'Dubya' isn't "Russian" for diplomacy.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

"Putin loses his smile after lecture from Bush on democracy" (via Drudge)
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/story.jsp?story=614535




mr. ("I do so miss the Cold War") Curmudgeon

[Gunstar Hero]

That's our president. Making it look good. And by good, I mean bad. 

[SeaMonkey]

They POISONED an oposition candidate.

I don't think he was SUPPOSED to be smiling at what Goerge Bush had to say.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Yeah, now that they have gobbled up billions in U.S. aid, it is time to put the commy p.j.'s back on, and start the old cold war up again.

[Grasshopper]

A certain phrase involving glass houses and stones springs to mind.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4289209.stm

Ok, nothing's been proven yet, but we also haven't got conclusive proof that Russia had anything to do with the poisoning of Ukranian presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko, (I assume that's what you're referring to).

[fredster]

But Condi was so hot in that black outfit with the boots

At least that's as far as the washington post would go.

I love moonbats.

[shmokes]

I've always hated Condi from the first time I laid eyes on her.  Either she never closes her mouth, or the press are just mean.  I defy you to find a picture of her in which her gigantic teeth are not the focal point (I'm sure such pictures exist, but they are few and far between). 

Since then I've wondered if my opinion of the things she says, does and supports is not continuously colored by the underlying mouth-bias. 

At any rate, for good reasons, bad reasons, or both (well....definitely for bad reasons, but probably both) I can't stand her.

[Grasshopper]

I have to admit there's something about her I find strangely sexy. But her political views are diammetrically opposed to mine. It's really hard to know what makes her tick which, in a way, makes her more dangerous than the other members of Bush's team.

[shmokes]

I automatically distrust black republicans, especially when they're women.  It makes me wonder if their mental faculties are entirely in tact and sound.

[fredster]

automatically distrust black republicans, especially when they're women.  It makes me wonder if their mental faculties are entirely in tact and sound.

Why is that? Because they Love America and want to contribute to the success of America?

[TOK]

I automatically distrust black republicans, especially when they're women.  It makes me wonder if their mental faculties are entirely in tact and sound.

Way to decide by the issues.
She's black and has big teeth, so she must be evil. I though liberals were supposed to be tolerant? If you're representative of your party, and I've heard a lot of similar comments, Republicans are going to be in office for the next 40 years.

Did you even vote? The guys that I work with that sound like you didn't... None of them. They just sit there and talk crap.

[Dexter]

Seriously guys, credit where credit is due. To be the first black secretary of state is a hell of an achievement. To be a black female warmonger republican secretary of state is something else.

[DrewKaree]

Shmokes and Condi (or Ann Coulter, they're interchangeable) sittin' in a tree, k-i-s-s-i-n.....

Since shmokes is so young, he's not that far removed from the "pick on/antagonize the girl you like because you don't know how to express your true feelings for her" that we all practiced at his age.

He wants to get all curled up in a corner with her and start smoochin'!

I think Dexter loves her too, but he knows she's not into his pasty white skin, red hair, and potato lovin'....wait, are we doing "dueling stereotypes" for $600, Alex? 

[duffjr]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20050224/ap_on_re_eu/bush

click on the ap video.  bush said, "if you smile, i'll kill you."
in an unrelated story:  http://www.xtra.co.nz/streaming/0,,10616-4138278-300,00.html

[fredster]

I dunno Drew, what shmokes said was pretty racist to me.

I automatically distrust black republicans, especially when they're women.

Not to mention sexist. Apparently he has preconcieved notions of ethinc and gender roles. Stereotyping.  I don't think he is savy enough to see what he said.

[DrewKaree]

quick, change "savy" to "savvy" before he comes in and notices 

and preconceived....i before e except after c....and sometimes y

and "ethnic", instead of "ethinc"

Man, you're just leaving yourself WIDE OPEN to potshots from a racist sexist young know-it-all fresh from school willing to tear you apart! 

Hurry up and fix those so I can delete this post pointing out how much better shmokes is than you 

[Grasshopper]

Well I'm sure Shmokes can defend himself but FWIW I interpreted his remark as implying the following:

The Republican party has traditionally promoted policies that are anti-ethnic minority and anti-women. Therefore anyone who is female and/or from an ethnic minority would be mad to support them. [It doesn't really matter for the purposes of this discussion whether you think this is true or not, that's an issue that probably deserves a thread of its own]

I think you're reading things into his remark that were simply not there.

[fredster]

The Republican party has traditionally promoted policies that are anti-ethnic minority and anti-women.

Ok, Like Lincoln.  Can we name any of these?

Maybe we can ask a democratic leader like Bird?

Drew, yeah, I know. (http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php/topic,32236.0.html) It's a #4.  Shmokes likes that one.
I just pulled a #12.

I'm expecting a #9a in return.

[DrewKaree]

I hereby wish to submit my #3 into the debate.

(dang, that thing should be a STICKY!)

Speaking of stickies, I'd like to hijack this thread for just a second and let you know I'm working on a PDF of the mp3 guide I posted...results to follow as soon as the PDF is done being made....hopefully a few minutes

We now return you to your regularly scheduled #3 discussion, and I bow out with a hearty #5a

[mr.Curmudgeon]

I dunno Drew, what shmokes said was pretty racist to me.

Actually, I think it's fairly reasonable to be suspicious of a person that continually supports a party that has a history of working against the interests of their own people. It's not racist, it's logical. Most likely Condi is welcome in the administration, not because she is black, female, or particularly qualified, but simple because she's a filthy rich oil baron. Her being black and female is just a 'bonus' since the Repubs can claim to "support diversity". It's the "I gave at the office" approach.

Just as rich, white guys who support the Democrats continually draw the ire of Republicans (Soros) not only because they support the opposition, but most likely, because they are seen as traitors.

mrC

[mr.Curmudgeon]

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1032354,00.html

In the spirit of this thread, Putin digs into Bush.

"If the press was so free in the U.S., Putin asked, then why had those reporters at CBS lost their jobs? Bush was openmouthed."

...

"The Russians did not let the matter drop. Later, during the leaders' joint press conference, one of the questioners Putin called on asked Bush about the very same firings, a coincidence the White House assumed had been orchestrated."


LOL. The White House certainly would know something about orchestrated questions...*cough* GANNON/GUCKERT *cough*


mrC

[DrewKaree]

Actually, I think it's fairly reasonable to be suspicious of a person that continually supports a party that has a history of working against the interests of their own people.

I'm glad to see you pre-emptively signing up for the rallies against Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

I believe Dr. King would be ashamed at the way these hucksters have (and continue to) sell out their "people" in an effort to line their pockets, in the process doing ever more harm than good.  The Mafia could learn a trick or three from Mr. Jackson, specifically.

[DrewKaree]

"If the press was so free in the U.S., Putin asked, then why had those reporters at CBS lost their jobs? Bush was openmouthed."

Are you that ignorant that even YOU can't answer the question?  It'd leave ME open mouthed as well, having a world leader speaking to me and him being unable to comprehend the right of a business to deal with their employees how they wish.

A simple point to dispatch, but somehow you read a fatal parry by Mr Putin, rather than using your intelligence to assess the situation.  Your "point" is underwhelming.

LOL. The White House certainly would know something about orchestrated questions...*cough* GANNON/GUCKERT *cough*

The fact the story is gone so fast should explain the importance of the matter, but thankfully, you're still out there searching for every last dead horse to beat.  That this is a NON-story is lost on you.  It's ok.  Bang the drum loudly.  We need to be able to keep tabs on you. 

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Are you that ignorant...

Drew, I'll take you to the woodshed, you insult me one more time without provocation. Directly or indirectly. Swear to God.

You're insinuating something I never said. Whether you like it or not, whether I think Putin's comment was factually correct or not, it does *not* diminish the fact that it was a direct dig at Bush, on the world stage nonetheless. That's the point. That Bush continues to fail so badly at managing diplomacy and exuding leadership, that he'd engender other world leaders to act in the same prepubescent fashion he's prone to behave in. It's sad, sloppy and downright silly.

The fact the story is gone so fast should explain the importance of the matter

It does nothing of the sort. I don't use the media to gauge the importance of a story. Nor do I allow them to dictate to me what matters. You'd call me ignorant, then propose that CNN/CBS/FOX should guide our lives? sad.

There has been continued investigation into the GOP funded, male prostitute, media shill, planted in the White House, who was used to keep the President from having to answer *real* questions, should they have been posed by our ever vigilant "liberal" media. I really don't care if you think it's important or not. You've already shown that you care so little about anything this administration does or does not do. In fact, given that it seems to upset you so much whenever it's brought up, I'd say it's pretty entertaining...*and* that's even more reason to keep pursuing it.


mrC

[fredster]

Dexter -

To be the first black secretary of state is a hell of an achievement

I guess Colin Powell was white?

MrC -

That Bush continues to fail so badly at managing diplomacy and exuding leadership, that

  By all accounts this visit was a huge success.  France and the US are working together in Lebanon.  Russia is with us, as much as they can be.  Germany and Nato are going to start a role in training of Iraqi Troops.

In short, all the things your man said we should do, and now you rip Bush with nonsensical insults when his achieving these goals?  That makes sense to you?.

And the insults directed at Condi Rice. Probably one of the most brilliant people in public life. Ms Rice didn't start out "fility" rich did she? Don't you think she's the role model for anybody? Work hard, study, focus and stick to your convictions and you too can become rich and powerful?

I don't use the media to gauge the importance of a story.

Good point, I don't either. However, I do gage the authenticity of a story by the media. If they keep finding out facts because inquiring minds what to know, that's interesting. But if the story ends with no new facts, that's great.  Besides, I guess the democratic "shills" want equal time.  One conservative in a crowd of democtrat reports isn't a story to me. 

Either way, it has little to do with this thread.

I think it's a good thing that Bush was firm with the KBG myself.  I don't see why we have to make friends by being utilitarian about our foreign policy. 

Read up on your party's OCT 04 platform. Looks like Bush is good enough to both his and yours.  What a great President!

[mr.Curmudgeon]

I think it's a good thing that Bush was firm with the KBG myself.  I don't see why we have to make friends by being utilitarian about our foreign policy.

The reality is that, just like you, I am also concerned about the direction Putin, specifically, and democracy in general, is headed in Russia and I feel something *absolutely* needs to be done about it. But much like everything else, Bush goes about it in, what I feel, is a completely unproductive way. Also, just to head off this line from Bsuh defenders, it's not as simple as, "Wah! You damn liburuuuls just hate Bush, and he can never do anything right in your eyes!"...that's a extremely deficient statement and it's totally untrue.

As far as this incident w/ Putin, my concern is simple. Let's compare it to our own little microcosm here in this forum. What Bush just did to Putin, is like what Drew does to most everyone he disagrees with on this forum, he insults them indirectly by making snide comments about their "ignorance" and/or mental inferiority. I do it as well from time to time, although I'd like to think I've matured a bit lately, and as such, have toned it down a little. This behavior doesn't lead to reconciliation, or further understanding, nor does it illicit any desire to see his point of view. For my part, that's why I've tried to be less pointed by working to eliminate ad hominem attacks.

If Putin is already reacting so negatively, out in front on the world stage, what the *hell* do you think he'll do behind the scenes, behind closed doors (or behind a new iron curtain)?

Do you really think Bush's comments and subsequent behavior are going to effect positive change in Russia's thinking and/or actions? Are they going to compell Putin to want to work w/ the U.S. on any number of very important fronts? Or will they, like Drew's comments do for me, make Putin want to take Bush out behind the Woodshed?

If so, how is this a good thing?

mrC

[Dexter]

Dexter -

To be the first black secretary of state is a hell of an achievement

I guess Colin Powell was white?

Ooops, meant black female, as I mention in the rest of the paragraph. Well spotted though

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Probably one of the most brilliant people in public life.

Yeah, ignoring those memos was brilliant! Ignoring 52 separate warnings from the FAA about upcoming attacks on America was brilliant!! No wonder you feel Bush is a success, if this is your measure of brilliance. I see it now, Osama still on the loose is a tremendous boon for our country!!

Seriously, I'm curious...since the right is constantly bleating about the educated liberal "elite", beyond her education, by what measure is she "brilliant", what successes did she have under Bush's first term that allow you to continue to perceive her as brilliant?


mrC

[Dartful Dodger]

I automatically distrust black republicans, especially when they're women.

[fredster]

MrC, there are unsubstantiated threats against the US all the time.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

To me, the war in Iraq is a HUGE success.

115 dead today=success? Brilliant!

The war in Iraq is *not* over, so to call it a success or failure at this juncture is premature and jingoist at best. Let's be honest, you believe it *will* be a success, and I believe it will not. I guess I can't argue the case any further if you truly think it's already over and done with.

Condi rice is a great organizer, and as NSS, she held together a huge organization.  She has been the lead advocate for the President and put together the cases for the war in Iraq.

So she shills for the prez? How is she a great organizer? You've provided no substantial evidence as to why Condi should be considered a success other than outlining the most simplistic aspects of her job description? What accomplishments does she have under her belt from the first term? Supporting Bush really isn't an accomplishment, it's what she was hired to do.

Theres a new hope for democracy in the Middle East that wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for Condi Rice.  It was a vision your ideology has blinded you against.

Give me a break fredster. I disagree with Bush's motives and the plan, simple as that...doesn't mean I don't see them. You NEED to tell yourself I dont' see them, because that allows you to ignore the criticism completely. I wish that wasn't the case, but it seems you always come back to that same defense, time and again.

Has any American President made a "positive change in Russia's thinking" ?  Oh yeah, one did, Reagan.

I believe it's more apparent that the Communist bloc broke up from within. Republicans like to credit Reagan, but he really did nothing more than outspend the Russians in an attempt to bolster M.A.D. which led the U.S. into a tremendous deficits. His "arms race" played right into the hands of authoritarian "Communist" hard-liners in the Kremlin, which most likely extended the length of time it took for communism to finally fall in Russia, all while edging the dying regime to the brink of war several times.

We won the Cold War even before Reagan, to noone's credit, but rather due to inherent flaws in the Russian system. Even the CIA told Reagan this when he first took office.

mrC

[mr.Curmudgeon]

I automatically distrust black republicans, especially when they're women.  It makes me wonder if their mental faculties are entirely in tact and sound.

I feel the same way about all Democrats.

Noone has ever questioned the level of blind partisanship you are able to display.


mrC

[fredster]

Noone has ever questioned the level of blind partisanship you are able to display.

And you are a model of bi-partisanship ?  Dodger never pretended to be bi partisan.


MrC, there were thousands that would have died in the future. 100's died after every war.  We have done a tremendous job in stabalizing a country. It's a historical model of HOW TO.

I guess I can't argue the case any further if you truly think it's already over and done with.

It's easy. We ousted Saddam with less than 10,000 dead. We couldn't do that in 'nam could we?  Lybia gave up it's arms. Lebanon is ousting Syria. Saddam isn't backing Hammas. (before you go into the incredibly blind arguement that saddam wasn't into terror - look at this - http://www.husseinandterror.com/ so we can recall.  Egypt is discussing free elections, Saudi Arabia has had some minor elections. The youth in Iran are restless and scared the US will attack and are organizing against thier govenment.

In short, the entire middle east is seeing a wave of democracy because of Bush's policies. It's real and measurable.  All because he showed them he was resolved to do this and wouldn't back down as the US has because of the utilitarian policies of '92-2000.

Condi Rice has done her job, well. We will see explicitly how well she advised the president as this war plays out.  What didn't she do is my question?  Why are we saying she was lacking ? 

Because Barbra Boxer says so?  What has Barbra Boxer done that's had an effect or got to the bottom of terrorism? Oh yeah, she passed a resolution that Syria should stop funding terrorists.  Oh that was effective.  Let's give them a ticket for laughing at that.

I believe it's more apparent that the Communist bloc broke up from within. Republicans like to credit Reagan, but he really did nothing more than outspend the Russians in an attempt to bolster M.A.D. which led the U.S. into a tremendous deficits.

 
This is another example of partisan blindness. While I say that you are right to some degree you are ignoring others.  It's obvious that the type of communism that the USSR practiced was economically flawed, the US stood firm and upped the ante of the super power status.  We held firm and showed the world we weren't afraid to use what we had. We kept trade out of the USSR and starved them.  Reagan kept pushing up the defensive posture of America.  At the same time we supported the "insurgents" within.  Eventually the goverments couldn't control the people.  While it may have happened naturally, Reagan accellerated the process, there is no doubt about that, perhaps by 10 years. 10 years is a long time for those imprisoned in those countries.

Even the CIA told Reagan this when he first took office.

  Did you attend that briefing?

[mr.Curmudgeon]

And you are a model of bi-partisanship ?

When it comes to this administration, "HELL NO!" I'm a vicious liberal, pinko commie. I was never be so, to use one of Drew's most favorite derogatory terms, "ignorant" as to claim I automatically distrust *all* Republicans. My beef is with the fringe element that has hijacked the Republican party and whipped their base into such a fanatical frenzy that I see very decent people voting against their own best interests in support of the false premises of a wounded and dying ideology. I have Republican friends *gasp*...so I guess that makes me socially "bi-partisan."

What has Barbra Boxer done that's had an effect or got to the bottom of terrorism?

Was Barbara Boxer the NSA during the runup and subsequent execution of one of the worst attacks on American soil? Was see privy to the same reports as Condi was?

It never ceases to amaze me how efficient Bush supporters are passing the buck.

Condi Rice has done her job, well.  What didn't she do is my question?  Why are we saying she was lacking ?

52 warnings from the FAA during her tenure as NSA. You think it's ok, I think she should be held accountable. In her testimony before congress, she lied about the notion that she had never heard "planes would be used as missiles", intelligence reports that have recently come to light refute that claim. She lied about this administrations support of the Dept of Homeland Security.  She lied about Cheney's Counterterrorism Task Force and it's complete and utter lack of meetings. I could go on, but I'll stop now....Wouldn't want to "impune her integrity."

For more recent failures of leadership and diplomacy, here's one of Condi's latest beautiful displays of political prowess:

"CTV News has learned that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was so displeased by Canada's decision to opt out of the program that she's postponed a planned visit to Ottawa in mid-April."

Shorter Condi: WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!

Jesus, this administration exudes all the diplomacy of a preemie w/ a wet nappy.

mrC

[Dartful Dodger]

I was never be so, to use one of Drew's most favorite derogatory terms, "ignorant" as to claim I automatically distrust *all* Republicans. My beef is with the fringe element that has hijacked the Republican party and whipped their base into such a fanatical frenzy that I see very decent people voting against their own best interests in support of the false premises of a wounded and dying ideology.

Do you really think Kerry was the ideal man to be president, or were you voting for him because, you thought he was the lesser of two evils?

That

[fredster]

My beef is with the fringe element that has hijacked the Republican party and whipped their base into such a fanatical frenzy that I see very decent people voting against their own best interests in support of the false premises of a wounded and dying ideology.

There is no "fringe" element.  It's mainstream. If anybody is hijacked, it's the dems.  People I know that are "former" democrats took a look at the party platform and realized, hey, these people aren't doing for me what I want.  Southern dems are repelled by gun control and all the entitlements the dems stand for. That's what is wrong. People took a look at who was standing with the candidates, and they didn't like what they saw. Simple as that.

Was Barbara Boxer the NSA during the runup and subsequent execution of one of the worst attacks on American soil?

Good question. Where was she? But not the point.  There are numerous threats against the US everyday, probably all day. There are threats against nuclear plants, water supplies, highway systems.  We have all seen them. Can we close down the US and take care of every weakness and every possible senerio? How can you sort out which one is real and which one is fake? The former administration didn't get it after the first World Trade Center bombing did they? It was only after 9/11 that all of these nutcases were taken seriously by anybody.  Which one of the stack of threats on the desk should we freak about today Mr.C? How many more were there in the hour?

I guess the fact that it hasn't happened again helps me believe that Condi did a good job.  After all, the former admistration had the WTC bombing, followed by the Oklahoma city bombing, followed by the bombing of the embassies overseas, followed by the Cole.  Bush had 1. He doesn't have 2.

It never ceases to amaze me how efficient Bush supporters are passing the buck.

Right. And the Dems won't see where it started.  Your man didn't have anything at all to do with this huh?  The blame can be spread far and wide. There is plenty of reasons.  But now we have to figure out what to do and not fingerpoint furiously at each other.

Bush decided to go in and take care of it.  Boxer decided to give them tickets and call the "police".  One said it was war and has fought it as a war. One says it's a criminal act and fights it like jaywalking. That was the former administatation's stance. Sure worked well huh?

"CTV News has learned that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was so displeased by Canada's decision to opt out of the program that she's postponed a planned visit to Ottawa in mid-April."

If the news is real then Good. We say what we do and do what we say. Integrity. Should we cowtow to everybody so they will like us or should we stand up and say who we are and where we stand?  But who is CTV? Do you believe every network over the world as long as it reflects your belief? Remember when sky news reported they found a Nuke buried in Iraq? I'd like to believe it, but it didn't happen.  Wait for details before believing anything. I don't see how CTV has a "hotline" to the administation, do you? Looks like an opinion rather than a fact.

She lied about this administrations support of the Dept of Homeland Security.  She lied about Cheney's Counterterrorism Task Force and it's complete and utter lack of meetings. I could go on, but I'll stop now....Wouldn't want to "impune her integrity."

Where did you get these "facts" from Daily Kos or some left wing blog? Come on.  I guess you think if you keep the mantra up that these things are real eventually they become real. Just like the dems wanting to call the UN to police Osama. Great.

Grow up and get with the plan Mr. C. It's a hard world and we have to make sure we take care of real, not imagined, problems.  Listen to your Republican friends, and I listen to my democratic friends and we'll try to find enough common ground we can move on to the ideals this country stands for together.

[DrewKaree]

You're insinuating something I never said.

I'm saying something you clearly wanted to, since that's the best snippet of a "dig" you could come up with.

it does *not* diminish the fact that it was a direct dig at Bush, on the world stage nonetheless.

and days before, Bush was gunning Putin and we got to hear "lookit how he's alienating America from the rest of the world with these tactics".

It was a "dig" simple 'mercans like you and I could have shot down, and demonstrated a third-grade mentality from a "respected" world leader.  To 'splain it easier for you, your "point" would have been the same if Putin had stood there and calling Bush a big fat doody head.  It sounds ridiculous when I put it that way, yet you can't see it's essentially what Putin was doing.

You demonstrated your belief that he can't be direct, pointed, and honest in speaking with world leaders, and now your "point" that THAT was a "dig" demonstrates that you like third-grade arguments on the world stage.  Under no scenario is there a "winnable point" for Bush unless he acts the same way.  You want to paint him into a corner, but don't realize that there's a door in the corner.  He opened the door (said nothing) and walked away ignoring the point

Expecting us to believe you were pointing out a "dig" on Bush on the world stage, rather than gleeful revelry on your part that a world leader is willing to adopt your tactics IS ignorant.

Spare me your "woodshed"

That Bush continues to fail so badly at managing diplomacy and exuding leadership, that he'd engender other world leaders to act in the same prepubescent fashion he's prone to behave in. It's sad, sloppy and downright silly.

And yet, you can't help but to do the exact same thing in your quest to save America.  One wrong, in your mind, brings another wrong from Putin, and brings yet another from you.  You won't credit him for doing it his way, you can't give him credit for doing it your way, and he fails (in your mind) no matter what he does.  We understand your analysis.  Great job at "staying above the fray".

I don't use the media to gauge the importance of a story. Nor do I allow them to dictate to me what matters. You'd call me ignorant, then propose that CNN/CBS/FOX should guide our lives?

You use SOME form of media when gauging the "importance" of a story.  This has started to blow over on left-leaning sites, it's started to blow over EVERYWHERE.  Nobody said you should allow anyone to "guide your life", I just have a hard time believing you're doing any investigative journalism on your own that doesn't come from SOMEONE else considered "media"...which have dropped the story

You've already shown that you care so little about anything this administration does or does not do.

Either you're ignoring things I've said, or you expect ME to have my life guided by what YOU believe to be important, either way, my earlier point is demonstrated again.  Thanks.

[DrewKaree]

But much like everything else, Bush goes about it in, what I feel, is a completely unproductive way. Also, just to head off this line from Bsuh defenders, it's not as simple as, "Wah! You damn liburuuuls just hate Bush, and he can never do anything right in your eyes!"...that's a extremely deficient statement and it's totally untrue.

Then stop demonstrating that we hit the nail on the head

What Bush just did to Putin, is like what Drew does to most everyone he disagrees with on this forum, he insults them indirectly by making snide comments about their "ignorance" and/or mental inferiority.

I thought your "point" was about Putin getting a "dig" on Bush on the world stage. 

For my part, that's why I've tried to be less pointed by working to eliminate ad hominem attacks.

Good on ya...although your body of work paints a different picture

Do you really think Bush's comments and subsequent behavior are going to effect positive change in Russia's thinking and/or actions? Are they going to compell Putin to want to work w/ the U.S. on any number of very important fronts?

They already HAVE effected positive change and demonstrations by Russia of wanting to work with us.

Change is happening all around the world, and MUCH of it for the better, due to Bush's steadfastness and leadership.  Just because YOU aren't willing to credit him with any of it doesn't stop it from happening, and therefore, demonstrating that all your hand-wringing is nothing more than a hindrance to actual progress.

Yeah, ignoring those memos was brilliant!  Ignoring 52 separate warnings from the FAA about upcoming attacks on America[/url] was brilliant!! No wonder you feel Bush is a success, if this is your measure of brilliance. I see it now, Osama still on the loose is a tremendous boon for our country!!

Perhaps you should initiate a letter-writing campaign to the NSA who was offered Osama's head on a silver platter, and given numerous warnings about his capabilities and what he wished to do.

Wait, I made a mistake there.  It wasn't an NSA, it was the Pope of Presidents who ignored those things.  Again, a demonstration of your willingness to turn a blind eye to the best solution ever offered America and instead blame the man who was at the "end of the chain".  Your "point" is blindingly partisan.  There are those on your own side who can see and accept this.  Why you can't is beyond MANY.

The war in Iraq is *not* over, so to call it a success or failure at this juncture is premature and jingoist at best. Let's be honest, you believe it *will* be a success, and I believe it will not. I guess I can't argue the case any further if you truly think it's already over and done with.

You really can't argue it any further, just like we can't continually point out POSITIVE change and behavior happening in the region as a success to you.  We can't see your point, and you can't see ours.  At last, something we both agree on!

[DrewKaree]

Republicans like to credit Reagan, but he really did nothing more than outspend the Russians in an attempt to bolster M.A.D. which led the U.S. into a tremendous deficits. His "arms race" played right into the hands of authoritarian "Communist" hard-liners in the Kremlin, which most likely extended the length of time it took for communism to finally fall in Russia, all while edging the dying regime to the brink of war several times.

Let me get this straight....he outspent them (DID something), this led right into their hands somehow, and ultimately led to their demise.  So you point out that Reagan put into action a plan which led to their demise.  Sounds like you made our case for us, and in such a nice concise fashion!  Thanks!

We won the Cold War even before Reagan, to noone's credit, but rather due to inherent flaws in the Russian system.

Yeah, I remember all those gas lines, rampant inflation and unemployment, and outrageous military spending under the Carter administration   Those "flaws" seemed to be working beautifully until Reagan said "The hell with it, we're going to put the screws to them".  Those "flaws" WORKED, until we DID something about it.  Your extension of 10 years would have been 20 if Reagan hadn't done what he did.

My beef is with the fringe element that has hijacked the Republican party and whipped their base into such a fanatical frenzy that I see very decent people voting against their own best interests in support of the false premises of a wounded and dying ideology.

That you think a "fringe" element could coerce a turnout like the last election is yet another demonstration of how you misunderestimate America. 

That you think the "base" of the Republican party is so intellectually soft is another reason for the massive turnout.  The American people decided they'd had enough of being talked down to.  They said "SHUT UP" in more numbers than those who were pissed off at an "idiot and a chimp".

Was Barbara Boxer the NSA during the runup and subsequent execution of one of the worst attacks on American soil? Was see privy to the same reports as Condi was?

Clinton passed on Osama.  'nuf said.

It never ceases to amaze me how efficient Bush haters are at ignoring the failures of Clinton.

52 warnings from the FAA during her tenure as NSA. You think it's ok, I think she should be held accountable.

GREAT!  I'll pick you up so we can both go watch the hearings against WJC when they hold him accountable for allowing the figurehead of Al Qaeda to refine the plot against America that led to 52 warnings from the FAA

Again, we'll disagree until we're blue in the face.  We see it one way, you'll continue to use hindsight to micromanage the U.S. Government

For more recent failures of leadership and diplomacy, here's one of Condi's latest beautiful displays of political prowess:

"CTV News has learned that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was so displeased by Canada's decision to opt out of the program that she's postponed a planned visit to Ottawa in mid-April."

I believe, fredster, that stands for MrCTV, since the media doesn't guide his life.

[Grasshopper]

I never bought into the idea that Russia was on the verge of collapse in the eighties. Sure the economy was weak by western standards but it wasn't weak by Russian historical standards. Bear in mind literally millions of Russians died of starvation during the Stalin era. The question is not whether the Russian economy was weak but whether the Russian people, and the people in the satellite countries, were on the verge of revolution. I don't think there is any convincing evidence to suggest they were.

I believe the cold war ended primarily because of Gorbachev's bravery and vision, and I don't think he gets enough credit for this in America. Sure Reagan deserves credit for negotiating with him (something that many US presidents would not have done) but essentially Reagan was in the right place at the right time, and took most of the credit.

I always find it irritating when some US commentators brag about how the US 'won' the cold war, firstly because it is untrue, and secondly because this type of mentality helped to undermine Gorbachev. Comments such as these made many Russians feel humiliated. We (the west) should have supported Gorbachev far more than we did, and given Russia substantial economic aid at a crucial time. It would have been in our long term interest.

If we had supported Gorbachev then perhaps the coup against him wouldn't have happened and Russia would have been spared the disastrous Yeltsin presidency where communism was essentially replaced with organised crime, and perhaps we wouldn't now see Putin regressing back to a hard line authoritarianism.

What a wasted opportunity.

[fredster]

Yes and NO Grasshopper.

There was a set of conditions that caused the fall. Yugoslavia's move toward capitalism, the weak economy of the USSR, etc. I agree with that. NO doubt.

But the Resolve of Reagan was that we were going to hold the line and make it difficult for the USSR to survive. The moral support the US gave the people inside the walls gave them the boost they need.  Reagan kept up the pressure to the disdain of his domestic and european critics.  Reagan also kept Russia as isolated and demoralized as he could. It greatly contributed to the fall because it pushed them to use all of their resources where it really didn't benifit them.

Reagan made it clear that the US would support the people, and he did what he said. That was a huge contribution to the fall of communism. Maybe not the Key reason, but one of the top 5 reasons.  If we had pandered to them like we have China and supported their economy the communists could have artificially kept that system alive perhaps until today.

Past that, it was up to the people of the USSR to work out thier domestic issues internally.  We support the freely elected leaders of countries.  It was up to them to decide their leader. After generations of communism, a sort of governmental organized crime, we could hardly expect them to emerge with a perfect system.  A large segment of the population was fearful of any other form of government because they were socialized under communism. 

Bush has made it clear to Putin he sees the regression.  Putin made it clear that the Russians will handle Russia.  It wasn't wasted.  Putin is doing this as a reaction to the recent terrorist attacks, and he has went too far. Being former KGB he's falling back on his training.  After all, I don't think he studied government at Harvard or Yale did he?

There have been tremendous strides for human rights and capitalism in the former USSR.  There have been setbacks.  But the direction, as Putin himself stated is forward at their own pace. To expect more than that is to hold these people to an impossible standard.

When they do come around, after the old guard has died off, you are going to see a country that could overtake the free world with it's economic power.