Redstate

...to come pick you up now.

Sheesh. What a country, huh?

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

...do I need to answer three questions to post a rebuttal?

I have a hard time believing that because we have checkered past with a single anti-Castro terrorist, that you can conflate that into a full-throated accusation of terrorism. To even remotely attempt to draw a parallel is the height of cultural arrogance and liberal anti-Americanism. Does your hero William Ayers (I assume from your hateful attitude) see things that way? What about your ideological compatriots on the far Left, such as the Weather Underground and the loons at dKos?

Cuba is not free, nor sovereign. That's why over 120,000 Cubans made a run for it during the Mariel Boatlift. A truly free people would not flee en masse given the first chance, you dolt. I guess Fidel Castro is such a magnanimous cat that the people chose to elect him every cycle. Cuba is run by a brutal, paranoid oppressive tyrant class. Go worship your Che Guevara poster.

Unlike Cuba, in America, one is considered innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Orlando Bosch was never tried, let alone convicted, of any terrorist acts.

In America, Mr. Bosch's rights will be protected, and he will be afforded due process. That's more than anyone can say about Cuba.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

And that may have been the single most simultaneously inane and strained analogy that I have ever seen here. Bush is doing this for three reasons:

1). To embarrass the Cuban regime running the place;
2). To try to put an uncontrolled information source in the hands of an unfree populace;
3). To please the Cuban-American vote (although they're always up for something that will accomplish 1 & 2).

Did you not even read the article? Actually, I already know the answer: no, you didn't. We expect people to read the articles that they link to, by the way - so keep that in mind the next time that you comment here.

Moe Lane

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

So although Cuba is a Communist country 90 miles off our coast whose regime attempted to install nuclear missles from Russia to aim directly at us, it is perfectly acceptable for a sitting President to lift sanctions on them for your following reasons:

1. Embarassment (propaganda purposes)
2. Information sources (again propaganda)
3. Election Campaigning

Makes sense.

Do you actually have a point.

NC

Yes.

or do you prefer to posture?

NC

My point is that there seems to be a double standard in what is deemed acceptable foreign policy when dealing with state sponsors of terrorism.

We can send some cell phones to Iran. Preferably iPhones, the Iranians can do some serious web surfing with those.

NC

I'd support unrestricted/unfiltered internet access in all of the middle east.

_____________________________

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
--Aristotle

You choose to see it as propaganda. However, when I look at it, it seems a little closer to guerrilla politics. Evil flourishes when the tyrants control the mouthpieces of the people. Consider the extreme blockading of the internet conducted by China, Russia and most of the Middle Eastern regimes. Freedom of information is poison to thuggish cabals whose power depends on fear and secrecy. President Bush, for all of his political failings, understands that Cuba has a vibrant, strong population that would be an incredible engine of creativity if it were loosed from the Communist regime in place. He's simply providing the tools for freedom of information to explode, while simultaneously extending his coattails a bit for McCain. Quit with the cynicism, devil's advocate or not.

Do you believe Cuba is a threat? The US and the Bush administration do, just follow the link.

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/c14151.htm

Actually you'll also see that Cuba was declared a state sponsor of terror before Iran.

In fact as recently as 2002 John Bolton and the State Department believed Cuba to be pursuing bioweapons and was active in proliferating the technology:

"U.S.: Cuba sharing bioweapons technology

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A State Department official demanded Monday that Cuba stop sharing biological weapons technology with nations unfriendly to the United States and singled out Libya and Syria as being intent on acquiring weapons of mass destruction.

"Cuba has provided dual-use biotechnology to other rogue states. We are concerned that such technology could support BW [biological warfare] programs in those states," said John Bolton, undersecretary of state for arms control, in an advance copy of a speech that CNN obtained. "

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/americas/05/06/cuba.weapons/index.htm...

So why then is it acceptable policy for the President to lift sanctions against a state sponsor of terror?

And please don't try and tell me that giving cellphones to the masses will help overthrow the regime, if so why didn't we just carpet bomb Iraq with Nokias and call our job done :)

Sparky, free hint: just because you'd do it for those reasons, doesn't mean that we would.

Now behave, before I make you apologize to the site readers for wasting their valuable time.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Although, I'm not sure there really is an Iranian-American voting bloc.

I could be wrong, but it's not one of those groups that people have ever talked about.

Perhaps there are large Iranian-American voting blocs in some crucial swing states.

Anyways its always sound foreign policy to lift sanctions on our enemies to win votes.

from Hugo Chavez, sell it, and buy cellphones for Iranians with the proceeds?

Oil for Phones...now *that's* a keeper.

"ma deuce says no truce"

include government cheese in with the deal.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

I do not support taking free oil from Venezuela for political reasons.

But you do know that the US imports/buys about 1 million barrels a day from Venezuela, so I suppose if they want to give it to us for free instead that's not too bad.

Have you seen the Army's new M16-NOKIA? Fires Nokia phones, the insurgents love it, they get a new phone and loose all will to fight, they just want to txt.

To paraphrase Heinlein, there's a geometric progression to some humor: use a particular joke once, you're a wit. Use it twice, you're a half-wit.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Give me a break.

When it comes between the two of them yes he is better, even Bush Praised some of Ali Khamenei moves. Has Ali Khamenei done and said things yes, but if I had to choose between Ali Khamenei or Ahmadinejad to be the Supreme Leader I would choose Ali Khamenei everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.
Ali Khamenei has been supportive of scientific progress in Iran. He was the first Islamic clerics to allow stem cell research and therapeutic cloning. In 2004, Khamenei said that the country's progress is dependent on investment in the field of science and technology. He also said that attaching a high status to scholars and scientists in society would help talents to flourish and science and technology to become domesticated, thus ensuring the country's progress and development.
In 2007, Khamenei requested that government officials speed up Iran's move towards economic privatization. Khamenei also suggested that ownership rights should be protected in courts set up by the Justice Ministry; the hope was that this new protection would give a measure of security to and encourage private investment.

advocating the slaughter of an entire nation. How noble of him.

I even said that he said and did things. I am saying regardless of that Ali Khamenei is better than Ahmadinejad.

I have a question so since George W. Bush meet with "terrorist" Muammar al-Qaddafi and “tyrant”Kim Jong-il should we have congress impeach him or send George W. Bush through the ringer.

We would have seriously considered the notion.

Fortunately, Bush wasn't that dumb.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

has not offered anything he is not President.
Before anyone says Obama is my man he is not I am a former member of the Straight talk express, if you don't believe me ill be more than happy to send you my cancelled checks of donation and my straight talk express membership card. I am tired of mudslinging POLITICS and lets take everything and anything to destroy a person and for that reason i am voting Barr or Ralph Nader.

You know, the one where it was made clear via the video who was being referred to.

It's not our fault that your guy is a chowderhead when it coems to natsec.. I wish that you people would learn to accept that, and move on.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

for proving my point again that people don't hear what was actually SAID. People need to Clean out there ears and do some research.
MOE PLEASE POINT OUT WHERE HE SAID AHMADINEJAD BY NAME. IT'S NOT MY FAULT YOU HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF WHO THE TRUE LEADER OF IRAN IS.
MOE If you do not know this maybe you should do some research, and learn more about Iran, and the middle east. Iran has a very complex system of government with varying institutions, but at the top of it sits Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who essentially is only one accountable to the Council of Guardians made up of clerics, many of whom are appointed by Khamenei himself. So, Ahmadinejad is not the supreme leader, or the head of foreign policy. As the Council on Foreign Relations and the CIA explains, especially in the area of foreign policy, Ahmadinejad has very little if any influence.

Ahmadinejad, IS NOT THE SUPREME LEADER OF IRAN. ACCORDING TO OUR OWN GOVERNMENT, AND THE UN HE HAS LITTLE TO NO SAY WHEN IT COMES TO FOREIGN POLICY. ANOTHER TID BIT FOR YOU AHMADINEJAD CAN BE FIRED AT ANY TIME BY GUESS WHO THE TRUE LEADER OF IRAN ALI KHAMENEI.

Alas, motigercali, if you want to make the argument that Obama most emphatically did not mean to refer to Ahmadinejad at the time, you need to explain why he didn't take the time to correct the original questioner, who used a photo of the man as part of his question. And when you do it, don't shout, don't be snide, and don't presume to lecture.

To repeat myself: Obama; chowderhead on natsec. Fault: not mine.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Moe maybe he didn't see the picture on the promter, maybe he thought people were smarter than they truly are, maybe he was under a time limit, and wanted to answer a question instead of taking all his time explaining who the true leader of Iran is. There are a lot of reasons why didn't.
Why Don't we ask McCain who the Supreme leader of Iran is. Oh thats right he does not know he thinks it's Ahmadinejad. McCain is suppose to be the one that's the genius about foreign policy and he does not even know who the true leader is.

NC

was clear would you meet with the Leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, North Korea?

Not my fault this country has a lot of darn dumb people. Iran Ali Khamenei total supreme ruler, Syria Bashar al-Assad some question how much power he truly has some think it's miltary and cabinet leaders that have the power, Venezuela Hugo Chavez had a few setbacks in last election but still very much powerful, North Korea Kim Jong-il crazy bastard or as Bush calls a “tyrant”.

Which included Ahmadinejad.

I have to go cook, so let's cut to the chase: please acknowledge in your next post that the questioner clearly intended Ahmadinejad to represent the leader of Iran in his question to Obama, and that Obama did not see fit to comment on this representation at the time of the question.

I'm quite serious: you have to do this.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

I would have thought that your average Obama supporter would have thought talking to Ahmadinejad was a good thing. I amazed he feels the need to reconstruct Obama's answer.

NC

...for him; surely there was no need to encourage me to repeat myself, nu?

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Obama is not my man. I am a former member of the Straight talk express, if you don't believe me ill be more than happy to send you my cancelled checks of donation and my straight talk express membership card. If that is not good enough for you maybe, you could access McCain's own list of Donor's and Straight Talk membership records and see my name there for yourself. But for some reason i think you still wouldn't believe your eyes. Then if you still didn't believe that I'm sad that you are to blind to see why people are tired of the same ole politics. He lost my Vote, Money and time. I am tired of mudslinging POLITICS and lets take everything and anything to destroy a person and for that reason i am voting Barr or Ralph Nader.

I'll give you a bit of advice, if you truly want the Independents vote. STOP attacking Obama and discuss the ISSUES. If you don't the Special Elections were just the beginning of what will happen.

...when you feel like following a moderator's instructions.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

If it is okay to assume that Obama did not mean Ahmedinijad (I don't care how you spell his name) then can you guys please understand that in talking appeasement perhaps Bush was not talking about Obama since he did not say Obama by name?
MelZ

Question: "Would you be willing to meet separately without preconditions during the first year of your administration in Washington or anywhere else with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, and North Korea in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?"

Answer from Obama: "I would."

There is zero ambiguity in Sen. Obama's answer. To be charitable, perhaps he was simply pandering to a left-leaning Democratic audience.

NC

who is the True leader of Iran?

First, the question was about meeting with "leaders" which I believe is a word that denotes more than one. Since Ahmadinejad is President of Iran I think its a fairly reasonably to assume that he is one of the "leaders" of Iran (its fairly unreasonable to assume that he is not one of the leaders).

But lets assume for the sake of argument that you are right and that Sen. Obama was referring not to Pres. Ahmadinejad, but to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. That somehow makes it better???!! I was not aware that Ali Khamenei was a closet moderate.

NC

He wants us in his headspace; if he can't "convince" us, wearying us into it will do for his purposes.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

NC