|
| Posted by: Zapos
- [15241919] Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 20:25
Anyone have any ideas how to solve this Pirate problem? Or do you just want to call each other "lefty" and righty"? |
| | | 1 | Perm Dude
ID: 193231017
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 20:29
|
Can't we do both?
:)
|
|
| | | 2 | Zapos
ID: 15241919
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 20:38
|
Ok. I'll start.
I have heard that shipping lines have to pay increased insurance rates if they arm their crew plus numerous ports aren't receptive to having arms brought into port.
So, I'd arm my crew with ex-military (heavily arm) and pay the insurance premium. When I got to the edge of port, I'd offload the militia to a small boat and "wait" until the ship unloads and steams out to sea again, then re-board.
When at sea, I'd treat any approaching vessels like you would protect those approaching an airplane w/o a boarding pass. (except official nation -state boats doing inspections).
Unidentified boats would receive 1 warning and then if they do not heed... blam. Unload the RPGs.
|
|
| | | 3 | Tree
ID: 41371322
Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 09:01
|
personally, i think we're on track to do away with the pirate problem. as we continue to ignore environmental concerns, we'll eventually see the oceans dry up, and viola, no more pirates on the seven seas.
of course, then it'll be Mad Max like, with land pirates and water being at a premium, and all sorts of chaos, but since that's the future, it's cool.
|
|
| | | 4 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 09:45
|
I wonder if in 100 years they will have movies about the swashbuckling pirates of the Aden? Seriously though I am not sure there is much you can do until either reward for piracy is less than the cost...I guess you can do that by making Somalia more economically friendly and 2 start executing pirates like the did back in the day.
|
|
| | | 5 | Pancho Villa
ID: 233231222
Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 10:33
|
Back in December, the UN Security Council addressed the piracy issue.
UNITED NATIONS, Dec. 16 -- The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Tuesday to authorize nations to conduct military raids, on land and by air, against pirates plying the waters off the Somalia coast even as two more ships were reportedly hijacked at sea.
The vote represented a major escalation by the world's big powers in the fight against the pirates, who have disrupted commerce along one of the world's most active sea routes and acquired tens of millions of dollars in ransom. It came as China -- which has had several ships commandeered in recent months -- said it is seriously considering joining U.S., European and Russian warships policing the region.
The U.S.-drafted resolution authorizes nations to "use all necessary measures that are appropriate in Somalia" in pursuit of pirates, as long as they are approved by the country's transitional federal government. The resolution also urges states to deploy naval vessels and military aircraft to carry out the operations, and it calls for the creation of a regional office to coordinate the international effort.
as long as they are approved by the country's transitional federal government.
It's no secret that Somalia's transitional federal government is as chaotic and dysfunctional as any on the planet. The key is support from Russia and China, who have both been victimized by Somalian piracy. And, there are those who feel an assault at the root will cause further chaos within Somalia:
Aid groups, meanwhile, said the approval of military raids could worsen the situation on the ground. "Expanding anti-piracy operations inside Somalia risks further complicating the conflict and could exacerbate an already dire humanitarian crisis," said Nicole Widdersheim, who heads Oxfam International's New York office. She urged nations to focus on reducing violence within the country, rather than "the threat to commercial interests from piracy off the Somali coast."
The commander of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet warned last week that ground attacks on suspected Somali pirates would put the lives of innocent civilians at risk. [Secretary of State] Rice told reporters Tuesday, "What we do or do not do in cases of hot pursuit we'll have to see, and you'll have to take it case by case."
There's the rub. The pirates are considered heroes among many Somalians, partly because their business is one of the few that is actually financially successful in Somalia, bringing millions of dollars into their communities.
As we've seen in Darfur, African Union forces(suggested by U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon) are cash-strapped and ineffectual, and UN peacekeeping forces are rarely deployed effectively, especially in volatile parts of Africa.
Like Columbian drug lords, Somalian pirates will continue to ply their trade as long as there is huge profit. Only by destroying their bases, as well as the actual vessels in the water, will these attacks decrease or be eliminated altogether.
The UN Security Council has basically already given the OK for offensive as well as defensive measures. It's now up to the individual countries, working in concert, to drop the kid gloves and start sinking pirate boats, be they at sea or in port.
|
|
| | | 6 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 11:06
|
As soon as I heard the pirates ended up in a life boat with 1 hostage and US Military 100 meters away I started counting down. How long until we have 4 dead pirates?
I mean what dumb asses. Let's see we'll sit in this life boat and since we have a hostage we'll be OK.
4 pirates against US Special forces.
You had to know what was coming.
|
|
| | | 7 | weykool
ID: 2842717
Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 11:23
|
personally, i think we're on track to do away with the pirate problem. as we continue to ignore environmental concerns, we'll eventually see the oceans dry up, and viola, no more pirates on the seven seas.
of course, then it'll be Mad Max like, with land pirates and water being at a premium, and all sorts of chaos, but since that's the future, it's cool.
If we are going to post environmentalist wacko propaganda can we at least be consistent?
I thought all of the global warming alarmists were claiming that when the ice caps melt the oceans were going to rise ala water world.
So which is it?
A flood or a desert?
And if there will be no more oceans where is all the water supposed to go?
|
|
| | | 8 | Perm Dude
ID: 533581411
Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 16:07
|
Heh heh:
|
|
| | | 9 | DWetzel
ID: 278201415
Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 17:05
|
Google is fun. You learn all sorts of things.
I was surprised Teddy Roosevelt hadn't bashed a few pirates heads in.
Instead, I found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_Perdicaris
|
|
| | | 10 | bibA
ID: 83301317
Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 18:17
|
How could Wikipedia have got it so wrong? Didn't they see the movie?
|
|
| | | 11 | DWetzel
ID: 33337117
Tue, Apr 14, 2009, 19:30
|
*facepalm*
|
|
| | | 12 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 01:46
|
Doesn't Obama realize that violence never solves anything?
|
|
| | | 13 | Perm Dude
ID: 533581411
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 01:51
|
Suddenly found Jesus, did you?
|
|
| | | 14 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 01:53
|
What about the pirate street? Doesn't he realize he just made more pirates?
|
|
| | | 15 | Boxman
ID: 571114225
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 06:03
|
Maybe he's attacking the pirates over there before they come over here.
|
|
| | | 16 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 06:20
|
How the hell did the crew convince the pirates to leave the boat and sit in a lifeboat, that's what I want to know.
I mean just stoooopid.
On top of that what did the boat have in it? Food aid for Africa including Somalia.'
|
|
| | | 17 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 07:59
|
What proof did he have that they were going to harm that captain anyway? Obama lied, muslim teenagers died.
|
|
| | | 18 | Boxman
ID: 571114225
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 08:47
|
Kill one person and it's murder. Kill three and it's foreign policy.
|
|
| | | 19 | Pancho Villa
ID: 6361421
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 08:53
|
Obama lied, muslim teenagers died.
What's your source that these pirates were Muslim?
|
|
| | | 20 | Razor
ID: 371502414
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 09:05
|
Baldwin sees no difference between civilians and men who steal and threaten the lives of civilians?
|
|
| | | 21 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 09:29
|
PV
This religious insensitivity displayed by Obama has got to stop.
|
|
| | | 22 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 09:30
|
Cultural imperialism raising it's ugly head.
|
|
| | | 23 | Boxman
ID: 571114225
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 09:38
|
Obama is not the son who's gonna tote the gun.
|
|
| | | 24 | Boxman
ID: 571114225
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 09:39
|
Obomba.
|
|
| | | 25 | tree on the treo
ID: 55220277
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 09:51
|
I'd like to think box and baldy are just having a goof....but considering their posting history, its tough to think that.
I hope they are just kidding...otherwise, there is no reality to the comparison they're trying to make...
|
|
| | | 26 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 10:11
|
Why didn't he wait for international consensus to form?
Why didn't he wait for the international anti-piracy taskforce?
Instead due to his arrogant cowboy stupidity the rest of the world will hate us.
|
|
| | | 27 | weykool
ID: 2842717
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 10:32
|
I'd like to think box and baldy are just having a goof....but considering their posting history, its tough to think that.
I hope they are just kidding...otherwise, there is no reality to the comparison they're trying to make...
They are not kidding, they are making a very good point about the hypocrisy of the left.
Those were all of the points that were made when Bush was the president but now the left has doing a 180 because their guy is now the president.....but I think you were smart enough to figure that out.
|
|
| | | 28 | Razor
ID: 371502414
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 10:32
|
The problem with their jokes is that they don't make any sense cause there is no valid analogy between the claims about Bush and our actions against the pirates.
|
|
| | | 29 | weykool
ID: 2842717
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 10:35
|
I disagree.
|
|
| | |
| | | 31 | Perm Dude
ID: 18351159
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 10:51
|
Baldwin is trying, and failing, at something Ann Coulter says she never engages in: satire.
|
|
| | | 32 | Pancho Villa
ID: 49325158
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 10:58
|
they are making a very good point about the hypocrisy of the left.
No they're not, although, if they were interested in pointing out the hypocrisy of the left concerning foreign policy, it would be easy to do.
The continuation and even escalation of drone bombings in the Waziristan provinces of Pakistan, which no one on the left seems to be protesting, would be a golden example of the left's hypocrisy.
Of course you don't hear the right protesting this policy either, since bombings with heavy civilian casualties is something they've supported in the region for years.
|
|
| | | 33 | Perm Dude
ID: 18351159
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 11:03
|
#30: Another graph
|
|
| | | 34 | Tree
ID: 41371322
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 11:08
|
They are not kidding, they are making a very good point about the hypocrisy of the left.
Those were all of the points that were made when Bush was the president but now the left has doing a 180 because their guy is now the president.....but I think you were smart enough to figure that out.
you're kidding now, right?
there were no american lives at danger when Saddam was in charge in Iraq. americans are more imperiled, and more dead, without him there.
there were, and are, american lives at danger with these pirates...
|
|
| | | 35 | Wilmer McLean
ID: 59318159
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 11:42
|
RE: 33
Thanx PD.
|
|
| | | 36 | Wilmer McLean
ID: 59318159
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 12:02
|
Iraqi Intelligence Service IIS - GlobalSecurity.org
...
In 1993, the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) directed and pursued an attempt to assassinate, through the use of a powerful car bomb, former U.S. President George Bush and the Emir of Kuwait. Kuwaiti authorities thwarted the terrorist plot and arrested 16 suspects, led by two Iraqi nationals.
...
Clinton Says U.S. Must Face New Security Challenges (03/12/93) -- GlobalSecurity.org
The United States cannot pretend that far-off violence has
no meaning at home, President Clinton declared March 12.
While the aggression of a Saddam Hussein or the violence of a Bosnia may not
directly threaten U.S. shores, the president said, Americans dare not
"overlook the significance" such new challenges present. "Blinders never
provide security," he said.
...
|
|
| | | 37 | Boxman
ID: 571114225
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 12:27
|
I must've missed the 12 UN resolutions condemning this specific act of piracy before we "went it alone", acted unilaterally and without approval from the UN Security Council.
I don't want the proof of piracy to emerge in the form of a mushroom cloud coming from the hull of a sinking ship, but I don't want this cowboy diplomacy either.
Obomba just created 1,000 more pirates.
|
|
| | | 38 | Boxman
ID: 571114225
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 12:32
|
No blood for cheap imported Chinese goods.
|
|
| | | 39 | Mith
ID: 2894309
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 12:36
|
Well, it's at least a little more clever than a photograph of a bag of Cheetos.
|
|
| | | 40 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 12:47
|
Somali hospitality requires large parting gifts from the guests. Who are we to judge one culture superior to another?
|
|
| | | 41 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 12:57
|
It's not like they are thieves. They have merely created an alternative way to regard work, society, and life's pleasures in an economically and religiously repressive age.
|
|
| | | 42 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 13:10
|
They have created a new vision of commercial democracy that contrasts positively with the legalistic control freaks of the outmoded nation state.
|
|
| | | 43 | Boxman
ID: 571114225
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 14:56
|
One man's pirate is another's freedom fighter.
|
|
| | | 44 | Perm Dude
ID: 18351159
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 15:11
|
Maybe you're right. Maybe they are just misunderstood:
|
|
| | | 45 | Baldwin
ID: 553441513
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 15:15
|
If I am not mistaken Susan Sontag wrote a book justifying piracy.
|
|
| | | 46 | Perm Dude
ID: 18351159
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 15:19
|
No, you're mistaken. That was about the sociology of pirate lesbians.
|
|
| | | 47 | Baldwin
ID: 553441513
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 15:28
|
Holloween at the PD household.
|
|
| | | 48 | Perm Dude
ID: 18351159
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 15:35
|
I really don't think you want to bring wives into this discussion, no matter how satirical you think you are being...
|
|
| | | 49 | Baldwin
ID: 553441513
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 15:49
|
Hmmm, what other source could PD have for that photo...hmmmm.
|
|
| | |
| | | 51 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Sat, Apr 25, 2009, 17:39
|
Is Rush back on the Oxy cotton?
Shane Murphy, second-in-command aboard the ship seized by Somali pirates this month, is happy to be home. But he's not happy to be sharing turf with land-lubber Rush Limbaugh, who politicized the pirate affair by referring to the pirates as "black teenagers."
"It feels great to be home," said Murphy in an interview with WCBV in Boston. "It feels like everyone around here has my back, with the exception of Rush Limbaugh, who is trying to make this into a race issue...that's disgusting."
Limbaugh made the remark to suggest why President obama might have appeared preoccupied at church on the day of the operation to rescue the ship's captain, who was taken hostage by the pirates until Navy SEAL snipers shot them in a daring rescue effort.
"He was worried about the order he had given to wipe out three teenagers on the high seas," Limbaugh said. "Black Muslim teenagers."
"You gotta get with us or against us here, Rush," Murphy said. "The president did the right thing...It's a war.... It's about good versus evil. And what you said is evil. It's hate speech. I won't tolerate it."
Does Limpbaugh just enjoy being a complete ass? Or is he back on drugs again? Or did he ever get off them. Oxy is basically heroin, they say it's the hardest drug to quit.
|
|
| | | 52 | Seattle Zen
ID: 8302511
Sat, Apr 25, 2009, 17:46
|
I believe that Rush's deep seated animosity towards blacks will eventually bite him in the ass in an Iman-like meltdown.
With a hugely popular, Black, liberal president successfully running our country, Rush will inevitably freak out. No way to avoid it.
|
|
| | | 53 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Sat, Apr 25, 2009, 18:14
|
What is an "Iman like Meltdown"?
|
|
| | | 54 | Seattle Zen
ID: 8302511
Sat, Apr 25, 2009, 18:17
|
Imus, whoops.
|
|
| | | 55 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Sun, Apr 26, 2009, 02:33
|
Geez Zen I thought it was some cryptic reference I wasn't familiar with, instead it's just another session with the pipe. 8-]
|
|
| | | 56 | Baldwin
ID: 553441513
Sun, Apr 26, 2009, 08:59
|
That's the problem with rescuing liberals.
|
|
| | | 57 | Mith
Dude
ID: 01629107
Sun, Apr 26, 2009, 09:17
|
I believe that Rush's deep seated animosity towards blacks will eventually bite him in the ass in an Iman Imus-like meltdown.
Repeated playings of 'Barack the Magic Negro' didn't bite him.
|
|
| | | 58 | Tree
ID: 41371322
Sun, Apr 26, 2009, 10:36
|
That's the problem with rescuing liberals.
your drive-by "OMGZ, liberuls are SCARY!!" posts are even cuter when they come in place of you responding to any of the challenges posed to you by folks like MITH...
but, i suppose, much like your idols Coulter and Limbaugh, if you don't have anything intelligent to say, just bash bash bash with silly blanket statements.
|
|
| | | 59 | Baldwin
ID: 553441513
Sun, Apr 26, 2009, 21:57
|
You perhaps think I should have done a 'quality' post like #50.
I'm just amazed you haven't been site banned.
|
|
| | | 60 | Tree
ID: 41371322
Sun, Apr 26, 2009, 22:00
|
You perhaps think I should have done a 'quality' post like #50.
nice subject change. you're the one incapable of meeting the challenges posed to you.
I'm just amazed you haven't been site banned.
i've posted nothing that has warranted being banned.
additionally, when i have posted an image that offended, if i was asked to remove it, i did.
|
|
| | | 61 | Mith
ID: 2894309
Tue, May 19, 2009, 09:50
|
Volokh:The Market Has Spoken
Despite the surge in Somali piracy and encouragement from some employees of the U.S. government, commercial ships aren’t choosing to put armed guards on their vessels. And with good reason: given present conditions, anyway, it’s a bad idea.
As I discuss in The Invisible Hook, like their Caribbean forefathers, Somali pirates are in the business of making money, not harming hostages. Of the 815 hostages Somali pirates took last year, only four died and two were injured under pirate care.
Pirates aren’t treating hostages well because they’re nice guys. They’re treating hostages well because it pays to do so. A dead hostage fetches no ransom and pirates’ business model would collapse if they injured prisoners or allowed them to die. The economics of piracy has a simple bottom line: for all the problems piracy may pose, the threat of dead and injured innocents isn’t one of them.
That could change, however, if commercial ships starting carrying armed guards on their ships. Armed guards will of course defend against pirate attacks, potentially leading to fire fights that could jeopardize innocent sailors’ lives. The prospect of having to battle for their prizes will deter some pirates. But others will remain undeterred. And for the remaining industry, armed guards’ effect may very well be to increase the dangers that piracy poses rather than reducing them.
The profit-driven behavior of commercial shippers corroborates this possibility. Like pirates, commercial shippers also have strong incentives to keep merchant sailors alive and well: insurance costs. If armed guards reduced the dangers of piracy instead of increasing them, commercial shippers’ insurance costs would fall by employing guards instead of rising. But in this case commercial shippers would have hired armed guards already, which they haven’t. Commercial shippers don’t need government to encourage them to undertake the most profitable course of action.
The market has spoken: Even in today’s pirate-infested waters off Somalia, the low probability of being captured by pirates, together with the fact that pirates release their hostages unscathed, means it’s cheaper--and safer--to go without armed guards. Predictably, Volokh's readers aren't thrilled with this entry.
|
|
| | | 62 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Tue, May 19, 2009, 12:55
|
Is it all about the money?
|
|
| | | 63 | Mith
ID: 2894309
Tue, May 19, 2009, 12:58
|
Ask auto company execs who ultimately decide it's cheaper to pay settlements to the deceased families of their clientelle rather than recall cars with safey-hazard design flaws.
|
|
| | | 64 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Tue, May 19, 2009, 13:02
|
And what correlation does that approach have with the [unsubstantiated] 'low probability of being captured by pirates'?
|
|
| | | 65 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Tue, May 19, 2009, 13:04
|
Mith So you are in the 'money is the only relevant consideration' camp or aren't you?
|
|
| | | 67 | Mith
ID: 2894309
Tue, May 19, 2009, 13:16
|
No, I'm in the 'as if any other consideration is relevant to typical corporate executives, even when grave safety concerns are at issue' camp.
On the specific question of whether these crews should be armed, I'm for whatever ultimately makes them safer. And I'm not at all sure that arming them does so. 4 deaths out of 815 hostages last year - paired with the fact that these pirates seem eager to show that they will return fire - leads me to think there is some merit to the argument.
But if a stronger military presence is established there to combat piracy, it seems likly enough that the pirates might become more dangerous to their captives in response. And if arming crews then proves more prudent to their safety, then give every last one of 'em a bazooka.
|
|
| | | 68 | Razor
ID: 371502414
Tue, May 19, 2009, 13:31
|
From my perspective, I don't see why the US government should continue to protect those who refuse to pay for any protection themselves. Some of these ships are worth hundreds of millions of dollars and are carrying hundreds of millions of dollars worth of cargo. And they refuse to pony up for a dime of security despite waves of attacks that have made international headlines? Come on. If they are relying on our military to protect their commercial interests without doing anything to protect themselves, then they should either be left to fend for themselves or taxed.
|
|
| | | 69 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Tue, May 19, 2009, 17:34
|
I'm for whatever Way to take a stand. Please hand your 20/20 hindsight glasses to the president so that he may know 'whatever' that course of action might be.
|
|
| | | 70 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Tue, May 19, 2009, 17:36
|
despite waves of attacks - Razor It's so rare we don't need to worry about it, according to the piece we are discussing. Please keep up.
|
|
| | | 71 | Mith
Dude
ID: 01629107
Tue, May 19, 2009, 23:50
|
Way to take a stand.
That post is all of 5 contrite sentences. What you cite was part of a deliberately broad opening statement which was carefully and explicitly explained in the following three sentences.
I'm sorry, was I supposed to weigh in with a comparison of the captive survival rate of unarmed merchant crews with a study of likely piracy deterrance and merchant casualties resulting from piracy incidents with armed merchants and from careful logical parsing of the data draft a comprehensive international merchant pirate engagement docrtine?
|
|
| | | 72 | Boldwin
ID: 133532810
Wed, May 20, 2009, 05:16
|
Let's just all be clear that when someone says, "I'm for whatever works"...
...he didn't just say something profound. He just said I have no flipping idea which way to go on this one.
|
|
| | | 73 | Mith
Dude
ID: 01629107
Wed, May 20, 2009, 07:03
|
He just said I have no flipping idea which way to go on this one.
Anyone else get that impression from post 67?
Anyone?
|
|
| | | 74 | sarge33rd
ID: 21435208
Wed, May 20, 2009, 09:53
|
Is Boldy then implying, that he is for whatever doesn't work?
|
|
| | | 75 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Wed, May 20, 2009, 10:11
|
Perhaps Sarge has finally found the fix for democracy. We'll just put 'whatever works' on the ballot and people can vote for that!
|
|
| | | 76 | Perm Dude
ID: 174121611
Wed, May 20, 2009, 10:13
|
Better than "partisanship, divorce from pragmatism!" which is what the GOP has been advocating for some time.
The GOP: Where Party Purity is Our Most Important Rule.
|
|
| | | 77 | Razor
ID: 371502414
Wed, May 20, 2009, 10:13
|
Are you incapable of reading, Boldwin? "Whatever works" was mentioned before an explanation of what he thinks the proper strategy might be, but he reserves the right to be wrong.
Humility. Jesus had it, you don't.
|
|
| | | 78 | C1-NRB
ID: 2911103011
Wed, May 20, 2009, 10:16
|
We'll just put 'whatever works' on the ballot and people can vote for that!
Hmm. For me it would be a toss-up between that and "None of the above."
|
|
| | | 79 | Mith
ID: 2894309
Wed, May 20, 2009, 11:23
|
For the record, I just realized that the post I pasted in #61 was not written by Eugene Volokh, but by guest blogger Peter Leeson.
|
|
| | | 80 | Tree
ID: 41371322
Wed, May 20, 2009, 12:37
|
although this probably belongs in the future of the GOP thread, it's a response to Baldwin's #75 here.
When the head of the GOP says that fighting the "cool" and "hip" factor of Obama is of utmost importance, he's missing the point.
then again, when he also says that GOP will confront Obama with class and dignity, unlike the "shabby and classless way" Democrats criticized George W. Bush, he obviously has no clue, because the last several months have been anything from class and dignity from Cheney to Limbaugh, and from questioning Obama's nationality and religion, to basically not liking him because he's black, the GOP has shown little, if any restraint, with the exception of, oddly, folks like GW and Condi Rice.
|
|
| | |
|
|