LMP737 wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Right schools, mgt consultant (no ability there) and short Navy career seeking to burnish his resume..

I would never vote for someone just because they were a veteran. That's how you get guys like Randy Cunningham and Duncan Hunter. On the other hand I never be dismissive of their service by saying things like they joined to pad their resume. Especially if I did not have evidence of it.

Oh how quickly things change. Time was not very long ago that anything other than praise and adulation for our service members (which to be clear I do not think is unwarranted or undeserved) would result in apoplectic screaming from the Dubya crowd. Now that it’s a “lib,” we should question his motivations for enlisting and think nothing of it.

LMP737 wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Right schools, mgt consultant (no ability there) and short Navy career seeking to burnish his resume..

I would never vote for someone just because they were a veteran. That's how you get guys like Randy Cunningham and Duncan Hunter. On the other hand I never be dismissive of their service by saying things like they joined to pad their resume. Especially if I did not have evidence of it.

No one simply enlists in the military because "I am going to be mayor of South Bend, Indiana!" My father enlisted in the army because his brothers fought in WWII and he thought it was what he was supposed to do. My father-in-law enlisted because it was the thing to do and patriotic. Neither had any political asperations, so attacking someone just because they enlisted is.... I don't have the word... crazy? Silly? A big nothingburger?

GWB enlisted in the National Guard to, presumably, avoid service in Vietnam. He did not see combat like Gore or McCain or Kerry, but he still served. I suppose those four were padding their resume, too?

It's obvious that some of our more right-leaning members are going to need some help...


Source: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/507 ... ef3b_c.jpg

scbriml wrote:

It's obvious that some of our more right-leaning members are going to need some help...


Source: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/507 ... ef3b_c.jpg

Didn't the Left tell me for the last 4 years that Pepe was symbol of right wing racism?

seb146 wrote:

No one simply enlists in the military because "I am going to be mayor of South Bend, Indiana!" My father enlisted in the army because his brothers fought in WWII and he thought it was what he was supposed to do. My father-in-law enlisted because it was the thing to do and patriotic. Neither had any political asperations, so attacking someone just because they enlisted is.... I don't have the word... crazy? Silly? A big nothingburger?

GWB enlisted in the National Guard to, presumably, avoid service in Vietnam. He did not see combat like Gore or McCain or Kerry, but he still served. I suppose those four were padding their resume, too?

Lots of people join the military, esp. the Navy Reserve's Direct Commission programs, precisely to get "veteran" credentials.

I personally would ask the question why a Certified Smart Guy like Pete ended up doing what describes (and no one really disputes) as a junior enlisted job in Afghanistan while intelligence officers were in critically short supply.

Bush, like it or not, was flying an airplane that turned plenty of decent pilots more dead than fried chicken. You can bang on the Guard and Reserve all you want, but frankly that was as dangerous as Pete's deployment, and flying One O Turds wasn't sweeping out the Reserve center.

seb146 wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

And what transportation or infrastructure experience does he bring to government? None that I read in the link.

After the past four years, does that really matter? Oh, that's right: Democrats MUST be held to an impossibly high standard.....

Impossibly high standard?

If the Democratic Party's standard wasn't "gross hypocrisy" it would have no standards, at all.

Remember when Bill Clinton pardoned a bunch of FALN and Weatherman terrorists?

Pepperidge Farm remembers.

But, [clutch pearls] "Right Wing Extremists!"

acecrackshot wrote:

seb146 wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

And what transportation or infrastructure experience does he bring to government? None that I read in the link.

After the past four years, does that really matter? Oh, that's right: Democrats MUST be held to an impossibly high standard.....

Impossibly high standard?

If the Democratic Party's standard wasn't "gross hypocrisy" it would have no standards, at all.

Remember when Bill Clinton pardoned a bunch of FALN and Weatherman terrorists?

Pepperidge Farm remembers.

But, [clutch pearls] "Right Wing Extremists!"

How many of those Weatherman and FALN people stormed the Capital during an election, killing those inside and calling for the assassination of elected officials because their candidate lost? None of that excuses FALN's or Weathermen's actions. They were acts of terror, to be sure. Add to that, there was bipartisan condemnation of Clinton's pardons. Not just a couple of Congress members here and there. More than 500 in Congress voted to condemn Clinton for his pardons.

Now, compare that to those in Congress who believe 1/6 was "antifa" and 1/6 was a "false flag" and that the terror attack of 1/6 was justified. There are people who believe their orange MAGA savior will be sworn in sometime in March. And no one within their party is even trying to stop the lie.

seb146 wrote:

How many of those Weatherman and FALN people stormed the Capital during an election, killing those inside and calling for the assassination of elected officials because their candidate lost? None of that excuses FALN's or Weathermen's actions. They were acts of terror, to be sure. Add to that, there was bipartisan condemnation of Clinton's pardons. Not just a couple of Congress members here and there. More than 500 in Congress voted to condemn Clinton for his pardons.

Now, compare that to those in Congress who believe 1/6 was "antifa" and 1/6 was a "false flag" and that the terror attack of 1/6 was justified. There are people who believe their orange MAGA savior will be sworn in sometime in March. And no one within their party is even trying to stop the lie.

I guess we can just chalk it up to a "difference in cultural norms."

acecrackshot wrote:

seb146 wrote:

How many of those Weatherman and FALN people stormed the Capital during an election, killing those inside and calling for the assassination of elected officials because their candidate lost? None of that excuses FALN's or Weathermen's actions. They were acts of terror, to be sure. Add to that, there was bipartisan condemnation of Clinton's pardons. Not just a couple of Congress members here and there. More than 500 in Congress voted to condemn Clinton for his pardons.

Now, compare that to those in Congress who believe 1/6 was "antifa" and 1/6 was a "false flag" and that the terror attack of 1/6 was justified. There are people who believe their orange MAGA savior will be sworn in sometime in March. And no one within their party is even trying to stop the lie.

I guess we can just chalk it up to a "difference in cultural norms."

ummm... no. No we can not. I just pointed out how nearly everyone was against Clinton's pardons but the one term former president still holds power and his followers still believe he will be supreme leader yet again. Not even close to the same thing in any way, shape, or form.

At least Hillary had the cajones to take responsibility for Benghazi over and over and over and over and over and over and over and even under oath. Even when those Americans in Benghazi said they did not need any extra security. Hillary still took personal responsibility. But, yeah, totally the former one term golfer in chief is so much better......

acecrackshot wrote:

scbriml wrote:

It's obvious that some of our more right-leaning members are going to need some help...


Source: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/507 ... ef3b_c.jpg

Didn't the Left tell me for the last 4 years that Pepe was symbol of right wing racism?

They did indeed, but then anything and everything that called them out or that they didn't like has been accused of being nazi, racist, white supremacist, homophobic, transphobic, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseam until all those terms have ceased to have any real meaning. It has been said many times that the Left can't meme, and there's your proof.

It's a shame the wonder drug Copium wasn't around a little over 4 years ago because if it had been sufferers of extreme Trump Derangement Syndrome could've gotten the medication they so desperately needed to help them stop their ceaseless "REEEEEEEE"-ing and get on with their lives before now, although going by the number of people still displaying the tell-tale signs of TDS on this forum despite the fact that Trump is no longer in office, I'm guessing Copium isn't effective against that particular affliction... at least not once it is in the advanced stages.

So anyway... Buttigieg as Transportation Secretary, huh? No particular experience in that field but no particular whackadoodle Greenie ax to grind there either, plus his military service may have given him a better-than-average ability to get in there and do the job he's assigned well no matter what it is, so I'll be watching with interest.

seb146 wrote:

ummm... no. No we can not. I just pointed out how nearly everyone was against Clinton's pardons but the one term former president still holds power and his followers still believe he will be supreme leader yet again. Not even close to the same thing in any way, shape, or form.

At least Hillary had the cajones to take responsibility for Benghazi over and over and over and over and over and over and over and even under oath. Even when those Americans in Benghazi said they did not need any extra security. Hillary still took personal responsibility. But, yeah, totally the former one term golfer in chief is so much better......

I think you missed the point of the quote, which was the POTUS saying that the current treatment of the Uigyurs (which has been characterized as a genocide by many in the international community) could be chalked up to a "difference in cultural norms."

Speaking of Benghazi, wasn't a guy basically railroaded into prison under the lie that his film somehow caused the uproar, and the then current Administration waited for hours with forces staged and ready and deploy, but just didn't pull the trigger?

Well, we are back in the bombing business, again. Not that people don't need to be bombed, just pointing of the double standard.

In 2017, after strikes in Syria, a person tweeted, "What is the legal basis for these strikes? Assad is a brutal dictator, but Syria is a sovereign country."

In 2018, after strikes in Syria, another person tweeted, "...But I am deeply concerned about the legal rationale of last night’s strikes."

In 2019, after military action in Syria, still another person tweeted, "...discussing [the President's] recent actions in Syria and how his erratic, impulsive decisions endanger our troops and make us all less safe."

acecrackshot wrote:

seb146 wrote:

ummm... no. No we can not. I just pointed out how nearly everyone was against Clinton's pardons but the one term former president still holds power and his followers still believe he will be supreme leader yet again. Not even close to the same thing in any way, shape, or form.

At least Hillary had the cajones to take responsibility for Benghazi over and over and over and over and over and over and over and even under oath. Even when those Americans in Benghazi said they did not need any extra security. Hillary still took personal responsibility. But, yeah, totally the former one term golfer in chief is so much better......

I think you missed the point of the quote, which was the POTUS saying that the current treatment of the Uigyurs (which has been characterized as a genocide by many in the international community) could be chalked up to a "difference in cultural norms."

Actually, if you read the transcript, it was Biden telling CNN that Xi said it was cultural norms. Not Biden organically saying that. Go back and read it. Go back and read where Biden said Xi's treatment of minorities is terrible and that there will be consequences for China's action.

I think Biden's picks for secretaries is great. He is nominating people with experience and people with futures and people with a "we are all in this together" mindset.

I noticed you didn't try to guess who was condeming strikes in Syria for the last two years, seb.

The answers, for those scoring at home were

In 2017, Jen Psaki

In 2108, the current VPOTUS and POTUS, respectively.

More, "standards for thee, not for me."

acecrackshot wrote:

I noticed you didn't try to guess who was condeming strikes in Syria for the last two years, seb.

The answers, for those scoring at home were

In 2017, Jen Psaki

In 2108, the current VPOTUS and POTUS, respectively.

More, "standards for thee, not for me."

A reading from Trump's tweets....sit down this could take all day...

acecrackshot wrote:

I think you missed the point of the quote, which was the POTUS saying that the current treatment of the Uigyurs (which has been characterized as a genocide by many in the international community) could be chalked up to a "difference in cultural norms."

Let's not forget the last guy--and republicans--loved concentration camps. Maybe their concentration camp hero Joe Arpaio could advise the Chinese:

Bolton: Trump said Xi was right to detain ethnic minorities
https://apnews.com/article/63f156933a55 ... 5ab764af09

acecrackshot wrote:

I noticed you didn't try to guess who was condeming strikes in Syria for the last two years, seb.

The answers, for those scoring at home were

In 2017, Jen Psaki

In 2108, the current VPOTUS and POTUS, respectively.

More, "standards for thee, not for me."

Maybe because they saw the strikes as starting yet another Republican unwinable war or because the strikes were allowing Turkey and Russia to invade and turn our backs on Kurds? Remember that whole discussion? Context matters.

seb146 wrote:

Maybe because they saw the strikes as starting yet another Republican unwinable war or because the strikes were allowing Turkey and Russia to invade and turn our backs on Kurds? Remember that whole discussion? Context matters.

But that's NOT what they said. Plus, we had told the Kurds that our support was neither open-ended or unlimited. When the majority of your orbits over the battlespace are launching out of Incirlik, there are going to be constraints and restraints on your freedom of action.

Speaking of turning backs on people, remember the Obama Administration doing nothing to help the Green Revolution in Iran in 2010? Or, walking back the Chemical Weapons use in Syria "red line?" Or doing nothing to maintain our agreements under the Budapest Memo when the Russians went into Ukraine?

Interestingly, even the then ambassadors in Damascus and Baghdad saw our withdrawal from Iraq in 2010 as basically snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, which was basically the summation of US policy in Vietnam 1971-1975.

MaverickM11 wrote:

acecrackshot wrote:

I noticed you didn't try to guess who was condeming strikes in Syria for the last two years, seb.

The answers, for those scoring at home were

In 2017, Jen Psaki

In 2108, the current VPOTUS and POTUS, respectively.

More, "standards for thee, not for me."

A reading from Trump's tweets....sit down this could take all day...

acecrackshot wrote:

I think you missed the point of the quote, which was the POTUS saying that the current treatment of the Uigyurs (which has been characterized as a genocide by many in the international community) could be chalked up to a "difference in cultural norms."

Let's not forget the last guy--and republicans--loved concentration camps. Maybe their concentration camp hero Joe Arpaio could advise the Chinese:

Bolton: Trump said Xi was right to detain ethnic minorities
https://apnews.com/article/63f156933a55 ... 5ab764af09

Well, when it comes to American concentration camps, no one beats FDR.

acecrackshot wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

acecrackshot wrote:

I noticed you didn't try to guess who was condeming strikes in Syria for the last two years, seb.

The answers, for those scoring at home were

In 2017, Jen Psaki

In 2108, the current VPOTUS and POTUS, respectively.

More, "standards for thee, not for me."

A reading from Trump's tweets....sit down this could take all day...

acecrackshot wrote:

I think you missed the point of the quote, which was the POTUS saying that the current treatment of the Uigyurs (which has been characterized as a genocide by many in the international community) could be chalked up to a "difference in cultural norms."

Let's not forget the last guy--and republicans--loved concentration camps. Maybe their concentration camp hero Joe Arpaio could advise the Chinese:

Bolton: Trump said Xi was right to detain ethnic minorities
https://apnews.com/article/63f156933a55 ... 5ab764af09

Well, when it comes to American concentration camps, no one beats FDR.

Nice display of historical ignorance and flippancy on a serious topic. FDR sought guidance on the issue and internment was first suggested by a Congressional subcommittee on espionage. There were a couple members of the wartime JCS who were vigorously anti-Japanese and they pretty much controlled the narrative that exploded in media and popular sentiment ultimately resulting in FDR signing EO9066.

acecrackshot wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Maybe because they saw the strikes as starting yet another Republican unwinable war or because the strikes were allowing Turkey and Russia to invade and turn our backs on Kurds? Remember that whole discussion? Context matters.

But that's NOT what they said. Plus, we had told the Kurds that our support was neither open-ended or unlimited. When the majority of your orbits over the battlespace are launching out of Incirlik, there are going to be constraints and restraints on your freedom of action.

Speaking of turning backs on people, remember the Obama Administration doing nothing to help the Green Revolution in Iran in 2010? Or, walking back the Chemical Weapons use in Syria "red line?" Or doing nothing to maintain our agreements under the Budapest Memo when the Russians went into Ukraine?

Interestingly, even the then ambassadors in Damascus and Baghdad saw our withdrawal from Iraq in 2010 as basically snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, which was basically the summation of US policy in Vietnam 1971-1975.

wait... I thought this thread was about Pete Buttigieg heading the Department of Transportation?

I get righites will constantly use "whataboutism" and their myopic view of Obama to demand that Obama was the worst president ever. Obama kept us out of unwinnable wars. But, that makes him the worst. We get it. What does that have to do with Pete Buttigieg leading the Department of Transportation.