now, with Barack Obama in the White House, not so consumed, either with Iraq or with Obama's escalation of the conflict in Afghanistan. In fact, they barely seem to care.

As part of a straw poll done at the convention, the Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg presented participants with a list of policy priorities like health care and the environment. He asked people to list the two priorities they believed "progressive activists should be focusing their attention and efforts on the most." The winner, by far, was "passing comprehensive health care reform." In second place was enacting "green energy policies that address environmental concerns."

And what about "working to end our military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan"? It was way down the list, in eighth place.

Perhaps more tellingly, Greenberg asked activists to name the issue that "you, personally, spend the most time advancing currently." The winner, again, was health care reform. Next came "working to elect progressive candidates in the 2010 elections." Then came a bunch of other issues. At the very bottom -- last place, named by just one percent of participants -- came working to end U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.

One percent, that's 1%. Hunh.

Anybody know what the body count in Iraq or Afghanistan is today? Gone are the days of breathlessly reporting the number of American soldiers who died and the inflated claims of civilian casualties. Obama has announced an expansion of troop levels and ... nothing. If you follow the news, it's almost as if the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ceased on Jan 20th - in fact I can't recall the last time I saw a report on it and it used to be pretty heavily covered.

Gotta add Cindy Sheehan's response to the article:
quote:
I read your column about the "anti-war" movement and I can't believe I am saying this, but I mostly agree with you.
The "anti-war" "left" was used by the Democratic Party. I like to call it the "anti-Republican War" movement.

While I agree with you about the hypocrisy of such sites as the DailyKos, I have known for a long time that the Democrats are equally responsible with the Republicans. That's why I left the party in May 2007 and that's why I ran for Congress against Nancy Pelosi in 2008.

I have my own radio show, "Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox," and I was out on a four-month book tour promoting the fact that it's not about Democrats or Republicans, but it's about the system.

Even if I am surrounded by a thousand, or no one, I am still working for peace.

Sincerely,
Cindy Sheehan



[ August 19, 2009, 08:57 PM: Message edited by: G2 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Funean
Member
Member # 2345

 - posted      Profile for Funean   Email Funean   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm about to put kids to bed and haven't fully investigated the subject, but this suggests otherwise.
Posts: 5277 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let's see. We have the Iraq war which was heavily protested, but we're finally on a clear path to being out of in the near future (and Bush certainly deserves credit for getting that set up) so there's not much reason to protest there anymore.

And we've got Afghanistan, which was largely supported on all sides but horribly mismanaged. Now we seem to be switching to more effective tactics than starting new fights to distract from it, as was promised, so while there is a minority that protests it on principle, it's only just now hitting the point where a slim majority of public sentiment is turning against it. (And that could easily change if we start seeing some evidence of progress)

So where are the _Iraq_ War protesters? Patting themselves on the back now that we're on our way out.

The Afghanistan war protesters? Pretty much right where they were before, which is to say: mostly existent in the broad brush strokes of people who try to conflate them with the Iraq protesters.

[ August 19, 2009, 11:01 PM: Message edited by: Pyrtolin ]

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
We have the Iraq war which was heavily protested, but we're finally on a clear path to being out of in the near future
Clear path? Near Future? The faith is strong in this one!
Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Daruma28:
quote:
We have the Iraq war which was heavily protested, but we're finally on a clear path to being out of in the near future
Clear path? Near Future? The faith is strong in this one!
We're drawing down troops and have a deadline to be out of there. For better or worse we've already pulled out of the major cities. That's not a matter of faith, it's a statement of the facts of what is currently occurring.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think daruma was talking about himself. Hilariously ironic statements are, after all, his favorite thing EVAR
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I suppose a clear path out of their includes all of the bases and the largest embassy in the world?

Yeah, right.

Pyrt, ever hear of the "military industrial complex?"

They own Obama just as much as they owned Bush...and we are NOT leaving Iraq anytime soon.

"Drawing Down" is not the same as Withdrawing.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I was just listening to a program on Pacifica today and they were sticking to their guns, supporting the soldiers in lawsuits about the legality of the war in Afghanistan and using that as their justification not to deploy there, and the Pacifica crowd fulling supporting them and voicing their distress with the continued warmongering of Obama in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

I happen to disagree with them, but there's no reason why we can't have a declaration of war from the Congress that is completely controlled by Democrats. Their whole contention about that seems to have disappeared now that Obama is at the helm. So the point is some liberals are sticking to their guns, but you won't see them in the mainstream media much so they may as well not even exist for all practical purposes.

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
We have the Iraq war which was heavily protested, but we're finally on a clear path to being out of in the near future ...

You're a victim of the news blackout. Check out current events in Iraq. Events are getting a little more fluid there:
quote:
Iraq’s prime minister has blamed Sunni insurgents for a wave of deadly bombings in Baghdad and says the Iraqi government must re-evaluate security to confront the challenge.

Nouri al-Maliki’s statement is the first government acknowledgment of security failings following an increase of attacks since the June 30 withdrawal of U.S. forces from cities.

Wednesday’s bombings killed at least 95 people and wounded more than 400. …

The attacks dealt a new blow to Iraqi government efforts to restore a sense of normalcy in the capital as the overall level of violence remains low compared with recent years. Iraqi security forces have promised to remove concrete blast walls from the main roads in Baghdad by mid-September with the aim of improving appearance and easing traffic congestion.

“The security forces have failed to protect the government buildings despite tight security measures and advanced equipment and this reflects huge shortcomings,” said Saeed Jabar, a 35-year-old government employee. “It is a message to Iraqi officials that they should stop their exaggerations about the stability of this country.”

Maybe you need to define the meaning of "clear path" and "near future".
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by G2:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
We have the Iraq war which was heavily protested, but we're finally on a clear path to being out of in the near future ...

You're a victim of the news blackout. Check out current events in Iraq. Events are getting a little more fluid there:
quote:
Iraq’s prime minister has blamed Sunni insurgents for a wave of deadly bombings in Baghdad and says the Iraqi government must re-evaluate security to confront the challenge.

Nouri al-Maliki’s statement is the first government acknowledgment of security failings following an increase of attacks since the June 30 withdrawal of U.S. forces from cities.

Wednesday’s bombings killed at least 95 people and wounded more than 400. …

The attacks dealt a new blow to Iraqi government efforts to restore a sense of normalcy in the capital as the overall level of violence remains low compared with recent years. Iraqi security forces have promised to remove concrete blast walls from the main roads in Baghdad by mid-September with the aim of improving appearance and easing traffic congestion.

“The security forces have failed to protect the government buildings despite tight security measures and advanced equipment and this reflects huge shortcomings,” said Saeed Jabar, a 35-year-old government employee. “It is a message to Iraqi officials that they should stop their exaggerations about the stability of this country.”

Maybe you need to define the meaning of "clear path" and "near future".

I didn't miss those news items. Those were pretty much expected as part of the transition to local control. I'm not seeing where they've changed thier minds because of some initial bumpiness and siad "never mind that whole withdrawal thing"

If that does happen, and we go along with it, you can be pretty sure that a fair number of the protestors will come back right along with it. But as long as the plan reamins to withdraw, then they've got no wind in their sails to run on.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
While I have not researched the history of troop levels in Iraq - which was not the only factor in the American presence there because of the actions of private organizations like Blackwater and companies trying to improve the infrastructure - American combat deaths have decreased greatly from the levels of two years ago. American troops may still be there, but that evidence suggests they are not fighting much. And the situation there may well escape U.S. control unless they do, which would create a tough choice for Obama.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Originally posted by Daruma28:
quote:
We have the Iraq war which was heavily protested, but we're finally on a clear path to being out of in the near future
Clear path? Near Future? The faith is strong in this one!
We're drawing down troops and have a deadline to be out of there. For better or worse we've already pulled out of the major cities. That's not a matter of faith, it's a statement of the facts of what is currently occurring.
Dude, you're trying to get him to stop flailing away at some strawman caricature of "the typical Republocrat-voting sheeple". Just nod your head and wait until he runs out of puff [Smile]
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by G2:
Maybe you need to define the meaning of "clear path" and "near future".

Clear Path: We've already left. You guys are in the process of leaving.

Near Future: Soon.

The mistake you're making is in assuming that these plans for leaving have to involve fixing Iraq first [Smile]

Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1