for a cause that for the pundit is merely ideological and upheld and supported from 10,000 miles away.

Chales Krauthammer is such a schmuck.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062503361.html?wpisrc=newsletter

Nichole

So what you dont like Krauthammer.

BTW I think you ment to write, "far right." Charley aint that a fat a dude.

Now the question: Whats your objection to Krauthammers analysis... seems spot on to me and shared by several left leaning pundits as well.

when he is right he is spot on.  On the other hand, the rest of the time, he is almost retarded.  Net wash, zero.

Quote from: michellesofl on June 26, 2009, 05:06:20 PM
So what you dont like Krauthammer.

BTW I think you ment to write, "far right." Charley aint that a fat a dude.

Now the question: Whats your objection to Krauthammers analysis... seems spot on to me and shared by several left leaning pundits as well.

No, I meant exactly "fat" as in living in the pockets of those who have paid his way for years. Fat as in unable to think the least bit about ever doing anything in the least bold or against the bidding of his keepers.

Krauthammer is a sycophantic tool of the status quo who feels it within his capacity to urge, no, to whip on people toward their possible deaths while he sits his over-tailored, over-paid and moronic ass very comfortably down to table with his only danger being to think the most miniscule thought out of the box and lose the favor of his masters.

He would never consider putting his own ass on the line for anything other than a bank-balance, but feels the need to urge Mousawi to risk tanks and a basiji lynch mob in order that some neo-con fantasy about US hegemony in Iran might come to fruition.

The fact that the "liberal" pigs are doing the same thing is no less reprehensible. The whole crew of pundits never put the least bit of their lives on the line for anything, nor their wages. A plague on both of their houses.

N~

sycophantic tool of the status quo

Come on Nichole, tell us what you really think.  It's OK. We're all friends here.

Quote from: tekla on June 27, 2009, 10:18:27 AM
sycophantic tool of the status quo

Come on Nichole, tell us what you really think.  It's OK. We're all friends here.

In the inimitable, but readily repeatable, words of Toni, tekla. Bite me.

You AND Toni?  Yow, that's a lot of biting to do.

They have been pretty funny of late, sort of a cross between Linda Blair's head turning in the Exorcist or my favorite scene from Scanners.  They just don't even know what to do, or who's side they are on anymore.  I mean Barack has Ahmadinejad hating on him, I thought that was a good thing?  He is actually going to get some sort of kinda health care deal passed, and lets hope that its intended to be just the break in the dam, but we haven't got any health care issues passed since the early 60s, so that's almost monumental. 

He's got that total lunatic in North Korea all wound up, and if he is stupid enough - and he is - to shoot a missile in the general direction of Hawaii (even if it can't make it) you are going to see it go 'poof' the moment it hits international airspace.  They are nuts about that too.

Hell, I think it's kind of cute when the last president violated the Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg decisions and committed crimes against humanity, and the one before was screwing anything in panties (which is why I never hung out with Bill) that they are all shocked that - GASP - he smokes a cigarette now and again.

They are so toast they run anytime any butter is around.

Quote from: tekla on June 27, 2009, 11:11:11 AM
You AND Toni?  Yow, that's a lot of biting to do.

You know you'd love every second of it!!

It's easy, all too easy, to recommend how brave and courageous or foolhardy and silly another should be when that other is facing a repression one's self has never known, nor expects to ever know.

It's been the entire bedraggled problem of the neo-cons and their insane mumblings about world-power and projecting power and how other's will and should act if I do this or that. Fact is the group of them make Henry Kissinger look as brilliant as Talleyrand, Bismarck or Metternich with their idiotic refusals to look at both the world and themselves.

And those who "think they are pretty astute" seem just as moronic because neither do they spend five minutes just asking one rather simple question: what would I do? Instead they get all tangled up in what would Jesus do, or what would Churchill do or some other as ludicrous bs about what anyone else would or should do.

The real question is always: what would I do. For at that point perhaps it begins to dawn on one that easy and simple answers are never easy and simple.

We (our government and populace) have spent the best part of thirty years knowing absolutely nothing about Iran: it's people, it's culture, religions, the things it's populace believe to be true and false. Instead we treat it and them as though they were some plastic chessmen to be moved here and there on a board in order that we can somehow "win" a silly game.

The idiocy didn't begin with the neo-cons, but they have carried it to ever more ludicrously unrealistic and fantastic levels. They haven't managed to recall that sending Kurds, contras, Shia'a, Hmong and Degar (Montagnards) people to die for their moronic fantasies of unlimited and irresponsible power-trips is always a losing game that simply creates resentment and betrayal of those we "are for" and of those "who are against us."

Itmatters not whether such folk conceive of themselves as liberal or conservative: they are just as short-sighted, ignorant and stubborn one way or another.

N~