posted
When/if I go to lunch, I usually listen to Rush Limbaugh. We don't get many stations and they all suck--it's Rush or pop. Rush is at least more entertaining.
Anyway, I was snacking on my Jr. Whopper and diet coke when Rush started talking about OSC.
He acknowledged OSC was a democrat. He said he never heard of OSC, but he thought OSC's piece The only issue on election day was spot on.
I have never heard Rush give someone besides himself so much praise. I swear, he almost read the entire 12 pages.
Anyway, I just thought I would throw that out there for all you Hatrackers and the Card family.
I wonder how many political pundants are going to see this forum now.
EDIT: I bet Hatrack gets really slow this next hour.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
Most of the guys I know are all about pigging out on the Stack-o'-Cow at BK. The Whopper Jr. combo, however, costs less than $4, fills me up, and gives me the illusion of not eating as much fat as everyone else. That way, I can feel superior and more healthy.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
And I got a diet coke to boot! I don't think I need to do my evening walk; I am so healthy. I don't get the meal tho--not a fan of fries.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is it made with organ meats? If so you're probably so healthy you can skip going to the dentist too!
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I POSTED it first on the other side of the forum!
It IS awesome and Rush just announced to his audience that he googled Card and talked about him, Ender's Game series, etc.
AND Rush linked to ornery.org from Rush's website.
I managed to get into ornery (despite it's server being overwhelmed and before Rush's link) to read the article.
I have to say that I feel that OSC is as brave as Lieberman (and Bush)! There are good men and bad men in any political party but few BRAVE men.
Posts: 874 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey! I had soup for lunch, and after reading that article, I think I might be seeing it again soon!
Posts: 1681 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I posted this topic 4 minutes after Iem. (Darn!) Let me restate my comments here:
Absolutely brilliant commentary by OSC on the War on Terror and Bush's leadership thereof.
I don't always agree with OSC, but he hit this issue squarely. I think he left out one important issue: The islamic population growth in Europe and how that threatens those democracies.
Suprisingly, I'm not as pessimistic as Card about the affect a Democrat Party victory would have on the War on Terror. When pushed to commit, only a handfull of Dems voted to withdraw troops from Iraq. This holds true for Hillary too, and other Dem Senators who had to vote onthe issue in an election year. I like to think most of the Dem leadership understands the repercusions of leaving Iraq prematurely, and that none of them want to be recorded in histroy as the president or Party that abandoned Iraq and emboldened the terrorists with another US defeat. But I'm afraid that their constant sniping at the war effort may continue to further embolded the terrorists in Iraq, cost more American and Iraqi lives, and undermine the war effort.
Posts: 407 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: If so you're probably so healthy you can skip going to the dentist too!
True story. I did not go to the dentist for 4 years. I only floss once a week, but I do brush.
My wife eats nothing but healthy food, flosses at least once a day, and even brushes more then me.
We went to the dentist recently and she had...I think 5 cavities. I, on the other hand, had no cavities. Full clean bill of health. They didn't even have much to scrap off during the cleaning.
Hurray for unhealthy foods and lifestyles! Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I second OSC's article. I do fear what the Democrats would do if elected. My only hope is that if they are elected, their constant bickering toward the war is only a political tactic to get elected, and that they don't actually believe withdrawal is the right answer.
I am not as convinced that stronger military action would unite the Islamists against us, but it is certainly a possibility. Given the current state of politics in our nation, though, I don't see someone getting elected in 2008 that would be too strong militarily. I see either another moderate (in terms of the War on Terror), like Bush, or someone who supports withdrawal, getting elected.
Posts: 684 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
My hope is that the article will draw more Conservatives onto this site to post. At least have more balanced liberal/conservative discussions. Of course, the liberals here will scream bloody murder because of where those Conservatives come from Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Storm Saxon: Rush Limbaugh loves OSC. Neil Boortz loves OSC. OSC loves David Horowitz.
Hmmm....
Uh-oh. OSC could lead us into revolution...or...something.
Actually, that would be pretty cool. I'd be onboard. I'll even help with fundraising for the Orsoncratic party.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Of course, the liberals here will scream bloody murder because of where those Conservatives come from...
Hey, if we get a decent crop of sensible, polite, erudite conservatives from among Rush Limbaugh's fanbase, more power to 'em. It's actually happened before, although in my experience it takes some time to grind off the rough edges and unsightly stains they picked up in places like the Free Republic site.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Marlozhan: I second OSC's article. I do fear what the Democrats would do if elected. My only hope is that if they are elected, their constant bickering toward the war is only a political tactic to get elected, and that they don't actually believe withdrawal is the right answer.
I'm pretty sure that's true. I think anybody would have to be a COLOSSAL moron to believe that immediately abandoning Iraq would be a smart move.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
OSC deserves praise from someone more worthy than Rush.
Ditto heads would be quickly confused and silenced on this site, and not by just us liberals. We have a tendancy to look beyond the fear and talking points, and demand actual open discussion here. To many of Rush's hardcore ditto-heads would never be able to get past the point that people who are not evil may actually disagree with Rush's rant-of-the-moment.
I look forward to hearing OSC's response the next time Rush or one of his guest hosts drop a bit of Mormon-Bashing.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Will B, are you kidding? I would think that Rush would know that large numbers of Mormons are his fan base. It would be ratings suicide. To be perfectly honest, I haven't listened to him in years so I can't be sure.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I used to listen all the time, move than a decade ago when I was on the road alot, and I listen occasionally at lunch time, and I have never heard Rush knock Mormons. He might have made comments about some of the more radical splinter groups of Mormon's, like that guy who has what is basically his own cult that practices polygimy.
posted
Sorry if I am mis-staking some comments I heard years ago. It went along the lines of tieing gay marriage to other slippery slope problems like pedophilia and bigamy, and then there was a quick Utah or such joke. Mormons and LDS may not have been mentioned out right though.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aspectre I read that as OSC writes Fanfic. My first thought was, "No he does not. That accusation is enough to leave him spinning in his grave, and he's not dead."
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: I look forward to hearing OSC's response the next time Rush or one of his guest hosts drop a bit of Mormon-Bashing.
No, Occasional, I wasn't kidding; I was asking a question. I've never heard of Rush bashing Mormons, and I was surprised by the accusation, so I wanted to know if it really happens.
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unfortunately for us, snide Bush jokes aren't much of a defense against the terrorists or make for a coherent policy.
Here's an interesting interview with Nasralla of Lebanon that supports the claim that the terrorists expect us to back down and abandon the Iraqi people.
posted
I love how conservatives are all for letting the opinions of terrorists guide our foreign policy. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Got it, O. Thanks for the clarification, Dan.
Mig: are you sure snide Bush jokes aren't a good defense against terror? Because if they are, our future is secure!
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hhmmmm......I wonder why someone with a conservative point of view might be "driven away" from the Hatrack website?
Posts: 874 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's pretty unlikely, actually. We have a fair number of conservatives. People with very strong opinions who can't share them civilly often wind up leaving this site for one reason or another, but I'm not sure how strongly that correlates with "conservative."
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Silent E: OSC's article is also being discussed in the SDMB's Barbecue Pit.
SDMB? Whassat? Sounds kinky.
It's the Straight Dope Message Boards. If you don't know what the Straight Dope is, you should find out. It is easily in my top 5 list of internet sites everyone should know. Even for people who don't do message boards.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mig: Unfortunately for us, snide Bush jokes aren't much of a defense against the terrorists or make for a coherent policy.
Here's an interesting interview with Nasralla of Lebanon that supports the claim that the terrorists expect us to back down and abandon the Iraqi people.
Well, we'll never leave the entire region, he should know that. We aren't leaving Kuwait, we aren't leaving Bahrain, or Qatar, or the other teeny little coastal US friendlies. And we aren't going to abandon Israel.
Nasrallah seems to be contradicting himself. It makes no sense to me to say "we encourage resistance there, we should be trying to get rid of the US as hard as we can" and then say "see look, the US is going to leave, you can't trust them." He's basically calling himself the Viet Cong, and he's saying that if America leaves, an innocent people will be left to the mercy of crazy insurgents. Seems like a pretty stupid comparison to make to anyone who understands the situation.
It's a very odd way of trying to win someone over to your side. But I have to wonder why we are allowing Nasrallah to dictate American foreign policy. Why is it all or nothing? Why is it that talk is either of us staying forever or leaving immediately? Even if we were to leave next year, the bulk of our forces I mean, we're still going to be there. There will still be US airpower in the region for years to come. There will still be a large US military presence in Kuwait. There will still most likely be thousands of US personnel in Iraq after the handover of power to continue training the Iraqis, and working on building projects.
Part of the reason I think we need to leave is to see what happens when the insurgents can't blame everything on the US. Then what happens? Sure we'll still be there, but as a minor support role. The insurgents will have to attack the Iraqi government, and Iraqi soldiers, and then their propaganda becomes far less effective.
McCain the other day said we need to take out al-Sadr, as he is an impediment to peace, and it's time to drastically increase the size of the military. Taking out al-Sadr would ignite the 30,000 man strong militia force he controls, and would probably piss off a good many other people as well. Is this really the best time to be talking about PROVOKING a conflict over there? How would we feel if we were under occupation, and there was a large militia controlled by (trying to think of a universally loved figure in American and I'm coming up short) Bill Clinton AND George Bush Sr. And the occupying force picked them both off. Well gee, I guess it's time to go home, damn, we lost that one. No, you go on an streak of revenge killings.
MiG-
Defining our policies, our rherotic, our actions, our tactics, everything we do in Iraq, based on the FEELINGS of terrorists, and their outlandish rhetoric is ridiculous. Isn't it Republicans who are always saying that Liberals want to hand terrorists the keys to the Pentagon, and let them walk in, and offer them all hugs and what not? And yet the only people I ever hear talking about what the terrorists want, and what they like to hear, are the Republicans. To say nothing of the fact that we know Osama Bin Laden himself has been hoping for Republican wins in the last few elections, as their actions win him tons of money and recruits.
Seriously, what do we think is going to happen in Iraq? Israel has been fighting Palestinians for FIFTY YEARS, and all it has done is create an almost institutional hatred of both parties, by both parties. Israel is still no closer to getting rid of that thorn in their side, and Palestine is still no closer to having their own peaceful state, so what is it exactly, using the exact same formula, that we think we're going to achieve? It's been tried folks, by them, and by us, and it's worked for neither.
It's inevitable that we're going to leave. And no matter when it happens, we'll leave behind a battle hardened insurgency, and a weary, disheartened America. I say strategically it's best to leave sooner, rather than later. Give them less time to train and recruit new anti-American zealots. Give our side less time to grow apathetic and tired of a losing war. Give the Iraqi people a reason to trust us, by doing what they ask. The longer we stay there, the more we have to LOSE, not gain. If we pull back, we can at least try and teach that region that we're respectful, and really just want the best for them, rather than the fact that we're going to stay until WE win, regardless of the cost to THEM. What if THEY aren't willing to pay that price? We aren't gods, and we don't get to make that decision for them.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Besides, that horse has long left the barn. It was Reagan who convinced Nasrallah, Osama, etc that terrorism and suicide bombing would be a successful tactic to use against the US.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
