The "anti- Soros" has stepped up to the plate

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by ZonieDiver

Yeah, but the man's point was that by shouting 'Socialist' at Obama, the Rs are going to play into the D's hands - allowing them to scream - "Far Right Wingers!"

Given the proclivities of the MSM, at least according to what I read here repeatedly, shouting 'Socialist' will not get traction, but "Far Right Wingers!" will.

Okay, then it would seem to me that based on that the D's are defining the ROE, minimizing the your use weapons and thus controlling the battlefield. And in this case the D's can dropped verbal JDAM's at will, but the governing body of the ROE, the MSM puts harsh sanctions on the R's when they attempt to use the same weapons. In addition the MSM continues to change the ROE to minimize other avenues of attack and effectiveness of the R's.

And all the while the R's keep taking the hits.......kind of reminds me of 'Troops Ordered Not to Shoot Taliban at Night Because It Might Wake Up The Locals'.



Broadsword.......I believe we have had this discussion on Social Democracy before. We won't agree.

Descriptive terms like Socialist and Neoconservatives draw my interest, terms containing Far and Wing generally kill my interest.....as do long windy explanation's that don't get down to the nuts and bolts.

[ZonieDiver]

Originally Posted by Paslode

Okay, then it would seem to me that based on that the D's are defining the ROE, minimizing the your use weapons and thus controlling the battlefield. And in this case the D's can dropped verbal JDAM's at will, but the governing body of the ROE, the MSM puts harsh sanctions on the R's when they attempt to use the same weapons. In addition the MSM continues to change the ROE to minimize other avenues of attack and effectiveness of the R's.

And all the while the R's keep taking the hits.......kind of reminds me of 'Troops Ordered Not to Shoot Taliban at Night Because It Might Wake Up The Locals'.



Broadsword.......I believe we have had this discussion on Social Democracy before. We won't agree.

Descriptive terms like Socialist and Neoconservatives draw my interest, terms containing Far and Wing generally kill my interest.....as do long windy explanation's that don't get down to the nuts and bolts.

IF that is the way it is... that's the way it is. If the Rs refuse to understand what's going on in the battle, what the enemy is up to, and how the enemies' allies operate... how the hell are they ever going to win?

It's like walking into the same ambush time after time after time.

I'm beginning to think that Dozer is correct:

POTUS can't lose, cuz the Rs ain't going to allow that.

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by ZonieDiver

IF that is the way it is... that's the way it is. If the Rs refuse to understand what's going on in the battle, what the enemy is up to, and how the enemies' allies operate... how the hell are they ever going to win?
It's like walking into the same ambush time after time after time.

I'm beginning to think that Dozer is correct:

POTUS can't lose, cuz the Rs ain't going to allow that.

The GOP cannot win when the Teleprompter and Chief refuses to enforce the immigration laws and adds millions of democratic voters seemingly overnight by giving them amnesty. I have given this a lot of thought and have come to the conclusion that this country will in fact become socialist state in the next 50 years or sooner.

We have fed the bears from the picnic table for too long to turn this around. The bear population has grown far too big to stop feeding them now. 50 years or sooner.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by ZonieDiver

POTUS can't lose, cuz the Rs ain't going to allow that.

Not just POTUS. In what had been shaping up to be a winnable Senate seat, Tammy Baldwin (D) had been doing a not-too-shabby job of painting former Gov. Tommy Thompson (R) as the former guv-turned-fatcat-lobbyist. Believe me when I say you don't want her socialistic agenda with her spending habits in the Senate, but she was doing OK, even as beloved or at least respected as local boy Thompson is. Baldwin made little attempt to hide what was obviously the standard gambit of fostering class warfare.

However, over the weekend Thompson's 38-yo son pledged at an event their goal was to "send Obama back to Chicago...or Kenya." Naturally there was a Dem operative in the room and nanoseconds later (probably) the film is on the net.

No need for Baldwin to look any further for something to deflect those who would scrutinze her actual Congressional record. Thompson had plenty to go after in terms of moderates suffering from 2008 buyer's remorse; people who may only have been vaguely familiar with him. But when you keep giving the other side 4 outs, they're gonna base-hit your ass to death & you're toast.

What a freakin' circular firing squad.

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by Paslode

Okay, then it would seem to me that based on that the D's are defining the ROE, minimizing the your use weapons and thus controlling the battlefield. And in this case the D's can dropped verbal JDAM's at will, but the governing body of the ROE, the MSM puts harsh sanctions on the R's when they attempt to use the same weapons. In addition the MSM continues to change the ROE to minimize other avenues of attack and effectiveness of the R's.

Your interpretation is in accurate. As Lexington (the pen name of the Economist's observer of American politics and society) reminded us late last month, both parties are taking the same approach to electoral politics. Meanwhile, that same newspaper has pointed to another ongoing dynamic practiced by both parties. (IIRC, these two dynamics were discussed at length back in 1992 at the LBJ School of Government.)

Originally Posted by Paslode

...[A]s do long windy explanation's that don't get down to the nuts and bolts.

Then again, maybe pieces from The Economist aren't for you.

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by ZonieDiver

It's like walking into the same ambush time after time after time.

Yeah. So I am wondering why the R's keep playing by the same rules time after time after time and end up looking like they have been neutered.

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Then again, maybe pieces from The Economist aren't for you.

I am sure there is some sarcastic humor there, but You lost me Sig....I was discussing BS2004 comments not anything from The Economist.

[XngZeRubicon]

I've caught about half of that ad twice now and got pretty emotional watching it. My dad's parents came over on the boat from Poland and as a merchant seaman for 40 years, my dad would tell stories about pulling into communists and socialist countries to include Poland where he could understand the conversations on the streets. He would then bring home the stories about how much pain the Soviets were causing in places like Poland.

I also ended my Air Force career in 1990 when Communism basically collapsed, and never did I think I'd ever see the debate again over a centralized economic system versus the decentralized market entreprise system in my lifetime - which this election is about IMO. When I saw his ad, I thought to myself, "Finally! Somebody who actually understands the history."