PDA

View Full Version : Against Healthcare Reform? You Support the Taliban, Then!


revefsreleets
09-16-2009, 10:01 AM
I almost can't believe my eyes...but it's true...the newest thrust form the left is that not supporting Obama and blindly signing whatever half-assed POS bill he spurts out means you support the terrorists. I guess, given the lows the left will stoop to, this should not be a surprise, but I'm sorry, I'm shocked by this...and Rubin is usually pretty good.

http://www.ohio.com/editorial/commentary/59429432.html

Unwitting aid to the Taliban By Trudy Rubin
Philadelphia Inquirer

Published on Wednesday, Sep 16, 2009
PHILADELPHIA: Are some Democratic legislators who are squabbling over health care secret supporters of the Taliban? Are some Republican legislators in cahoots with Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?



I'm dead serious when I ask those questions, as we pass another anniversary of 9/11. President Obama must make critical decisions this fall about policies toward Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran decisions forced on him early in his term because of wrongheaded policies by the previous administration.



Eight years after the twin towers fell, militant Islamists in all three countries are on a roll. They think the United States is on an economic and political downslide. Fearful at first of Obama because of his global appeal they now sense he may be done in at home by his own party, and by sharp Republican opposition.
''Both the internal and external signs of this Western liberal democracy show that it's approaching defeat and collapse,'' said top Ahmadinejad aide Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi last week, echoing past comments by his boss. I believe Hashemi is wrong. But psychology figures powerfully in the unwillingness of Iranians (or the Taliban) to compromise and we are giving them good reason to believe they are winning.



A U.S. president who fails on his signature issue health care won't have the strength and public support to deal with new challenges by Islamists. He will be seen at home and abroad as seriously weakened. Yet neither party seems much bothered by this threat.



Among Democrats, many liberals are so mesmerized by their allegiance to one provision of health care or another, that they fail to consider the consequences to an Obama presidency of failure. Many Democrats also doubt Obama's policy on Afghanistan. But I believe he can still make smart choices about troop levels, provided he isn't fatally wounded first by the politics of health care.



Yet such wounds are just what some Republicans hope to inflict. Republican Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina put it bluntly: ''If we're able to stop Obama on this (health care) it will be his Waterloo. It will break him.''



Never mind that the stunning challenges Obama faces regarding the Taliban result from eight years of neglect of Afghanistan by the previous president in favor of Iraq. ''President Bush had eight years to build up an Afghan army, to invest in agriculture and jobs there, and he didn't do it,'' says Ahmed Rashid, one of the world's leading experts on the Taliban.



And never mind that Republicans like Sens. Lindsay Graham and John McCain are supporting the president on the Afghan issue. The lure of the DeMint scenario seems to have blinded much of the GOP to the dangers that slash-and-burn politics pose to our policy abroad.



So, for those Democrats and Republicans whose narrow focus puts our foreign policy at risk, let me lay out those dangers:
As our top military brass have bluntly said, things are getting worse in Afghanistan. I needn't remind you this is the country in which the 9/11 tragedy was hatched.



Afghan Taliban are gaining ground, Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida still plot inside their Pakistani safe haven, and Pakistani jihadis are trying to destabilize a country with nukes and to provoke a war with India, which also has nuclear arms.



Any U.S. hope of improving the situation requires a reversal in the current victor mentality of Taliban adherents. The U.S. military hopes to achieve this by demonstrating our commitment to secure and aid Afghans, even as we train up the Afghan army to replace us. If the Taliban is convinced of our commitment, chances rise that we can peel off mid- and low-level members who are in the fight for money or jobs.



But if the Taliban believe we, and Obama, are weak, they will refuse to bargain. Similarly, so long as Iranian leaders believe that our democracy is approaching collapse, they will feel confident in refusing to negotiate about their nuclear program and flouting Obama's September deadline for them to do so.
The same top Ahmadinejad aide who predicted America's fall said Iran will not even talk about halting its uranium enrichment program.



This leaves Obama with two choices: trying to rally the U.N. Security Council around new sanctions, which will be made all the more difficult if the world perceives him as failing at home; or turning to military action. His options might expand if he were strengthened at home.



So legislators on both sides of the aisle should start thinking beyond their narrow self-interest. If Democrats fail to find a health-care compromise they may doom their president's foreign policy, and their own reelection chances. They will certainly be helping the Taliban, by undercutting Obama's ability to craft a policy that could save Afghanistan.



If Republicans adopt the South Carolina approach don't fight on policy, fight to destroy Obama they'll undercut national security. Shouting ''You lie'' the words of South Carolinian Joe Wilson is easy and cheap. But do Republicans really want to give Ahmadinejad a boost?



George W. Bush's policies immeasurably strengthened Iran, and now we all must deal with the consequences. Isn't it time for some grown-up behavior on Capitol Hill?
Rubin is a columnist and editorial-board member for the Philadelphia Inquirer. She can be e-mailed at trubin@phillynews.com.

KeiselPower99
09-16-2009, 10:42 AM
I didnt read the whole article the first line about made my head explode.

Godfather
09-16-2009, 11:02 AM
I started reading it (didn't read the whole thing), but that comes off as a parody of the people on the right who said anyone questioning Bush supported the terrorists.

arge5809
09-16-2009, 12:19 PM
wow.... :banging:

xfl2001fan
09-16-2009, 02:08 PM
Interesting...talk about stretching your $hit thin...

MACH1
09-16-2009, 02:19 PM
Scraping the bottom of the barrel for excuses again. Remember also if you don't go along with Messiahs rantings your a racist too.

When I read that article the first thing to come to mind was this.....

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rIZfaHBJWHE/SoZ6VP_Oz_I/AAAAAAAAPSM/aPqYE948ELM/s400/ObamaCare+Lies2.jpg

7SteelGal43
09-16-2009, 02:25 PM
The author paints himself as a partisan hack from the beginning. Not sure the rest of his arguments can be taken seriously.

Is he suggesting that we cave, and become subserviant to President Obama just so he'll look strong in the eyes of our enemies - the terrorists - ????
Good Grief.

I can't remember an example when Bush was Commander in Chief during a war against terrorists where any Conservative suggested anyone cave on domestic policy to create a look of a "Strong President". Did we repeat the mantra "support the troops" ? Damn right we did.

This Conservative is behind President Obama as Commander in Chief as he commits himself to remain strong in his resolve to find and capture Bin Laden. If he commits himself to fight and defeat terrorists, keep us safe from attacks, I'll support him in that effort 100%

But if the author thinks we should pretend to be supportive of domestic policy we are diametrically opposed too...........[expletive deleted] that.


EDIT: How 'bout this. How 'bout we show the world an America where we Support our Commander in Chief as he protects our country, AND at the same time, show them an America where you CAN voice opposition to his domestic policy without fearing for your life or freedom ?

revefsreleets
09-16-2009, 02:29 PM
It's a her...and Trudy Rubin is usually VERY solid on the middle east...she's there, knows the people and the culture, and has her ear to the rail. True, she hates Bush, but she usually is a little more staid in her approach to the partisan side of things.

This is very out of character for her...but also severely cripples her credibility when she gets back to reporting and prognosticating on reality...

Godfather
09-16-2009, 03:35 PM
It's a her...and Trudy Rubin is usually VERY solid on the middle east...she's there, knows the people and the culture, and has her ear to the rail. True, she hates Bush, but she usually is a little more staid in her approach to the partisan side of things.

This is very out of character for her...but also severely cripples her credibility when she gets back to reporting and prognosticating on reality...

I'm not particularly familiar with her work, but that makes me even more convinced the article is satire.

revefsreleets
09-16-2009, 03:54 PM
I don't believe she's capable of it...she's deadly serious...

Steelerstrength
09-16-2009, 06:03 PM
[QUOTE=revefsreleets;660633]I almost can't believe my eyes...but it's true...the newest thrust form the left is that not supporting Obama and blindly signing whatever half-assed POS bill he spurts out means you support the terrorists. I guess, given the lows the left will stoop to, this should not be a surprise, but I'm sorry, I'm shocked by this...and Rubin is usually pretty good. QUOTE]

I find entertainment in reading your posts, Rev. Most are very informative, some are provocatively opinionated, and some appear intellectually narcissistic to the point where one can envision you reading your own posts while looking in the mirror, winking. And please, in no way do I mean that as an insult. :thmbup:

Don't be upset, I really do enjoy the game you play on this site! I sincerely compliment your personal perspective on politics, and your chosen method for conveying the message! I actually look forward to your next post. You would be a fantastic character in a sitcom! :thumbsup:

Play on!

fansince'76
09-16-2009, 06:36 PM
''Both the internal and external signs of this Western liberal democracy show that it's approaching defeat and collapse,'' said top Ahmadinejad aide Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi last week, echoing past comments by his boss. I believe Hashemi is wrong. But psychology figures powerfully in the unwillingness of Iranians (or the Taliban) to compromise — and we are giving them good reason to believe they are winning.

A U.S. president who fails on his signature issue — health care — won't have the strength and public support to deal with new challenges by Islamists. He will be seen at home and abroad as seriously weakened. Yet neither party seems much bothered by this threat.

Ummm, he's already failing on that front and has done more than enough on his own to project an image of being a milquetoast. He tried "engagement" and the olive branch was very promptly and emphatically slapped away by the Iranian Mullah-ocracy when he extended it. Then he stood by silently while they rigged an election and then slaughtered their own citizens by the hundreds when they tried to protest. Time to try a new tack.

tony hipchest
09-16-2009, 07:17 PM
I find entertainment in reading your posts, Rev. Most are very informative, some are provocatively opinionated, and some appear intellectually narcissistic to the point where one can envision you reading your own posts while looking in the mirror, winking. And please, in no way do I mean that as an insult. :thmbup:

Don't be upset, I really do enjoy the game you play on this site! I sincerely compliment your personal perspective on politics, and your chosen method for conveying the message! I actually look forward to your next post. You would be a fantastic character in a sitcom! :thumbsup:

Play on!

i agree. it was more than a few times, i was accused of and chastised for posting an op-ed piece, spining and twisting it with my own comments, and then passing it along as TRUTH and FACT.

lo and behold! what have we here?

I almost can't believe my eyes...but it's true...the newest thrust form the left is that not supporting Obama and blindly signing whatever half-assed POS bill he spurts out means you support the terrorists.

who is this "you" he speaks of? no, it is not a fact that the voting public (on either side) support terrorists.

the whole gist (of what was pretty much a cherry picked, poorly written article) was she thinks that both sides OF POLITICIANS are undermining each others efforts.

nothing original or groundbreaking there. :noidea:

just another excuse to :shout:-PANIC!!!

:stirthepot:

the charade definitely is comical, though.

Preacher
09-16-2009, 07:34 PM
Hilarious how Tony sidesteps the real point of the article: Stop opposing Obama because in doing so, you are strenghening the terrorist positions against him by virture of weakening him.

And there wasn't one word about how the same actions form the democrats hurt George Bush.

It is a hack piece.

tony hipchest
09-16-2009, 08:34 PM
Hilarious how Tony sidesteps the real point of the article: Stop opposing Obama because in doing so, you are strenghening the terrorist positions against him by virture of weakening him.

And there wasn't one word about how the same actions form the democrats hurt George Bush.

It is a hack piece.funny how, once again, preacher swoops in to be the hero and save the day.

*insert andy kaufman "mighty mouse" video here*

even more funny how preacher cant even decipher the "REAL POINT" of the article and can only see what revs bolds for him.


So legislators on both sides of the aisle should start thinking beyond their narrow self-interest. If Democrats fail to find a health-care compromise they may doom their president's foreign policy, and their own reelection chances. They will certainly be helping the Taliban, by undercutting Obama's ability to craft a policy that could save Afghanistan.



If Republicans adopt the South Carolina approach — don't fight on policy, fight to destroy Obama — they'll undercut national security. Shouting ''You lie'' — the words of South Carolinian Joe Wilson — is easy and cheap. But do Republicans really want to give Ahmadinejad a boost?

while i agree this is a hack piece i have correctly bolded the thesis statement, crux, main point, etc. of the article.

english 101.

the least revs coulda done was accurately dump his rant off onto the people in washingtomn for which the article was intended and directed at as opposed to spinning it off onto me and you and millions of other voters who put these politicians in place.

its just more empty rhetoric being spun into propoganda that suits an agenda.

:coffee:

im suprised you got in knee deep. but then again according to revlogic YOU "really want to give Ahmadinejad a boost" (as does he).

Preacher
09-16-2009, 09:01 PM
funny how, once again, preacher swoops in to be the hero and save the day.

*insert andy kaufman "mighty mouse" video here*

even more funny how preacher cant even decipher the "REAL POINT" of the article and can only see what revs bolds for him.



while i agree this is a hack piece i have correctly bolded the thesis statement, crux, main point, etc. of the article.

english 101.

the least revs coulda done was accurately dump his rant off onto the people in washingtomn for which the article was intended and directed at as opposed to spinning it off onto me and you and millions of other voters who put these politicians in place.

its just more empty rhetoric being spun into propoganda that suits an agenda.

:coffee:

im suprised you got in knee deep. but then again according to revlogic YOU "really want to give Ahmadinejad a boost" (as does he).

See tony,

English 101 would tell you that I wrote about how they did NOT follow that same logic under BUSH. Now it is demanded of both side of the aisle under Obama.

The main point of the article, which you are so trying to ignore, is that UNDER OBAMA, they should do what Obama wants, since he is trying to fix what Bush supposedly broke.

There is NO MENTION of bipartisanship or the demand of it under Bush. Thus, this isn't a piece demanding bi-partisanship. It is a piece demanding we support a liberal democrat politician for no better reason, than he is a liberal and THAT is how you fix things.

It sure is kinda cute how you like to try and educate me though.... When your own comments show that you have no idea what my main argument really is.

or are you still upset you were :busted: for taking a quote out of context and making say what it wasn't saying? Funny thing... it seems you are doing that here too!

tony hipchest
09-16-2009, 09:14 PM
:huh: so now you are confusing (or intentionally muddying) your own argument with the main point of the hack job article? :willy:

:shout:- "deflect, deflect, deflect!!!"

Preacher
09-16-2009, 09:58 PM
:huh: so now you are confusing (or intentionally muddying) your own argument with the main point of the hack job article? :willy:

:shout:- "deflect, deflect, deflect!!!"

So sad.

Ok. I'll bring it down for you.

Originally, I said.

real point of the article: Stop opposing Obama because in doing so, you are strenghening the terrorist positions against him by virture of weakening him.

And there wasn't one word about how the same actions form the democrats hurt George Bush.
That is called critical thinking. The main point of the article I have contended, was that politicians need to agree with Obama, or they strengthen terrorists by weakening a commander in chief of the US.

I then commented on how there was no reference to the same issue under George Bush and thus, concluded that by keeping silent during the Bush years and now not referencing the democrat's actions during those years, this author has written a hack piece.

From this point Tony, you post
even more funny how preacher cant even decipher the "REAL POINT" of the article and can only see what revs bolds for him.
So legislators on both sides of the aisle should start thinking beyond their narrow self-interest. If Democrats fail to find a health-care compromise they may doom their president's foreign policy, and their own reelection chances. They will certainly be helping the Taliban, by undercutting Obama's ability to craft a policy that could save Afghanistan.



If Republicans adopt the South Carolina approach don't fight on policy, fight to destroy Obama they'll undercut national security. Shouting ''You lie'' the words of South Carolinian Joe Wilson is easy and cheap. But do Republicans really want to give Ahmadinejad a boost?while i agree this is a hack piece i have correctly bolded the thesis statement, crux, main point, etc. of the article.
The funny thing is... you seem to ignore the point where I state, "Stop opposing Obama." See, that IS what he said.

So in hopes to help you understand... I post it again, with a different way of explaining it.

See tony,

English 101 would tell you that I wrote about how they did NOT follow that same logic under BUSH. Now it is demanded of both side of the aisle under Obama.

The main point of the article, which you are so trying to ignore, is that UNDER OBAMA, they should do what Obama wants, since he is trying to fix what Bush supposedly broke. And in context of the discussion, what was that same logic? Support Obama or you are weakening him in the face of the terrorists.

Sadly, you still miss the fact that I have the main point, and am looking beyond it to see the hack piece for what it really is

so now you are confusing (or intentionally muddying) your own argument with the main point of the hack job article?

So let me see if I get this right.

So in a nutshell, I say the same thing 3 times, and you accuse me of muddying or confusing the issue?

then... you say I am trying to deflect?

SIGMUND FREUD... CALLING DR. SIGMUND FREUD. WE HAVE A CASE OF FREUDIAN PROJECTION IN THE LOCKER ROOM!

http://sidesplittingauctions.com/uploaded_images/sigmund-freud-action-figure-739043.jpg


He has a book for you to read...

http://rgr-static1.tangentlabs.co.uk/media/9780399144462/who-moved-my-cheese-an-amazing-way-to-deal-with-change-in-your-work-and-in-your-life.jpg

tony hipchest
09-16-2009, 10:18 PM
muddying it is...


I then commented on how there was no reference to the same issue under George Bush and thus, concluded that by keeping silent during the Bush years and now not referencing the democrat's actions during those years, this author has written a hack piece.

bu...bu...bu...bush. :yawn:

Preacher
09-17-2009, 06:17 AM
muddying it is...



bu...bu...bu...bush. :yawn:

Sigh.

Having a conversation with you is about like having one with my dog. He'll c0ck his head to the side, look back and forth at the dog dish, even wag his tale at times.

But the truth of the matter is, he has no clue what is really being said.

Keep playing your games Tony. Keep playing your games.

Vincent
09-17-2009, 10:31 AM
This line of reasoning is consistent with the whole "anyone that I disagree with is a 'hater' / mean people suck and they don't swallow / 'hate' is not a family value" school of "thought". Infantile. But to be "sensitive", it's about all their tiny minds are capable of.

revefsreleets
09-17-2009, 10:59 AM
I almost can't believe my eyes...but it's true...the newest thrust form the left is that not supporting Obama and blindly signing whatever half-assed POS bill he spurts out means you support the terrorists. I guess, given the lows the left will stoop to, this should not be a surprise, but I'm sorry, I'm shocked by this...and Rubin is usually pretty good.

I find entertainment in reading your posts, Rev. Most are very informative, some are provocatively opinionated, and some appear intellectually narcissistic to the point where one can envision you reading your own posts while looking in the mirror, winking. And please, in no way do I mean that as an insult. :thmbup:

Don't be upset, I really do enjoy the game you play on this site! I sincerely compliment your personal perspective on politics, and your chosen method for conveying the message! I actually look forward to your next post. You would be a fantastic character in a sitcom! :thumbsup:

Play on!

Shhh....you'll upset Tony because he'll completely miss....whoops, never mind, too late, your comments WHOOSHED right over his head...again...

Anyway, back on topic...look at the headline. Look at who wrote the piece. Look at her vast resume filled with trashing Bush. There are extremely thinly veiled references all throughout this hack piece that insinuate, "Yes, by failing to support THIS president and his agenda, you ARE supporting the terrorists". That's not the secondary or tertiary thrust, that's the central tenet of the piece.

This is, once again, the left saying, in no uncertain terms, what was acceptable behavior for them in the past, disrespecting the President and attempting to undermine him in any way possible, is now not only wrong and unpatriotic, it actually SUPPORTS terrorism...oh, yeah, and if you're a Blue Dog, YOU'RE a traitor too, just like those evil terrorist supporting Republicans!

SteelerEmpire
09-17-2009, 11:57 AM
Health care reform will pass as the Dems don't need the Repubs to do it. I can see Obama benefiting from all of the talk going on around it because it gives him data that will enable him to taylor it to maximize its benefits for the most Americans. Two things will make it a shoe-in to get him re-elected. 1) the economy.... its coming back already. And 2) the passage of a health care bill.... a success 20 other Presidents failed to accomplish....:hatsoff:

revefsreleets
09-17-2009, 12:20 PM
The economy was coming back regardless...the stimulus was WAY too small, and the funds were frittered away on useless pet projects that had little effect on the overall economy and saved ZERO jobs, despite the heavy disinformation campaign enacted in the White House claiming the opposite ...he'll get credit for the recovery, but the recovery was inevitable and happened in SPITE of Obama's efforts, not because of them. Also, he racked up a HUGE credit card of debt in the process that will come back to bite him in the ass in 2012.

As for Healthcare, the Max Baucus plan is SO bad, so watered down, it will probably end up being worse than what we have now. Unfortunately, it looks like that's what's going to get rammed down our throats...

Watch the Health Insurance industries stocks over the next few days...if the stocks surge, bank on this plan screwing us even worse...