Posted on 10/15/2006 6:23:08 AM PDT by Kid Shelleen
is quite doubtful that HBO’s Bill Maher knew what he was in for when he scheduled Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute to be on his "Real Time" panel Friday night. After all, with CNN’s Lou Dobbs and liberal actor Ben Affleck surrounding her, it seemed highly unlikely the lone conservative in the discussion would survive the scrum, let alone win the debate. However, not only did Pletka hold her own, but she also ended up schooling Maher and Affleck on a virtual plethora of geopolitical issues making this one of the more enjoyable Friday Night Fights in recent memory (video link to follow).
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Danielle was clearly nauseasted and stunned by Maher's profane and revolting closing statement on that show, by far the most offensive he has ever uttered.
Drive By Media. Rush has been using it for some time instead of MSM, main stream media, I guess because he doesn't think they really are main stream, but mostly to get across the idea that they show up, throw some mud at a conservative that usually turns out to be false, but have moved on to other subjects by the time the evidence to prove them wrong is gathered and they're no longer interested and won't bother reporting the contrary facts. "It's no longer news." It's like a gang banger doing a drive by shooting.
"that should be Ben 'AFLAC' (quack!)"
Please don't denigrate geese. :)
We have nukes. Does having nukes make us evil? I have a gun. Does having a gun make me evil? With our without a gun I am either good or evil. Without the gun I can't shoot you, but it doesn't affect whether I'm good or evil, just what I can do about it.
Capability vs character. Pretty fundamental and quite simple. Unfortunately our education system has been selling the notion that objects are inherently evil, guns causing people to kill, SUVs killing people in accidents, not the drivers who fail to control them, cars causing global warming, etc., that basic concepts get obscured.
Bingo. Someone gets it when many others on here fail.
Now before some of you get on my butt, I know the majority of NK's work on nukes happened during Clinton and Clinton appeased them left and right. What my problem is how GW & Co. is handling the problem. Just as in Iraq, if the international community refuses to step up to the plate because of certain interests, you go around them. What we are seeing is not diplomacy, it's failed diplomacy. When China refuses to take part in a supposedly binding UN agreement, it's time to act. Call the UN out on its irrelevance and punish China for providing support to NK. I'm not seeing that. How many deadlines is Iran going to blow by in its quest for nukes? It's a rhetorical question yet we are seeing no real action to stop that country from obtaining nukes. If you want to make this political, open up Congressional hearings into the Clinton-NK reactor deal. That will give the Rats and MSM something to chew on.
i can't stand that smug liberal lou dobbs.
there are freepers who like him? they think he's not a total lib??
i suppose you think we should just go in there unilaterally and bomb the s&*t out of them like most of the DBM think. \sarc
So if we went off half ass cocked and bombed the crap out of them to stop their nuke development and the NK invaded SK and took over the entire country under their control, you would be one of the first out their blaming GW. You are a clown.
Wow...and will you volunteer to serve in this war you just started?
No, you responded to this statement:
The first lesson came when Affleck had the gall to suggest that Iran and North Korea “became more evil after” President Bush made his Axis of Evil speech during the 2002 State of the Union address (emphasis mine)...
With this:
Well they did, let's be honest about it.
You asserted that Iran and NK "became more evil" after the AoE speech. That is categorically wrong not to mention silly in the extreme.
Wether Bush did anything to prevent Iran and NK from pushing ahead with the nuclear program they had been developing for a decade at least, is a completely separate issue.
The fact of the matter is that they would have done exactly as they have done wether or not Bush uttered the phrase "axis of evil".
Not by his rhetoric, he's not.
it just goes to show you that in Ben's case, you can dress a retarded person in an expensive suit, but that doesn't enhance his IQ.
Maher: Excuse me kids, but stop watching…what ass did you pull that out of?
Pletka: I pulled that out of the U.N. ass.
LMAO - I like her!
I like that analogy!! Good one!!
Thanks, just didn't click this morning.
How am I a clown? Because I don't support the actions of the current administration on this issue? Typical FR BS. Like I mentioned a while ago, if anyone criticizes any action of the Bush admin on FR they are humped by a pack of wild dogs. This is also the reason nothing can get done in Washington because rational debates are a thing of the past. If a Rat even appears to look at a Republican he is crucified. If a Republican criticizes the admin he's labeled a clown.
Notice that I said nothing about bombing or war so thanks for putting words in my mouth. Tougher action does not automatically mean war. Apparently, to you and others, tougher action means watered down UNSC resolutions that some countries decide they are not going to follow. Funny, however, that was given as a reason to go to war in Iraq by the current admin and now China's doing the same thing.
Also, where did all the talk about preemptive strike go? "We have to strike them before they strike us." If the admin is going to go down that path it must not pick and choose. Iraq didn't even have the capability to test a nuke and we put a quick end to Saddam's yearning to do so. I guess that doesn't apply to the current, much more serious WMD problems the world is facing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.