The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]

The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

The LIGHT IN THE FOREST

The Lion's Den ... International & Political Debate

A Reply to Rich

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:

UserName:

Password:

Format Mode:

Format:

Videos:

Message Icon:

Message:

Smilies




		$computer woes {CW:_(}$

[quote][i]Originally posted by BookwormMG[/i]
[br]Rich, I've been following your "What's a Mother to Do?" post, and I'm . . . well, what am I . . . disturbed, perplexed, amazed?  Having spent five years contributing to this wonderful virtual community that you've created and maintained, I know you to be very intelligent, intellectually curious, well read and educated, highly patriotic, thoughtful and reasonable.  I'd like to think that I possess those qualities as well.

Yet when the subject is Barack Obama's presidency and the future of our country, we have diametrically opposed reactions.  I'm thrilled to death, you're deathly afraid.  What gives?  More than a simple liberal-conservative, Democrat-Republican difference, I assume, given the degree of passion we're both prone to displaying on this subject, yet I don't understand exactly what.  (Pre-emptive strike: I'm not implying racism.  I know you're not a racist.)

So in an effort to dig deeper, with the aim of understanding each other, I'll try the approach I know best: thinking like a lawyer.  I have specific questions/comments about your posts, so I'll ask/state them; you can respond and ask me questions, if you like, and I'll answer them to the best of my ability.  Maybe some progress will be made, maybe it won't, but we really should try.  Please believe that I am sincere in this endeavor.  (I'm tempted to say that as a token of my sincerity I just made a donation via Pay-Pal, but I was going to do that anyway.)

1) In your first post in the "What's a Mother to Do" thread, you said that Obama's attitude is "shut up and get out of the way."  When, and in reference to what?  Please provide examples, because believe me, many on the left (myself not included) declare themselves disillusioned that he has [u]not[/u] taken such an attitude, most recently with regard to health care.

2) You express concern and grave doubt regarding Obama's desire for "fundamental and wholesale changes" that will enable him to "rebuild" this country.  Are you talking here about specific proposals for legislation, and if so, which ones?  If not, what kind of changes are you referring to?

3) Congressman Wilson did not merely "say" the phrase "You lie!" to the President.  He shouted it, during an address by the President to a joint session of Congress.  That's a type of blatant disrespect to the office of President of the United States that, as far as I know, was never shown to the previous occupant of the office, despite the disapproval that most Democrats in Congress felt for him and expressed [u]elsewhere[/u].  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

4) Who in the Obama Administration bombed the Pentagon, or attempted to?  In a way it's misleading of me to even ask this question because I know that you're referring to William Ayers, and that you believe him to be a close Obama adviser.  I'm certain that he isn't.  Here's my analysis:

As you've probably heard ad infinitum, Obama was eight years old when Ayers committed the acts for which he's known.  If Obama was eight, I was nineteen -- and I didn't recognize the name "William Ayers" when it was first mentioned during the campaign.  (The name of his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, I did recognize.)  I suspect that when Obama was first introduced to "Bill Ayers, an education professor" and member in good standing of the liberal Chicago establishment, he didn't know of Ayers' radical past. When he did learn of it, he faced the same choice everyone else in that situation faced: a) reject any association with him, because of his past; or b) accept him for the person he currently appeared to be.  No doubt some people chose the first option; most people, Obama included, appear to have chosen the second.

But I believe that Obama chose the second option only up to a point: He allowed Ayers to host a neighborhood fundraiser for him, served on a charitable board with Ayers, no doubt accepted one or more donations from him, but that's it, because Obama is far too skillful a politician to saddle himself with baggage like a close relationship with Bill Ayers the Radical Student Bomber.  (Like any politician, though it's not often mentioned, Obama is as ruthless as he has to be.)  And as for Obama needing Ayers' help to write his books, devise legislation, or plot to take over the world, forget it -- Obama is a brilliant man who doesn't need the help of someone like Ayers to do whichever of those things he's chosen to do.

5) You're concerned that two such incidents as the Air Force One fly-by in NYC and the Coast Guard training exercise in DC on 9/11 are just too bizarre to be coincidental.  I'm not; there's a whole lot of stupidity in the world.  (Note also that the person who authorized the Air Force One photo shoot is no longer part of the Administration.)  You and I both work for large organizations with layers of hierarchy, so think about it, Rich -- haven't you ever learned of an incident so incredibly dumb that it made you say, "How could anyone have approved that?!!!  Couldn't they see how it would look??? how it would turn out??? that someone would get hurt??? etc."  But they didn't.  A minor but telling example:  If I remember correctly, Secretary of State Clinton chose to symbolize that America was turning over a new leaf in its relationship with Russia by giving her Russian counterpart a buzzer or bell that was labeled "RESET."  You'd think that someone on her staff would have made sure, before the event took place, that the device made an appropriate sound when pressed.  Guess what . . . .  Stupidity happens.

6) You state that a person can be judged by those he chooses to associate with. I'd like to offer a few short biographies of some of the people President Obama has chosen to associate with.  You'll recognize the names and may be tempted to move on, but please read or at least skim the information provided.

http://www.defenselink.mil/bios/biographydetail.aspx?biographyid=115

http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nsc/nsa/

http://www1.va.gov/opa/bios/biography.asp?id=76

http://www.dni.gov/blair_bio.htm

Now ask yourself, why did these men, each of whom has devoted decades of service to our country, choose to serve in the Obama administration?  Are they dupes? glory hounds? Manchurian candidates? too dumb to know any better?  Why?

Finally, you're probably aware of my great admiration for Senator Jim Webb of Virginia, once a Republican, now a Democrat but hardly a "strong lefty."  There are many tributes to his character that could be quoted, but the most persuasive may be the following:

http://hamptonroads.com/node/173161

You'd think that as a Vietnam veteran of demonstrated courage and a graduate of the Naval Academy, Webb would have endorsed McCain, his fellow vet and Annapolis grad.  But he didn't; he endorsed and campaigned with Obama.  Why would he have done that if he feared for the future of the country under Obama?  (You can rule out "too dumb to know any better" -- I've read all eight of his books, and no one has ever suggested that he had a ghostwriter.)

Well, there you have it, Rich.  I put a lot of time into this because I really want to know what you think.  I don't mean to dissuade others from replying, but I want to hear from Rich as well.

[/quote]

Upload an Image File From Your PC For Insertion in Your Post

- HTML is OFF | Forum Code is ON

Check here to include your profile signature.
Check here to subscribe to this topic.

T O P I C R E V I E W
BookwormMG	Posted - September 12 2009 : 2:50:02 PM Rich, I've been following your "What's a Mother to Do?" post, and I'm . . . well, what am I . . . disturbed, perplexed, amazed? Having spent five years contributing to this wonderful virtual community that you've created and maintained, I know you to be very intelligent, intellectually curious, well read and educated, highly patriotic, thoughtful and reasonable. I'd like to think that I possess those qualities as well. Yet when the subject is Barack Obama's presidency and the future of our country, we have diametrically opposed reactions. I'm thrilled to death, you're deathly afraid. What gives? More than a simple liberal-conservative, Democrat-Republican difference, I assume, given the degree of passion we're both prone to displaying on this subject, yet I don't understand exactly what. (Pre-emptive strike: I'm not implying racism. I know you're not a racist.) So in an effort to dig deeper, with the aim of understanding each other, I'll try the approach I know best: thinking like a lawyer. I have specific questions/comments about your posts, so I'll ask/state them; you can respond and ask me questions, if you like, and I'll answer them to the best of my ability. Maybe some progress will be made, maybe it won't, but we really should try. Please believe that I am sincere in this endeavor. (I'm tempted to say that as a token of my sincerity I just made a donation via Pay-Pal, but I was going to do that anyway.) 1) In your first post in the "What's a Mother to Do" thread, you said that Obama's attitude is "shut up and get out of the way." When, and in reference to what? Please provide examples, because believe me, many on the left (myself not included) declare themselves disillusioned that he has not taken such an attitude, most recently with regard to health care. 2) You express concern and grave doubt regarding Obama's desire for "fundamental and wholesale changes" that will enable him to "rebuild" this country. Are you talking here about specific proposals for legislation, and if so, which ones? If not, what kind of changes are you referring to? 3) Congressman Wilson did not merely "say" the phrase "You lie!" to the President. He shouted it, during an address by the President to a joint session of Congress. That's a type of blatant disrespect to the office of President of the United States that, as far as I know, was never shown to the previous occupant of the office, despite the disapproval that most Democrats in Congress felt for him and expressed elsewhere. Please correct me if I'm wrong. 4) Who in the Obama Administration bombed the Pentagon, or attempted to? In a way it's misleading of me to even ask this question because I know that you're referring to William Ayers, and that you believe him to be a close Obama adviser. I'm certain that he isn't. Here's my analysis: As you've probably heard ad infinitum, Obama was eight years old when Ayers committed the acts for which he's known. If Obama was eight, I was nineteen -- and I didn't recognize the name "William Ayers" when it was first mentioned during the campaign. (The name of his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, I did recognize.) I suspect that when Obama was first introduced to "Bill Ayers, an education professor" and member in good standing of the liberal Chicago establishment, he didn't know of Ayers' radical past. When he did learn of it, he faced the same choice everyone else in that situation faced: a) reject any association with him, because of his past; or b) accept him for the person he currently appeared to be. No doubt some people chose the first option; most people, Obama included, appear to have chosen the second. But I believe that Obama chose the second option only up to a point: He allowed Ayers to host a neighborhood fundraiser for him, served on a charitable board with Ayers, no doubt accepted one or more donations from him, but that's it, because Obama is far too skillful a politician to saddle himself with baggage like a close relationship with Bill Ayers the Radical Student Bomber. (Like any politician, though it's not often mentioned, Obama is as ruthless as he has to be.) And as for Obama needing Ayers' help to write his books, devise legislation, or plot to take over the world, forget it -- Obama is a brilliant man who doesn't need the help of someone like Ayers to do whichever of those things he's chosen to do. 5) You're concerned that two such incidents as the Air Force One fly-by in NYC and the Coast Guard training exercise in DC on 9/11 are just too bizarre to be coincidental. I'm not; there's a whole lot of stupidity in the world. (Note also that the person who authorized the Air Force One photo shoot is no longer part of the Administration.) You and I both work for large organizations with layers of hierarchy, so think about it, Rich -- haven't you ever learned of an incident so incredibly dumb that it made you say, "How could anyone have approved that?!!! Couldn't they see how it would look??? how it would turn out??? that someone would get hurt??? etc." But they didn't. A minor but telling example: If I remember correctly, Secretary of State Clinton chose to symbolize that America was turning over a new leaf in its relationship with Russia by giving her Russian counterpart a buzzer or bell that was labeled "RESET." You'd think that someone on her staff would have made sure, before the event took place, that the device made an appropriate sound when pressed. Guess what . . . . Stupidity happens. 6) You state that a person can be judged by those he chooses to associate with. I'd like to offer a few short biographies of some of the people President Obama has chosen to associate with. You'll recognize the names and may be tempted to move on, but please read or at least skim the information provided. http://www.defenselink.mil/bios/biographydetail.aspx?biographyid=115 http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nsc/nsa/ http://www1.va.gov/opa/bios/biography.asp?id=76 http://www.dni.gov/blair_bio.htm Now ask yourself, why did these men, each of whom has devoted decades of service to our country, choose to serve in the Obama administration? Are they dupes? glory hounds? Manchurian candidates? too dumb to know any better? Why? Finally, you're probably aware of my great admiration for Senator Jim Webb of Virginia, once a Republican, now a Democrat but hardly a "strong lefty." There are many tributes to his character that could be quoted, but the most persuasive may be the following: http://hamptonroads.com/node/173161 You'd think that as a Vietnam veteran of demonstrated courage and a graduate of the Naval Academy, Webb would have endorsed McCain, his fellow vet and Annapolis grad. But he didn't; he endorsed and campaigned with Obama. Why would he have done that if he feared for the future of the country under Obama? (You can rule out "too dumb to know any better" -- I've read all eight of his books, and no one has ever suggested that he had a ghostwriter.) Well, there you have it, Rich. I put a lot of time into this because I really want to know what you think. I don't mean to dissuade others from replying, but I want to hear from Rich as well.
3 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
SgtMunro	Posted - September 14 2009 : 6:54:38 PM P.S.- Sachem Rich, the only reason I didn't add to your already excellent observations on Van Jones was the he had resigned last weekend, and therefore I would have been 'beating a dead horse', so-to-speak. I would like to add that one of Van Jones' early crusades was joining the Leftist movement to free convicted Philadelphia cop-killer Mumiah Abu Jamal. But as I alluded to, there are many more of his ilk still at the levers of control, or otherwise in close-confidence to President Obama, and I will focus on exposing them. (since they also pose a Clear & Present Danger to the Republic) *YMH&OS,* The Sarge
SgtMunro	Posted - September 13 2009 : 1:21:13 PM quote: richfed asked: This drains me. I don't know how the Sarge does it! I do it out of love for freedom, and our way of life. I use the same personal skill-sets acquired over a lifetime, to help me press on in the face of adversity. When I do think I hit a personal 'wall', that is when I find more to push beyond. Whether it was in Panama in 1989, Iraq in 1991, dealing with stressful law enforcement situations of the present, or suffering fools who wish to erode the same liberties I fought (and bled) for, I will always find the effort well worth it. In other words Sachem, I do it the same way, and for the same reasons you do. quote: richfed said: -- Doesn't matter the age Obama was when he met Ayers. Obama was affiliated with Ayers (Senior Presidential Advisor David Axelrod told Politico that Obama and Ayers have a friendly relationship, and that they had done a number of speeches together and that they sat on a board together) before and after old 'Bomber Bill' said these lovely words in an interview with Dinitia Smith of the NY Times, "I don't regret setting bombs," and "I feel we didn't do enough." The NY Times interview was published on September 11th of 2001... *YMH&OS,* The Sarge
richfed	Posted - September 12 2009 : 3:53:39 PM First, some cliches ... -- Flattery will get you everywhere!! -- Never argue with a woman! -- As for you, dear Mary, you should never argue with a sick mind! And, BTW, I feel very much the same about you! Now, do I even want to do this? The reason I locked that thread - "What's a Mother To Do?" - is because I really don't WANT to debate all of this. It usually goes nowhere. The thread was/is simply a release for me. I am tired of yelling at the newscasters, etc. etc. I just wanted a release. I post. I feel better. No one even has to read it!! That said, here I go, however meekly. quote: 1) In your first post in the "What's a Mother to Do" thread, you said that Obama's attitude is "shut up and get out of the way." When, and in reference to what? Please provide examples, because believe me, many on the left (myself not included) declare themselves disillusioned that he has not taken such an attitude, most recently with regard to health care. No, I said he SAID, basically, "shut up and get out of the way." Paraphrasing, he said those of us who created this "mess" need to "shut up and get out of the way" and let him fix it. quote: 2) You express concern and grave doubt regarding Obama's desire for "fundamental and wholesale changes" that will enable him to "rebuild" this country. Are you talking here about specific proposals for legislation, and if so, which ones? If not, what kind of changes are you referring to? I could go on & on & on ... It comes down to, simply, neither liberal or conservative, certainly not Democrat or Republican. Not for me. It boils down to more central government or less central government. I am strongly for the latter. As Obama says, "shut up and get out of the way." Let the private sector succeed at what it does. There will be ups; there will be downs. Let it be. The laws of economics will prevail and all will be good in the end. The President referred to Social Security during his latest infomercial - uh, SPEECH. I thought that was about broke? He spoke of getting the money from corruption in the Medicaid system to pay for [the coming corruption] in an even larger bureaucratic system ... quote: 3) Congressman Wilson did not merely "say" the phrase "You lie!" to the President. He shouted it, during an address by the President to a joint session of Congress. That's a type of blatant disrespect to the office of President of the United States that, as far as I know, was never shown to the previous occupant of the office, despite the disapproval that most Democrats in Congress felt for him and expressed elsewhere. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I have no idea, honestly. I do know debates in congress have often been raucous affairs - especially so in the early years. Senator Reid has said - while Bush was president - that the Iraqi war was lost. That, to me, is a greater Presidential slap-in-the-face than calling the President a liar TO HIS FACE! Which he was doing at the moment of the "shout", BTW, and Wilson's "outburst" has lead those 6 Senators working on a bipartisan solution to close the loophole to which Wilson referred. The joint session of congress was also a farce. This is not a State-of-the-Union address or national emergency. quote: 4) Who in the Obama Administration bombed the Pentagon, or attempted to? In a way it's misleading of me to even ask this question because I know that you're referring to William Ayers, and that you believe him to be a close Obama adviser. I'm certain that he isn't. Ah, but Van Jones is/was/probably still will be. A few other points on this ... -- Doesn't matter the age Obama was when he met Ayers. He sat in Rev. Wright's church listening to that babble for 20 years. That would seem to indicate it wouldn't have mattered a lick. -- Obama's "brilliance" doesn't impress me in the least. He can be as smart as he wants, it's his BELIEFS that have me scared. -- Ayers radical past has not passed. quote: 5) You're concerned that two such incidents as the Air Force One fly-by in NYC and the Coast Guard training exercise in DC on 9/11 are just too bizarre to be coincidental. I'm not; there's a whole lot of stupidity in the world. (Note also that the person who authorized the Air Force One photo shoot is no longer part of the Administration.) You and I both work for large organizations with layers of hierarchy, so think about it, Rich -- haven't you ever learned of an incident so incredibly dumb that it made you say, "How could anyone have approved that?!!! Couldn't they see how it would look??? how it would turn out??? that someone would get hurt??? etc." But they didn't. A minor but telling example: If I remember correctly, Secretary of State Clinton chose to symbolize that America was turning over a new leaf in its relationship with Russia by giving her Russian counterpart a buzzer or bell that was labeled "RESET." You'd think that someone on her staff would have made sure, before the event took place, that the device made an appropriate sound when pressed. Guess what . . . . Stupidity happens. Oh yes, at the Post Office these things are rampant. I often feel like I'm at Romper Room. But, guess what, this stuff originates at the top. At the PO or in Washington, it begins at the top. Flunkies carry it out. Isn't it Obama who is so fond of telling us all our civil duties and responsibilities? Mary, the buck stops at his door. He is the biggest finger pointer in recent memory. Mainly, Obama just covers his ass. quote: 6) You state that a person can be judged by those he chooses to associate with. I'd like to offer a few short biographies of some of the people President Obama has chosen to associate with. You'll recognize the names and may be tempted to move on, but please read or at least skim the information provided. Sure, there are good people in this administration ... a few. Obama NEEDS a few people who actually know how to run the country. He is surrounded, mostly by incompetence. Worse, actually ... Van Jones being, possibly, the worst example of that. If, I truly believe, Obama has success at passing his agenda, "these few good men" will slowly disappear, to be replaced with folks who claim they are enlightened in some fashion because they call God a "goddess". There, I didn't even use the term "socialist". OK - I'm tired ... This drains me. I don't know how the Sarge does it! No matter what Mary, I respect you. Carry on ...

DISCLAIMER
Tune, 40, used by permission - composed by Ron Clarke

Custom Search

The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]

Current Mohicanland page raised in 0.22 seconds