Opinion on the Embassy attack, and other events

[CBWx2]

I think JG?'s characterization of this issue is spot on. The US's involvement in the Middle East over the last 5 or 6 decades has not made us many friends over there, and when you topple a government, the odds are that the people who replace that regime are going to be luke-warm at best in terms of dealing with the US, regardless of the fact that we helped put them in power. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, for example, is trying to walk a fine line between keeping the US as an ally and keeping them at arms length, because their survival depends on Washington's support, but looking too chummy with the US will alienate a great number of the people who voted them into power. What's ironic is that a number of people who are now criticizing the president for interfering in Libya are the same ones who criticized him for not interfering in Syria.

[spartan]

I think JG?'s characterization of this issue is spot on. The US's involvement in the Middle East over the last 5 or 6 decades has not made us many friends over there, and when you topple a government, the odds are that the people who replace that regime are going to be luke-warm at best in terms of dealing with the US, regardless of the fact that we helped put them in power. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, for example, is trying to walk a fine line between keeping the US as an ally and keeping them at arms length, because their survival depends on Washington's support, but looking too chummy with the US will alienate a great number of the people who voted them into power. What's ironic is that a number of people who are now criticizing the president for interfering in Libya are the same ones who criticized him for not interfering in Syria.

Personally I don't think these guys are going to like us no matter what we do. Oh they will talk out of both sides of their mouths and take our money, but they will no sooner stab us in the back. Might as well just do what we consider to be in the best interest of the US.

[Durango 95]

We shouldn't  be forced to live on the same planet as those people.

Did you ever watch Planet of the Apes?

[CBWx2]

My point (lost on you CBW) is that you see things the way you do because you are on a political extreme. I have seen you cite as authority things from Salon and DailyKos etc. 

People like you and your opposites on the extreme right wing KILL reasonable political discourse in this country because you are more concerned with your ideology than progress.

Like I have said about you many times, you consistenly take information you get from other sources -- seemingly without actually understanding it -- and pawn it off as your own or as supporting your view.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/09/15/Obama-Contribution-Anti-Islam-Filmmaker

LOL!

hypocrisy  (hɪˈpɒkrəsɪ)

1.   the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc, contrary to one's real character or actual behaviour, esp the pretence of virtue and piety

Not going to make this into a big deal that derails the thread. Just couldn't resist pointing out how someone can criticism others for posting from extreme partisan sources, and then turn around and repeatedly do it themselves. That is all...

[VinBucFan]

My point (lost on you CBW) is that you see things the way you do because you are on a political extreme. I have seen you cite as authority things from Salon and DailyKos etc. 

People like you and your opposites on the extreme right wing KILL reasonable political discourse in this country because you are more concerned with your ideology than progress.

Like I have said about you many times, you consistenly take information you get from other sources -- seemingly without actually understanding it -- and pawn it off as your own or as supporting your view.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/09/15/Obama-Contribution-Anti-Islam-Filmmaker

LOL!

hypocrisy  (hɪˈpɒkrəsɪ)

1.   the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc, contrary to one's real character or actual behaviour, esp the pretence of virtue and piety

Not going to make this into a big deal that derails the thread. Just couldn't resist pointing out how someone can criticism others for posting from extreme partisan sources, and then turn around and repeatedly do it themselves. That is all...

I know I am in your head and you want to try to make me look bad, but you could at least get your facts straight.  i think the Breitbart article is funny in its extremism.  He's putting Bill Maher on the same level for goodness sakes  If that isn't obvious, then shame on you.  I posted it though because the one point he does make accurately (and to be clear he is a political hit man) is that the WH bent over backwards trying to blame it on a movie.  Anyway, if you look at my quotes that you posted what i am talking asbout is YOU adopting as your own things you do not understand because you THINK they meah with your world view. Very different, so maybe you shoud think about that word "hypocrite."  Maybe you dont know what it means?

See CBW, your problem is that you mistakenly assume that EVERYONE is partisan.  I am not. I am a fiscal conservative (a small business owner most of my life) but socially moderate. For example, I have been an outspoken propent of gay rights, including on this website, as i have member of my family (my children's grandfather) who is gay.  You ignore that because it makes it easier for you to label people (lie you just did in another thread)

[CBWx2]

I know I am in your head and you want to try to make me look bad, but you could at least get your facts straight.  i think the Breitbart article is funny in its extremism.  He's putting Bill Maher on the same level for goodness sakes  If that isn't obvious, then shame on you.  I posted it though because the one point he does make accurately (and to be clear he is a political hit man) is that the WH bent over backwards trying to blame it on a movie.  Anyway, if you look at my quotes that you posted what i am talking asbout is YOU adopting as your own things you do not understand because you THINK they meah with your world view. Very different, so maybe you shoud think about that word "hypocrite."  Maybe you dont know what it means?

You are trying your damnedest to create some sort of distinction where there isn't one. Surrender noted.

See CBW, your problem is that you mistakenly assume that EVERYONE is partisan.  I am not. I am a fiscal conservative (a small business owner most of my life) but socially moderate. For example, I have been an outspoken propent of gay rights, including on this website, as i have member of my family (my children's grandfather) who is gay.  You ignore that because it makes it easier for you to label people (lie you just did in another thread)

Not everyone, just the ones who clearly are partisan, like you. You support gay marriage. Whoopee freaking doo. That doesn't make you non-partisan. A partisan response to an issue, for example, might be to post a scathing commentary of the Obama administration's handling of this issue that was written by a conservative ideologue and posted on an extremist conservative website. You are so full of garbage I can smell it all the way up here in Michigan. Now I'm seriously done with you here. You've embarrassed yourself enough. No need for me to continue to help you.

[VinBucFan]

I know I am in your head and you want to try to make me look bad, but you could at least get your facts straight.  i think the Breitbart article is funny in its extremism.  He's putting Bill Maher on the same level for goodness sakes  If that isn't obvious, then shame on you.  I posted it though because the one point he does make accurately (and to be clear he is a political hit man) is that the WH bent over backwards trying to blame it on a movie.  Anyway, if you look at my quotes that you posted what i am talking asbout is YOU adopting as your own things you do not understand because you THINK they meah with your world view. Very different, so maybe you shoud think about that word "hypocrite."  Maybe you dont know what it means?

You are trying your damnedest to create some sort of distinction where there isn't one. Surrender noted.

See CBW, your problem is that you mistakenly assume that EVERYONE is partisan.  I am not. I am a fiscal conservative (a small business owner most of my life) but socially moderate. For example, I have been an outspoken propent of gay rights, including on this website, as i have member of my family (my children's grandfather) who is gay.  You ignore that because it makes it easier for you to label people (lie you just did in another thread)

Not everyone, just the ones who clearly are partisan, like you. You support gay marriage. Whoopee freaking doo. That doesn't make you non-partisan. A partisan response to an issue, for example, might be to post a scathing commentary of the Obama administration's handling of this issue that was written by a conservative ideologue and posted on an extremist conservative website. You are so full of garbage I can smell it all the way up here in Michigan. Now I'm seriously done with you here. You've embarrassed yourself enough. No need for me to continue to help you.

I am embarassed to learn that you are from my state of Michigan . . .  egad.   

Partisan, to me, means that you elevate a political party orideology above all else.  That description bests fits people at the ENDS of the political spectrum. You have described yourself tonight as being a LIBERAL and you pointed out that you are often at odds with other more centrist democrats.  If the shoe fits CBW . . .

I, on the other hand, disagree with the extremes on both ends, from birthers to liberals like you.  Like I said, if it helps you cope to call other partisans, so be it, but that does not make it true

[dbucfan]

Perhaps if one were to open a Vin Vs CBW thread and you folks could ignore conversations others might be enjoying...

[CBWx2]

Partisan, to me, means that you elevate a political party orideology above all else. That description bests fits people at the ENDS of the political spectrum. You have described yourself tonight as being a LIBERAL and you pointed out that you are often at odds with other more centrist democrats.  If the shoe fits CBW . . .

You just equated being a liberal to being an extremist. For someone as non-partisan as you, that seems like an oddly partisan characterization. If you think me an extremist, I would sincerely question what your idea of what a centrist is, and sincerely reject your characterization of yourself as one.

But we both know that you aren't. The only issue you have taken a liberal view on at all on this MB is gay marriage, and that's not even a liberal issue anymore. Most of the country now is in favor of it. Liberals just happened to champion it first, just like every other form of civil rights.

I, on the other hand, disagree with the extremes on both ends, from birthers to liberals like you.  Like I said, if it helps you cope to call other partisans, so be it, but that does not make it true

Here's a lesson for you, the opposite of a conservative is liberal. Neither is an extreme, they are merely a specification of each side of a spectrum, both having varying degrees. The extreme wing of liberalism is communism, not liberalism itself, just like the extreme wing of conservatism is fascism.

I am not a communist, I am a liberal. A proponent of social liberalism, if you want to get specific. Here's the definition of social liberalism for you:

Social liberalism is the belief that liberalism should include a social foundation. It differs from classical liberalism in that it believes the legitimate role of the state includes addressing economic and social issues such as unemployment, health care, and education while simultaneously expanding civil rights. Under social liberalism, the good of the community is viewed as harmonious with the freedom of the individual. Social liberal policies have been widely adopted in much of the capitalist world, particularly following World War II. Social liberal ideas and parties tend to be considered centrist or centre-left.

Now what you are suggesting that you are is not what is politically defined as a centrist. It is politically defined as Neo-classical liberalism, and is on the middle-right side of the political spectrum.

Neoliberalism is a label for economic liberalizations, free trade and open markets. Neoliberalism supports the privatization of nationalized industries, deregulation, and enhancing the role of the private sector in modern society.

[CBWx2]

Perhaps if one were to open a Vin Vs CBW thread and you folks could ignore conversations others might be enjoying...

You are right, dbuc. I've made my last post responding to Vince in this thread. Scout's honor.

[VinBucFan]

Partisan, to me, means that you elevate a political party orideology above all else. That description bests fits people at the ENDS of the political spectrum. You have described yourself tonight as being a LIBERAL and you pointed out that you are often at odds with other more centrist democrats.  If the shoe fits CBW . . .

You just equated being a liberal to being an extremist. For someone as non-partisan as you, that seems like an oddly partisan characterization. If you think me an extremist, I would sincerely question what your idea of what a centrist is, and sincerely reject your characterization of yourself as one.

Because I presume you can read, I should laugh at your crocodile tears, but I will try, instead, asking you to simply read a little more closely (particularly the part in purple--lol). You put yourself on the near end of a political spectrum and then claim I called you an extremist. LOL.  Cry me a river of those croc tears

The entire rest of your post is the type of non-sensical babble that leads me to call you the Black Hole and that leads other to flee in droves.  No thanks, not interested. 

[dbucfan]

Perhaps if we all focused upon the thread topic and offered thoughts related to the topic we would find more conversation and less space will be wasted with unrelated comments - and more thoughts about the topic will fill the threads vince.  Just thinking out loud again.

[Durango 95]

Partisan, to me, means that you elevate a political party orideology above all else. That description bests fits people at the ENDS of the political spectrum. You have described yourself tonight as being a LIBERAL and you pointed out that you are often at odds with other more centrist democrats.  If the shoe fits CBW . . .

You just equated being a liberal to being an extremist. For someone as non-partisan as you, that seems like an oddly partisan characterization. If you think me an extremist, I would sincerely question what your idea of what a centrist is, and sincerely reject your characterization of yourself as one.

I should laugh at your crocodile tears,

I've heard this line of crap before.

Find a new spiel, Vin, you're repeating yourself.

[Chief Joseph]

" Liberals just happened to champion it first, just like every other form of civil rights. "

And here I was thinking old Honest Abe was a Republican.

[CBWx2]

" Liberals just happened to champion it first, just like every other form of civil rights. "

And here I was thinking old Honest Abe was a Republican.

He was, and the Republican party was the liberal party in the US in the 1850's.