darthtang aw
Active Member
Funny, he posted links about this group and think tank but skipped over the KEY important one.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm
http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm
Republican Candidates
- Thread starter stdreb27
- Start date
stdreb27
Active Member
Don't get me wrong I'm not putting words in this persons mouth. But I think this may be his problem with this organization.
"a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad"
Quotation from
New American Century
Statement of Principles
The horror.
"a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad"
Quotation from
New American Century
Statement of Principles
The horror.
stdreb27
Active Member
On a more important note, here is a live example, that help prove that democratic socialist economic ideas of "control" won't work.
http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/536641/1555965
http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/536641/1555965
stdreb27
Active Member
They are writing about the government seizing food, but the real story, is the effect of price controls. They have the highest inflation in South America, and have a food shortage. That is the real story in this article. The substory should be- the government for the people, seizes the peoples food...
rylan1
Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
I have to agree with you. I honestly think most candidates killed themselves this election with debates starting last year in mid july instead of a couple months ago. Guiliani then was a huge front runner, but as time went on the others and the media were able to raise questions aboit him. As strong as he was early on, I am shocked at how poorly he is doing. Unfortunantely McCain seems to be the horse that can get it done, I may not like the color of the horse, but he will still be where my money goes.
Problem w/ McCain is he is weak on matters of economics. The only way he will win is if we are attacked by terrorists or there is a new war or security risk in the next 6mos.
I have to agree with you. I honestly think most candidates killed themselves this election with debates starting last year in mid july instead of a couple months ago. Guiliani then was a huge front runner, but as time went on the others and the media were able to raise questions aboit him. As strong as he was early on, I am shocked at how poorly he is doing. Unfortunantely McCain seems to be the horse that can get it done, I may not like the color of the horse, but he will still be where my money goes.
Problem w/ McCain is he is weak on matters of economics. The only way he will win is if we are attacked by terrorists or there is a new war or security risk in the next 6mos.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
Problem w/ McCain is he is weak on matters of economics. The only way he will win is if we are attacked by terrorists or there is a new war or security risk in the next 6mos.
Guess what we agree, sort of, McCains huge problem is that whole class envy thing he played back in the day, saying that Bush's tax cuts are ONLY for the rich. And although he is right, the government needs to spend less. But he has been rewriting history trying to say that he would have supported the bush tax cuts if they were coupled with spending cuts.
McCain's biggest problem is that since Iraq isn't a problem the democrats are going to do their best to sweep that topic under the rug. After all the last thing the libs and their media don't want to see is clips of Murtha, Peloci, and Reid talking about loosing the war ect. Then follow it up with things are going alot better in Iraq. So McCains biggest strength, (his war experience) isn't going to play well if he makes it out of the primaries.
Problem w/ McCain is he is weak on matters of economics. The only way he will win is if we are attacked by terrorists or there is a new war or security risk in the next 6mos.
Guess what we agree, sort of, McCains huge problem is that whole class envy thing he played back in the day, saying that Bush's tax cuts are ONLY for the rich. And although he is right, the government needs to spend less. But he has been rewriting history trying to say that he would have supported the bush tax cuts if they were coupled with spending cuts.
McCain's biggest problem is that since Iraq isn't a problem the democrats are going to do their best to sweep that topic under the rug. After all the last thing the libs and their media don't want to see is clips of Murtha, Peloci, and Reid talking about loosing the war ect. Then follow it up with things are going alot better in Iraq. So McCains biggest strength, (his war experience) isn't going to play well if he makes it out of the primaries.
tarball
Member
Frontline is a well-respected producer of excellent documentaries. A PBS production
They produced a documentary called: THE WAR BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
Within it are well-respected political figures & reparable reporters covering the event as they
Unfolded. Is a person wishes to be fair with their assessment about foreign policies & war events it should be viewed? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq
National security stragity of the United States.. Document
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html
They produced a documentary called: THE WAR BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
Within it are well-respected political figures & reparable reporters covering the event as they
Unfolded. Is a person wishes to be fair with their assessment about foreign policies & war events it should be viewed? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq
National security stragity of the United States.. Document
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by Tarball
Frontline is a well-respected producer of excellent documentaries. A PBS production
They produced a documentary called: THE WAR BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
Within it are well-respected political figures & reparable reporters covering the event as they
Unfolded. Is a person wishes to be fair with their assessment about foreign policies & war events it should be viewed? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq
National security stragity of the United States.. Document
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html
lol, anything that calls William Kristol, a and the american standard a NEO-conservative publication. Can't be taken seriously.
But on a more serious note.
What idea is it that is backed up by this article?
Frontline is a well-respected producer of excellent documentaries. A PBS production
They produced a documentary called: THE WAR BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
Within it are well-respected political figures & reparable reporters covering the event as they
Unfolded. Is a person wishes to be fair with their assessment about foreign policies & war events it should be viewed? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq
National security stragity of the United States.. Document
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html
lol, anything that calls William Kristol, a and the american standard a NEO-conservative publication. Can't be taken seriously.
But on a more serious note.
What idea is it that is backed up by this article?
1journeyman
Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
Problem w/ McCain is he is weak on matters of economics. The only way he will win is if we are attacked by terrorists or there is a new war or security risk in the next 6mos.
We're close to agreeing...
McCain's ideas are a bit too close to the Dems on the economy.
Problem w/ McCain is he is weak on matters of economics. The only way he will win is if we are attacked by terrorists or there is a new war or security risk in the next 6mos.
We're close to agreeing...
McCain's ideas are a bit too close to the Dems on the economy.
1journeyman
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
...What idea is it that is backed up by this article?
I'm trying to figure that out for myself...
Tarball reminds me of another poster that has been absent for a few weeks. We try to debate a topic and suddenly we're getting youtube conspiracy theory links in reply.
...What idea is it that is backed up by this article?
I'm trying to figure that out for myself...
Tarball reminds me of another poster that has been absent for a few weeks. We try to debate a topic and suddenly we're getting youtube conspiracy theory links in reply.
stdreb27
Active Member
PBS and NPR are long standing liberal establishments, and have done their fair share of conspiracy theory. From Walmart to Global warming. Everything you watch from Fox News to PBS need to back backed up with your own research, and intellegent thought. Intellegent being the key word.
-Narrow Minded Idiot-
The narrow minded dispels another accusation.
-Narrow Minded Idiot-
The narrow minded dispels another accusation.
scubadoo
Active Member
I'll try and move forward.
Tarball...since you appear to be agreeing with the cut and run strategy...please post what you would support regarding the war on terror and/or fighting terrorism (if you have no support please say so)..the leadership role the US should play after cut and running (if any), and what the US should do long-term regarding terrorism?.
Also, what consequences do you foresee if any once we cut and run in Iraq regarding terrorists attacks both here at home and abroad?
Finally, what action should the US undertake regarding proactivity against future attacks? SHould we wait for another 9/11, or should we be proactive and prevent the next one?
Thanks
Tarball...since you appear to be agreeing with the cut and run strategy...please post what you would support regarding the war on terror and/or fighting terrorism (if you have no support please say so)..the leadership role the US should play after cut and running (if any), and what the US should do long-term regarding terrorism?.
Also, what consequences do you foresee if any once we cut and run in Iraq regarding terrorists attacks both here at home and abroad?
Finally, what action should the US undertake regarding proactivity against future attacks? SHould we wait for another 9/11, or should we be proactive and prevent the next one?
Thanks
scubadoo
Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
This may shed some light.. It is a study documenting false statements made by Bush Administration since 911 in regard to Iraq War.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups..."In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003," reads an overview of the examination, conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism.
...
The quotes in the study include an August 26, 2002, statement by Cheney to the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction," Cheney said. "There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Lies... what proof did they actually have?
AP Reports 'Bush Lied' Study Funded by Ultra-leftist George Soros
By Warner Todd Huston | January 23, 2008 - 10:57 ET
Video update posted below.
Well, the AP has done it again. They have given us leftist propaganda and painted it as news. This time they have published the results of a "study" that claims that "Bush lied" in the run-up to Iraq and somehow the AP forgot to mention that the organization that released this study was funded by extreme leftist George Soros, who has spent billions funding the Democrat Party and many far left think tank and advocacy organizations. Yeah, THAT study is going to be legitimate!
This one may as well have been just a reprint of the press release of the Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity, but the AP dressed it up as an actual story written by reporter Douglass K. Daniel. Headlined "Study: False statements preceded war," the AP reveals how, "A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks."
What the AP forgets to mention is that the "two nonprofit journalism organizations" can hardly be imagined to be impartial. The Center for Public Integrity (CPI) is funded by well-known leftist, George Soros, as well as the Streisand Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Los Angeles Times Foundation -- all of which are exclusively leftist in political philosophy. Even more ridiculously, the second of these "non-profit journalism organizations" shares most of its board members with the first. So, the Fund for Independence in Journalism can hardly be considered a separate entity from the CPI
This may shed some light.. It is a study documenting false statements made by Bush Administration since 911 in regard to Iraq War.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups..."In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003," reads an overview of the examination, conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism.
...
The quotes in the study include an August 26, 2002, statement by Cheney to the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction," Cheney said. "There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Lies... what proof did they actually have?
AP Reports 'Bush Lied' Study Funded by Ultra-leftist George Soros
By Warner Todd Huston | January 23, 2008 - 10:57 ET
Video update posted below.
Well, the AP has done it again. They have given us leftist propaganda and painted it as news. This time they have published the results of a "study" that claims that "Bush lied" in the run-up to Iraq and somehow the AP forgot to mention that the organization that released this study was funded by extreme leftist George Soros, who has spent billions funding the Democrat Party and many far left think tank and advocacy organizations. Yeah, THAT study is going to be legitimate!
This one may as well have been just a reprint of the press release of the Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity, but the AP dressed it up as an actual story written by reporter Douglass K. Daniel. Headlined "Study: False statements preceded war," the AP reveals how, "A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks."
What the AP forgets to mention is that the "two nonprofit journalism organizations" can hardly be imagined to be impartial. The Center for Public Integrity (CPI) is funded by well-known leftist, George Soros, as well as the Streisand Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Los Angeles Times Foundation -- all of which are exclusively leftist in political philosophy. Even more ridiculously, the second of these "non-profit journalism organizations" shares most of its board members with the first. So, the Fund for Independence in Journalism can hardly be considered a separate entity from the CPI
scubadoo
Active Member
Originally Posted by Tarball
There is know way I'm going to sit at my computer and argue with 5 or 6 of you at one time. Your answers & my proof will be available with the information I provide.
I've asked you some pretty easy question regarding WMD's moved to Syria..plus your take on after we cut and run...should the cut and runners win the White House.
Should not take longer than a few minutes to respond.
There is know way I'm going to sit at my computer and argue with 5 or 6 of you at one time. Your answers & my proof will be available with the information I provide.
I've asked you some pretty easy question regarding WMD's moved to Syria..plus your take on after we cut and run...should the cut and runners win the White House.
Should not take longer than a few minutes to respond.
reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
Guess what we agree, sort of, McCains huge problem is that whole class envy thing he played back in the day, saying that Bush's tax cuts are ONLY for the rich. And although he is right, the government needs to spend less. But he has been rewriting history trying to say that he would have supported the bush tax cuts if they were coupled with spending cuts.
McCain's biggest problem is that since Iraq isn't a problem the democrats are going to do their best to sweep that topic under the rug. After all the last thing the libs and their media don't want to see is clips of Murtha, Peloci, and Reid talking about loosing the war ect. Then follow it up with things are going alot better in Iraq. So McCains biggest strength, (his war experience) isn't going to play well if he makes it out of the primaries.
McCain isn't Romney or Hunter when it comes to economics but he's still miles ahead of anything still in the Democrat field. The thing is most presidents are not good with economics. You need to look at who they are listening too. Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm appear to have McCain's ear, that's good enough for me.
Guess what we agree, sort of, McCains huge problem is that whole class envy thing he played back in the day, saying that Bush's tax cuts are ONLY for the rich. And although he is right, the government needs to spend less. But he has been rewriting history trying to say that he would have supported the bush tax cuts if they were coupled with spending cuts.
McCain's biggest problem is that since Iraq isn't a problem the democrats are going to do their best to sweep that topic under the rug. After all the last thing the libs and their media don't want to see is clips of Murtha, Peloci, and Reid talking about loosing the war ect. Then follow it up with things are going alot better in Iraq. So McCains biggest strength, (his war experience) isn't going to play well if he makes it out of the primaries.
McCain isn't Romney or Hunter when it comes to economics but he's still miles ahead of anything still in the Democrat field. The thing is most presidents are not good with economics. You need to look at who they are listening too. Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm appear to have McCain's ear, that's good enough for me.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
McCain isn't Romney or Hunter when it comes to economics but he's still miles ahead of anything still in the Democrat field. The thing is most presidents are not good with economics. You need to look at who they are listening too. Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm appear to have McCain's ear, that's good enough for me.
a couple pages ago, I posted a link to an interview of Hillary talking about her views on the economy. It is one of the scariest stories I've read in a looong time.
Romney, and Rudy, seem to be pretty conservative fically, Huckey isn't at all, a budget that tripled during his term isn't good news, and McCain is pretty moronic with what he is saying now. I won't support tax cuts without budget cuts. Since we ALL know that the Budget isn't going to shrink, so much for our tax cuts. And then again it is a bit odd that every time there is a rate reduction, tax revenues go up...
But that being said I'm not arguing at all that the Dems have a better point fiscally and economically then any of the Republican candidates. And someone need to tell McCain that global warming is the biggest hoax of the 20th and 21st century. I will not vote for a candidate that is going to run on a green platform.
McCain isn't Romney or Hunter when it comes to economics but he's still miles ahead of anything still in the Democrat field. The thing is most presidents are not good with economics. You need to look at who they are listening too. Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm appear to have McCain's ear, that's good enough for me.
a couple pages ago, I posted a link to an interview of Hillary talking about her views on the economy. It is one of the scariest stories I've read in a looong time.
Romney, and Rudy, seem to be pretty conservative fically, Huckey isn't at all, a budget that tripled during his term isn't good news, and McCain is pretty moronic with what he is saying now. I won't support tax cuts without budget cuts. Since we ALL know that the Budget isn't going to shrink, so much for our tax cuts. And then again it is a bit odd that every time there is a rate reduction, tax revenues go up...
But that being said I'm not arguing at all that the Dems have a better point fiscally and economically then any of the Republican candidates. And someone need to tell McCain that global warming is the biggest hoax of the 20th and 21st century. I will not vote for a candidate that is going to run on a green platform.
scubadoo
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
a couple pages ago, I posted a link to an interview of Hillary talking about her views on the economy. It is one of the scariest stories I've read in a looong time.
Nothing really new form the democratic side. Class warfare has been their approach for years.
The rich have too much money...universal government run heathcare, redistribution of wealth, etc, etc.
She'd say something different tomorrow if she thought a poll or some new idea would get her elected.
I'm not exacltly sure what a "Clinton" stands for.
I doubt she has any fundamnetal understanding of the economy...just some old views wrapped up differently. Play the class warfare card...old democratic ploy.
I agree with ---- Morris...the CLintons are now playing the race card today. Crying blacks will cause poor Hillary to loose in SC.....and hoping this will light a fire under white democrats so they go back to Billary. Obama CANT win if this thing turns to voting along raciial lines.. I think ---- Morris has their current strategy nailed.
Clintons will do anything to get ellected. I admire their drive....nothing else. I hope democratic blacks and whites see this for what it is. Perhpas ---- Morris is wrong...but he did work for them in the past.
What she said in that interview..... it will change several times...and be redefined as to the TRUE meaning daily by the Billary team.
I doubt she can keep it consistent for more than a day
a couple pages ago, I posted a link to an interview of Hillary talking about her views on the economy. It is one of the scariest stories I've read in a looong time.
Nothing really new form the democratic side. Class warfare has been their approach for years.
The rich have too much money...universal government run heathcare, redistribution of wealth, etc, etc.
She'd say something different tomorrow if she thought a poll or some new idea would get her elected.
I'm not exacltly sure what a "Clinton" stands for.
I doubt she has any fundamnetal understanding of the economy...just some old views wrapped up differently. Play the class warfare card...old democratic ploy.
I agree with ---- Morris...the CLintons are now playing the race card today. Crying blacks will cause poor Hillary to loose in SC.....and hoping this will light a fire under white democrats so they go back to Billary. Obama CANT win if this thing turns to voting along raciial lines.. I think ---- Morris has their current strategy nailed.
Clintons will do anything to get ellected. I admire their drive....nothing else. I hope democratic blacks and whites see this for what it is. Perhpas ---- Morris is wrong...but he did work for them in the past.
What she said in that interview..... it will change several times...and be redefined as to the TRUE meaning daily by the Billary team.
I doubt she can keep it consistent for more than a day
scubadoo
Active Member
McCain is actually the cnadidate democrats fear. he can win some democartic votes and does well among independents.
I'm not sure who I will vote for yet....but I do beleive democrats do not want to face MCCAin.
If McCain does make the general election he will get my vote.
I'm not sure who I will vote for yet....but I do beleive democrats do not want to face MCCAin.
If McCain does make the general election he will get my vote.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
McCain is actually the cnadidate democrats fear. he can win some democartic votes and does well among independents.
I'm not sure who I will vote for yet....but I do beleive democrats do not want to face MCCAin.
If McCain does make the general election he will get my vote.
If they feared him, why are they writing puff pieces about him? And endorsing him in the primary?
McCain is actually the cnadidate democrats fear. he can win some democartic votes and does well among independents.
I'm not sure who I will vote for yet....but I do beleive democrats do not want to face MCCAin.
If McCain does make the general election he will get my vote.
If they feared him, why are they writing puff pieces about him? And endorsing him in the primary?