lovable liberal: Where Obama's support is a negative

Friday, June 19, 2009

Where Obama's support is a negative

Iran, of course. The worst thing President Obama could have done would have been to land with both feet in open support of Mir Hossein Moussavi.

22 comments:

Pianki said...: Yea.. what if Mir Hossein Moussavi would have made grand stand support for Omama during the primarys. The Americans would have had a field day. I am a black Aerican and I say let Iran run its own business. Besides I like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.; June 19, 2009 at 11:25 PM
Anonymous said...: obama should come out and support Iranian people movement.and by explaining why human rights and democracy is attacked by Iranian government.in opposite to Russia and china who called Ahmadinezad rightful president he should have repeat people of iran,s request for fair reelection .excuses like not giving mollahs a reason to kill people is not acceptable.if he knows there have been mistakes in the past ,he is out to do the right thing; June 20, 2009 at 1:32 AM
globeisatrocious said...: Ignoring freedom protestors in Iran is part of a larger foreign policy based around 2 principles: 1) blaming the US for sins large and small so he can use this embrace of moral equivalency as a springboard to talk with these heads of state and get concessions out of them (real politik? more like real fantasy) and 2) do the opposite of what GWB did. If GWB did supported democracy and human rights, the One will not, and rather lend an ear to Khameni.

This is very weak blogging - since support trumps all, you might want to review Obama's support on closing Guantanamo.; June 20, 2009 at 10:21 AM
lovable liberal said...: Oh, yeah, the massive foreign policy successes of Duhbya...

What you want, gia, is more empty words that set the protesters back. Y'know, even more fruitless than the politics of engagement that you think is about persuading by kindness. You want a blustering argument that has no positive effects other than to make you feel better.

Everyone should also recall that the Islamic revolution in Iran was genuinely popular. Even the better side here is not going to become our buddies in the Middle East.

Last, you want a stronger (smelling!) blog, have at it.; June 20, 2009 at 10:38 AM
globeisatrocious said...: Empty words is all we have from the big O, but none here. There is nothing more fruitless than reaching out to a clenched fist. And I don't want to feel better, but maybe those protestors carrying signs that say "count my vote" do.

Looks like a vote for Ron Paul would have gotten you the same indefensible foreign policy . Utterly indefensible.; June 20, 2009 at 12:24 PM
globeisatrocious said...: You wrote: more empty words that set the protesters back...

Time for Oceania to switch again as the One offers just that (hear the mellifluous neocon undertones):

The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching. We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people. The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.; June 20, 2009 at 10:15 PM
lovable liberal said...: Are you seriously telling me that you can't differentiate that from a statement of support? That explains a lot...; June 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM
globeisatrocious said...: At this point even you do not seriously believe that he means it. I thought liberals are so 'different' in retaining their objective powers, undiminished by slobbering love. But here you are on record having congratulated Obama for doing nothing, then once he truly delivers empty words - a day late and many dollars short - you wonder why I am unsatisfied? I wonder why you aren't in the least consistent and blogging outraged that he would try to influence the election of an independent country.; June 21, 2009 at 5:42 PM
lovable liberal said...: I'm not satisfied either. There's nothing to be satisfied about.

Like democrats everywhere, Obama prefers to count votes rather than make them up.

You, on the other hand, prefer empty bluster to assuage your feelings of outrage and put you down for a nap.; June 21, 2009 at 7:16 PM
globeisatrocious said...: I guess Lovable means never having to say you are wrong. (Dems love counting votes so much they come out with more ballots than those who voted in Hennepin County).; June 21, 2009 at 10:32 PM
Silence DoGood said...: LL: "Obama prefers to count votes rather than make them up"

Tell me LL isn't begging for an ACORN reference here.

---------------------

As far as Iran goes, the debate over US position will have to wait until Umbama moves beyond his empty recommendation for "vigorous debate".; June 22, 2009 at 7:20 PM
globeisatrocious said...: The election is no longer the issue. Regime change is why people are being shot, not for a box or two of missing ballots. Obama had it wrong from the start when he said Mossavi and Achmid are the same. He lives in a fantasy world where he will sweet talk the Mullahs out of their nukes; June 23, 2009 at 3:11 PM
lovable liberal said...: My original statement is still 100% correct.; June 24, 2009 at 12:22 AM
globeisatrocious said...: Oh there are plenty worse things that Obama could have done, so it is 100% wrong. But your defense of his smart policy of last week must make you feel a little foolish this week, unless you slavishly believe Obama's statement, "we've been entirely consistent, Major, in terms of how we've approached this."; June 24, 2009 at 11:25 AM
Silence DoGood said...: I can think of something worse too. Launching a nuclear attack on Tehran would be worse. If you agree that would be worse, then logically your premise of "The worst thing..." is not correct.

But there I go with formal logic again. Please return to the normal wild unsupported assertions.; June 24, 2009 at 7:02 PM
lovable liberal said...: No, SDG, there you go with middle school intentional misconstruction. I didn't think I needed to say "the worst thing in the context of the election." I expected grown-ups here to notice that context. Wrong again! My bad.; June 24, 2009 at 7:15 PM
lovable liberal said...: By the way, I doubt very seriously you've ever studied formal logic. If you had, you wouldn't claim that what you said sprang from formal logic. You made a semantic argument, not a logical one.; June 24, 2009 at 7:18 PM
lovable liberal said...: Of course, we already knew that gia was a few bricks shy of that distinction. He can't even grant that changes of emphasis can nonetheless remain consistent. He's carping, but he thinks he's making insightful points - very Republican.; June 24, 2009 at 7:20 PM
Silence DoGood said...: @LL don't wade out in the waters of mathematics and logic - we'll have to call the life guard.

Meanwhile, back on Earth:

Iran as a whole must be laughing at us. Dubya stole one of our major elections too and now Obama, after you clear away all the oratory flatulence, is pretty much on the same policy towards Iran, just less clear. Where does our country get off telling them anything?; June 25, 2009 at 12:12 PM
lovable liberal said...: Hahaha, a metaphorical argument about logic!; June 27, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Silence DoGood said...: As usual, you resort to sophomoric taunts when counterpoint fails you.

Did you really type “hahaha”? Oh dude, how rad – you totally owned that guy!; June 29, 2009 at 1:08 PM
lovable liberal said...: LL don't wade out in the waters of mathematics and logic - we'll have to call the life guard.

You said this, smart guy. My taunt is much less sophomoric than your weak tea.

Question anyone who makes noise about logic but doesn't understand the word logic more deeply than "Star Trek".; June 29, 2009 at 5:34 PM

lovable liberal

Friday, June 19, 2009

Where Obama's support is a negative

22 comments:

Coolness away from politics

Shouting to be heard

Economics

Themes

Blog Archive

Economics data

Electoral data

Following bloggers

Big soapboxes

About Me

Labels