T Nation

Hillary the Hawk

Read it, and tell me who comes to mind…

“Let’s be clear about the threat we face now…a nuclear Iran is a danger to Israel, to its neighbors and beyond. The regime’s pro-terrorist, anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric only underscores the urgency of the threat it poses. U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal. We cannot and should not-must not-permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons…[We] cannot take any option off the table in sending a clear message to the current leadership of Iran-that they will not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons.”

Well, who was it – John McCain?
How about this:

“The first President Bush assembled a global coalition, including many Arab states, and threw Saddam out after forty-three days of bombing and a hundred hours of ground operations. The U.S.-led coalition then withdrew, leaving the Kurds and the Shiites, who had risen against Saddam Hussein at our urging, to Saddam’s revenge.”

Quoted from the Weekly Standard?

Games up, it’s the Democratic front-runner! But you already knew that from the thread title. So here’s the full article from The American Conservative:

http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_03_27/cover.html

I’ve got a suggestion: Why don’t the neocons on the right agree to vote for a Democrat standard-bearer this time around, and leave the sensible people on the right and left to vote for Ron Paul? Look at it this way: it will save you the trouble of having to pick-and-choose the best neocon from among 7-8 potential candidates on the Republican platform (barring the one true conservative).

Ron Paul is already recieving a disproportionate amount of attention from left-wing voters. It is not implausible to imagine the scenario happening in reverse on the other side of the spectrum.

Jeffy, HH, Zapman, be sure to let us know when you’ve registered to vote as Democrats. This could add an entirely new element of absurdity to our delightful forum.

A pretty good indicator to me of whether someone is a hawk or not is their relative affinity in speech content for AIPAC lobbying issues.

Hillary and Obama are definitely taking turns deep throating this lobby.

I think there is only one that remain untouched among the Republicans, Ron Paul. On the democratic side, I am pretty sure Kucinich, Gravel are untouched and I’m not quite sure about Dodd, Richards, and Edwards.

Good post, I agree through-and-through.

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Read it, and tell me who comes to mind…

I’ve got a suggestion: Why don’t the neocons on the right agree to vote for a Democrat standard-bearer this time around, and leave the sensible people on the right and left to vote for Ron Paul? Look at it this way: it will save you the trouble of having to pick-and-choose the best neocon from among 7-8 potential candidates on the Republican platform (barring the one true conservative).
[/quote]

I saw Ron Paul kicking ass on Bill Maher the other day. I don’t understand this. If he had his way, Ron Paul would DESTROY their precious socialist dream state. Welfare=gone, Department of well, almost anything=gone, social security=gone, IRS=gone.

I’m not talking about reform, I am talking about abolishment. The war is but one issue. Ron Paul is a liberal’s NIGHTMARE. With that in mind, I hope the libs vote for him. I’m going with either him or Thompson.

mike

Maybe some of you should understand that not all liberals match the comic book characterizations that are spewed all the time.

However, keep in mind, no matter who is president, it is still the house and senate that would have to find a way to implement policies.

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Read it, and tell me who comes to mind…

I’ve got a suggestion: Why don’t the neocons on the right agree to vote for a Democrat standard-bearer this time around, and leave the sensible people on the right and left to vote for Ron Paul? Look at it this way: it will save you the trouble of having to pick-and-choose the best neocon from among 7-8 potential candidates on the Republican platform (barring the one true conservative).

I saw Ron Paul kicking ass on Bill Maher the other day. I don’t understand this. If he had his way, Ron Paul would DESTROY their precious socialist dream state. Welfare=gone, Department of well, almost anything=gone, social security=gone, IRS=gone.

I’m not talking about reform, I am talking about abolishment. The war is but one issue. Ron Paul is a liberal’s NIGHTMARE. With that in mind, I hope the libs vote for him. I’m going with either him or Thompson.

mike[/quote]

There is no sense to be made of it. The politics of the masses are illogical and idiotic. The war is the biggest issue now and the libs apparently haven’t figured out yet that Ron Paul would close public schools and end welfare. I still give him a fighting chance in the election.

[quote]vroom wrote:
Maybe some of you should understand that not all liberals match the comic book characterizations that are spewed all the time.[/quote]

Really? I’ve always observed that most stereotypes based on sex, race, political affiliation, etc, are quite accurate. Humans are simply animals. They can be classified and labeled like any other species.

[quote]vroom wrote:
However, keep in mind, no matter who is president, it is still the house and senate that would have to find a way to implement policies.[/quote]

Not if those policies were originally implemented under executive order or other quasi-extrajudicial means (the majority of our unconstitutional laws were passed in such a way).

When Harry Browne ran for president in 1996 and 2000, he commented on the steps that a Libertarian president would take to overcome resistance in the Senate and Congress. Read his insight and get a glimpse of what a libertarian president would do on his first day in office:

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Read it, and tell me who comes to mind…

I’ve got a suggestion: Why don’t the neocons on the right agree to vote for a Democrat standard-bearer this time around, and leave the sensible people on the right and left to vote for Ron Paul? Look at it this way: it will save you the trouble of having to pick-and-choose the best neocon from among 7-8 potential candidates on the Republican platform (barring the one true conservative).

I saw Ron Paul kicking ass on Bill Maher the other day. I don’t understand this. If he had his way, Ron Paul would DESTROY their precious socialist dream state. Welfare=gone, Department of well, almost anything=gone, social security=gone, IRS=gone.

I’m not talking about reform, I am talking about abolishment. The war is but one issue. Ron Paul is a liberal’s NIGHTMARE. With that in mind, I hope the libs vote for him. I’m going with either him or Thompson.

mike[/quote]

The libs are not going to vote for him. They are cheering him now for 2 reasons. He is against the war and he will draw votes from the more traditional Republican candidates.

In their ideal world he will get enough support to go in as a third party candidate and get many of the conservative votes the Republican normally automatically get.

[quote]vroom wrote:
Maybe some of you should understand that not all liberals match the comic book characterizations that are spewed all the time.

However, keep in mind, no matter who is president, it is still the house and senate that would have to find a way to implement policies.[/quote]

Comic book and Liberal? That’s a very fitting comparison.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Read it, and tell me who comes to mind…

I’ve got a suggestion: Why don’t the neocons on the right agree to vote for a Democrat standard-bearer this time around, and leave the sensible people on the right and left to vote for Ron Paul? Look at it this way: it will save you the trouble of having to pick-and-choose the best neocon from among 7-8 potential candidates on the Republican platform (barring the one true conservative).

I saw Ron Paul kicking ass on Bill Maher the other day. I don’t understand this. If he had his way, Ron Paul would DESTROY their precious socialist dream state. Welfare=gone, Department of well, almost anything=gone, social security=gone, IRS=gone.

I’m not talking about reform, I am talking about abolishment. The war is but one issue. Ron Paul is a liberal’s NIGHTMARE. With that in mind, I hope the libs vote for him. I’m going with either him or Thompson.

mike

The libs are not going to vote for him. They are cheering him now for 2 reasons. He is against the war and he will draw votes from the more traditional Republican candidates.

In their ideal world he will get enough support to go in as a third party candidate and get many of the conservative votes the Republican normally automatically get.[/quote]

As much as I believe in a social-safety net, I don’t think Ron’d get most of his radical stuff past. I’d just like him to be in the House so he has some guiding force, away from bigger government we’ve seen today.

You don’t have to agree with a candidate to think he’d be good for the nation.

[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Comic book and Liberal? That’s a very fitting comparison.
[/quote]

Just because it pisses certain people off…

Slurp, slurp, enjoy the Kool-Aid!