Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: The Electoral Thread

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,536

    Default The Electoral Thread

    November 1, 2009

    Rival to Karzai Said to Be Ending Afghan Campaign




    By DEXTER FILKINS and ALISSA J. RUBIN

    KABUL, Afghanistan — Abdullah Abdullah, the chief rival to President Hamid Karzai, plans to announce on Sunday his decision to withdraw from the Nov. 7 Afghan runoff election, handing a new five-year term to Mr. Karzai but potentially damaging the government’s credibility, according to Western diplomats here and people close to Mr. Abdullah.

    American and other Western diplomats said they were worried that a defiant statement by Mr. Abdullah could lead to violence and undermine Mr. Karzai’s legitimacy, and they were urging him to bow out gracefully. Obama administration officials have scrambled for weeks to end the deadlock, trying to ensure a smooth government transition as President Obama weighs whether to increase the American military presence in Afghanistan.

    People close to Mr. Abdullah said that his representative met with Mr. Karzai on Saturday but that they were unable to make any progress on the issue that has brought the two campaigns to loggerheads: Mr. Abdullah’s demands that the Afghan election system be overhauled to head off more fraud in the second round. After the first round of voting, a United Nations-backed panel threw out nearly a million of Mr. Karzai’s ballots — one-third of his total — on the grounds that they were fake.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/wo...afghan.html?hp

    Meanwhile, back at Big Daddy's digs...

    November 1, 2009

    Upstate Republican Abruptly Suspends Race for Congress




    By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JEREMY W. PETERS

    A moderate Republican whose candidacy for an upstate New York Congressional seat had set off a storm of national conservative opposition, abruptly withdrew on Saturday, emboldening the right at a time when the Republican Party is enmeshed in a debate over how to rebuild itself.

    The candidate, Dede Scozzafava, said she was suspending her campaign in the face of collapsing support and evidence that she was heading for a loss in a three-way race on Tuesday involving Douglas L. Hoffman, running on the Conservative Party line, and Bill Owens, a Democrat.

    Ms. Scozzafava had been under siege from conservative leaders because she supports gay rights and abortion rights and was considered too liberal on various fiscal issues.

    The Republican National Committee, which had strongly backed Ms. Scozzafava’s candidacy, issued a statement applauding her decision and announcing it was now supporting Mr. Hoffman.

    “Effective immediately, the R.N.C. will endorse and support the Conservative candidate in the race, Doug Hoffman,” the party’s national chairman, Michael Steele, said. “Doug’s campaign will receive the financial backing of the R.N.C. and get-out-the-vote efforts to defeat Bill Owens on Tuesday.”

    Yet other prominent Republicans expressed concern that Ms. Scozzafava’s decision seemed likely to unsettle the party going into next year’s midterm elections, raising the prospect of more primaries against Republican candidates that they deem too moderate.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/ny...pstate.html?hp

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    2,680

    Default Re: The Electoral Thread

    Good to see a third party with a chance to win.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,536

    Default Re: The Electoral Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by cjppjc View Post
    Good to see a third party with a chance to win.
    If only they were really Conservatives!

    You know the type. Not neoliberals. Ain't no such animal.

    Prior to 1950 Conservatives were:

    fiscally responsible

    for small government, and meant it

    supported personal liberties

    were against foreign adventures


    Today's "Conservatives" :

    never saw a foreign war they didn't like

    deficits don't matter

    massive, ongoing surveillance is cool. Ditto ever-expanding Federal bureaucracy

    the Bill of Rights? "just a piece of paper"


    Yes, a third party would be welcome if it offered something else. Not a back-on-course correction in the bullshit culture wars that this one seems to be.

  4. #4
    Raz is offline iTulip Ambassador, Select Premium Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    The Deep Southern United States
    Posts
    2,385

    Default Re: The Electoral Thread

    You are correct, Don.

    Since 1996 I've been telling everyone who would listen that the Republican Party was not Conservative, and would eventuate in a disaster where these "NeoCons" would wreck the country and manage to discredit the entire movement of True Conservatism.

    There is a ten-year archive of this man's writings on the worldnetdaily website; reading it is a real eye opener as he was right in all the big issues - foreign policy, economics, trade relations, etc.

    This piece was written almost 8 years ago.




    War Party vs. the Constitution


    Posted: January 04, 2002


    By Patrick J. Buchanan

    Creators Syndicate, Inc.



    With the Taliban dethroned and Osama dead or on the run, the War Party has begun pulling down the invasion maps of Iraq. Op-ed pages and the little magazines are in full blossom with fresh war plans.

    One scheme is to make the Iraqi National Congress our Northern Alliance, march it out of Kuwait, capture Basra, cut off Saddam's oil exports, and force his Revolutionary Guard to come out and fight – where they could be cut to pieces by U.S. air power.

    But the military reception to this scheme has not been kind.

    Alluding to the Bay of Pigs, where anti-Castro Cubans sent in by JFK were all dead or POWs in 48 hours, Gen. Anthony Zinni has called this plan a "Bay of Goats," adding the United States would not "let some silk-suited, Rolex-wearing guys in London gin up an expedition."
    Another senior official reverted to barracks vocabulary to describe the neoconservatives behind this scheme as half-tailed "pissants" who never "smelled cordite."

    The War Party now concedes U.S. troops will probably be needed to crush Iraq. One plan calls for 50,000 U.S. troops to enter from Turkey, linking up with the Kurds, and another 50,000 to head north from Kuwait. Still another plan calls for virtual carpet-bombing.

    What all these war plans lack, however, is an indispensable element. President Bush does not have the authority to launch a war on Iraq.

    The Joint Resolution of Congress authorizing the attack on al-Qaida and Afghanistan is specific: "[T]he President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate forces against those nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, or committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons ..."

    Thus far, no hard evidence linking Iraq to Sept. 11 has been presented to the nation.
    Where, then, does Bush get the authority to make war on that country?

    Indeed, the constant clamor of the War Party for "Action This Day!" is taking on an aspect of desperation, rooted in a fear perhaps that, if Bush does not strike now, the moment will pass and their window will close. But if the War Party has a persuasive case to make for war, why are they trying to stampede us?

    After all, President Bush's father faced a more formidable Iraq in 1990, but made his case for war to Congress and the country over six months and won the support of both. Why does the War Party want to circumvent the Constitution? What is its hidden agenda?

    We are told Iraq is acquiring weapons of mass destruction and we must act now! But so are Libya and Syria, and Iran is even closer to a nuclear capacity. North Korea has atomic weapons, and we give them foreign aid. China has pointed atomic weapons at U.S. cities, and we just chaperoned her into the WTO. Why is Iraq, with a defense budget 1 percent of ours, the greater threat?

    Comes the reply: If Saddam gets weapons of mass destruction, he will use them on his neighbors, or us. But all those neighbors – Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Egypt – are telling us not to attack Iraq and warning us not to expect assistance if we do. And why would Saddam, who is grooming his younger son as his heir and who has built monuments to himself all over Iraq, order an act of terrorism against America that would rain down fire and destruction on him, his regime, his dynasty and his legacy. Evil though he may be, the man seems more a crafty survivor than a crazed suicide bomber.

    Even so, on this issue of Iraq, the War Party may be right.
    Perhaps Saddam will secretly acquire some awful weapon and use it in a suicide attack on America, and bring down the wrath of the United States on his head. But if the War Party believes this, let it make its case to Congress for a formal declaration of war. Why are they reluctant?

    Today, Bush has united this country behind his campaign to punish those responsible for Sept. 11 and has built an international coalition that includes old adversaries like Russia. But if it is vital to our national security to oust Saddam – even if it means dividing America and shattering that coalition – let this president do as his father did: Make the case to the country and Congress, and ask for the constitutional authority to make war. No more presidential wars.

    When the 13 colonies declared their independence, Jefferson gave the world our reasons, to show "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind." Ought we not do the same? As for those who would bypass the Constitution to make war, before their country has had time to reflect on its consequences, they should cease to call themselves conservatives, "neo" or otherwise.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    4,223

    Default Re: The Electoral Thread

    The press coverage of NY-23 is fascinating on several levels.

    You have the Glenn Beck / Conservative Party / Sarah Palin / Dick Armey / 9/12 Project Tea Parties. This is the Christian "conservative" wing of the Republican party.

    Than you have the RHINOs like Collins and Snow and Dede S.

    Than you have the Ron Paul Libertarian Right paleo-conservatives. The leaders of the first group would love to have you believe they are one in the same with the last, but as Don and Raz have pointed out, they are not.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,166

    Default Re: The Electoral Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by babbittd View Post
    The press coverage of NY-23 is fascinating on several levels.

    You have the Glenn Beck / Conservative Party / Sarah Palin / Dick Armey / 9/12 Project Tea Parties. This is the Christian "conservative" wing of the Republican party.

    Than you have the RHINOs like Collins and Snow and Dede S.

    Than you have the Ron Paul Libertarian Right paleo-conservatives. The leaders of the first group would love to have you believe they are one in the same with the last, but as Don and Raz have pointed out, they are not.
    Astute, indeed. At least we all have one thing in common though. We're all FOX News-watching retards, right? :rolleyes:

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    464

    Default Re: The Electoral Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghent12 View Post
    Astute, indeed. At least we all have one thing in common though. We're all FOX News-watching retards, right? :rolleyes:
    Well, at least you got the retard part right

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    35

    Default Re: The Electoral Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by don View Post
    If only they were really Conservatives!

    You know the type. Not neoliberals. Ain't no such animal.

    Prior to 1950 Conservatives were:

    fiscally responsible

    for small government, and meant it

    supported personal liberties

    were against foreign adventures


    Today's "Conservatives" :

    never saw a foreign war they didn't like

    deficits don't matter

    massive, ongoing surveillance is cool. Ditto ever-expanding Federal bureaucracy

    the Bill of Rights? "just a piece of paper"


    Yes, a third party would be welcome if it offered something else. Not a back-on-course correction in the bullshit culture wars that this one seems to be.
    Exactly! 100% agree

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    10,290

    Default Re: The Electoral Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Raz
    This piece was written almost 8 years ago.
    What is doubly amusing is the author of the piece: Pat Buchanan, stalwart of the Catholic as well as Conservative movement...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Buchanan#Catholicism

    I will use the bully pulpit of the Presidency of the United States, to the full extent of my power and ability, to defend American traditions and the values of faith, family, and country, from any and all directions. And, together, we will chase the purveyors of sex and violence back beneath the rocks whence they came.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    39

    Default Re: The Electoral Thread

    So the Republicans have turned cannibalistic, so what?

    I laud any third or fourth/fifth party movement here in the states. I grew up in a country with about 10 parties covering the whole spectrum of politics. It was great.

    BUT, having lived through the "Nader and Green" years, when ideological purists were siphoning off support from the Democratic party, I can't see how this is anywhere good for the Republicans in the next 5-10 years.

    The two party system will prevail even if TSHTF.

  11. #11
    Raz is offline iTulip Ambassador, Select Premium Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    The Deep Southern United States
    Posts
    2,385

    Default Re: The Electoral Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by c1ue View Post
    What is doubly amusing is the author of the piece: Pat Buchanan, stalwart of the Catholic as well as Conservative movement...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Buchanan#Catholicism
    Being an Orthodox Christian I have no love for the Papacy, but in terms of traditional morals I'm mostly in agreement with Buchanan.

    And I have no problem with his use of "the Bully Pullpit" to influence American public opinion.
    Every President does this to some degree. (Well, maybe not "W", since he could barely utter several concatenated sentences.)

Similar Threads

  1. Not a Jokes Thread
    By metalman in forum Rant and Rave
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-22-09, 11:10 AM
  2. This Thread is for Mega
    By Munger in forum Rant and Rave
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-10-09, 10:07 AM
  3. Hijacked my thread
    By cjppjc in forum I've Lost My Mind Just Now
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-14-09, 05:33 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Opinions expressed herein are those of the posters, not those of iTulip, Inc., its owners, or management. All material posted on this board becomes the intellectual property of the poster and iTulip, Inc., and may not be reposted in full on another website without the express written permission of iTulip, Inc. By exception, the original registered iTulip member who authored a post may repost his or her own material on other sites. Permission is hereby granted to repost brief excerpts of material from this forum on other websites provided that attribution and a link to the source is included with the reposted material.

Nothing on this website is intended or should be construed as investment advice. It is intended to be used for informational and entertainment purposes only. We reserve the right to make changes, including change in price, content, description, terms, etc. at any time without notice. By using this board you agree that you understand the risks of trading, and are solely responsible for your own investment and trading decisions. Read full legal disclaimer.

Journalists are not permitted to contact iTulip members through this forum's email and personal messaging services without written permission from iTulip, Inc. Requests for permission may be made via Contact Us.

Objectionable posts may be reported to the board administrators via Contact Us.

-->