Here’s a headline that shows that the Republicans are not about to win any awards for original thinking.
Don’t wait around for any introspection either, because even when Rand Paul tries to start a conversation he gets met with a brick wall of idiocy.
“We have to question: Is Iraq more stable or less stable since Hussein is gone?” asked Paul, who espouses some of the hands-off foreign policy of his father, former Texas Rep. Ron Paul.
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham tried to reject any assertion that the existing problems in Iraq were the result of the Republican president who ordered the invasion, Bush’s brother George W. Bush.
“The person I blame is Barack Obama, not George W. Bush,” said Graham, who criticized Obama for keeping a campaign promise to withdraw combat troops from Iraq. Of George W. Bush, Graham said, “He made the best decision he could.”
It makes me wish that we could hire a national baseball manager whose job it would be to come take tired old morons out of the game and send them to the showers.
Former Sen. Rick Santorum’s answer for handling Iran, one of four countries on the U.S. list of nations accused of repeatedly supporting global terrorism, was to “load up our bombers and bomb them back to the seventh century.”
I grow weary of the casual calls for violence. But this is the best these folks can do. Their imagination can go that far, but it can go no further.
And then they start looking for people beside themselves to blame when violence doesn’t lead to a safer more stable world. “Violence was the best choice we had.”
Fuck these people.
President Obama could have said Iraq wasn’t our problem and walked away from the whole mess, but he did not. He has continued US involvement in the middle east religious wars to such an extent that he opens himself up to this sort of criticism. I’m all out of sympathy for politicians who try and have it both ways. If violence is not the answer, then Obama should stop committing murder on our behalf. If wars are not the answer to the political and religious problems in the middle east, then Obama should stop supporting countries waging war.
Of course, that’s not going to happen now is it? It’s Obama’s war now. He isn’t winning or losing. He’s just killing people in pursuit of some unknown goal.
That wasn’t gonna happen once Obama went all out Establishment early on by naming Rbt Gates to stay on as SecDef, along with the other usual suspect national security picks. Not quite sure why he decided to govern center-right on NS issues, given his well-known skepticism about starting the Iraq War. For me, I don’t quite buy that he’s truly a sorta hardliner, and wonder if it owes more to his lack of courage in taking on the NS establishment.
At least there’s some slight glimmer of hope that he’s wising up about Russia/Ukraine, judging by the latest apparently successful Kerry visit w/Putin. That’s the one which in the near term threatens to unravel disastrously if we continue to poke Russia in the eye.
That, or he’s determined not to be outflanked to the right on national security, so as not to risk the rest of his agenda. Amounts to the same thing, I guess.
I agree totally with BooMan: Fuck ’em.
They’re a shallow bunch, to be sure. And useful to remember that they’re comfortable being shallow.
Watching a friend a few years ago riding as a passenger see a nasty bumper sticker and laugh at it and then when I asked him to explain it he began to hum. And he continued to hum and hum and hum.
It appears that the Mad Bomber mindset of Gen Curtis “Bomb ‘Em Back to the Stone Age” LeMay has gone mainstream in the Republican Party. Not entirely surprising either.
Well, sure.
These are the people that commonly say “…all they understand is force”.
They’re also the ones that always project. Always.
“…load up our bombers and bomb them back to the seventh century.”
And Santorum is running as a Christian?
When the only tool you have is a hammer,
Everything looks like a nail.