Make It Three for Four
As in, “Three out of four countries where the US actively encouraged or stood by and did nothing when Arab Spring uprisings lead to a change in government.” That’s the number of such countries in which US diplomatic facilities have been attacked. So far Tunisia remains the sole exception.
According to early reports, the US embassy compound in Yemen has been stormed. It appears the Embassy buildings themselves were not penetrated. However, part of the Embassy compound was occupied, and the US flag at the Embassy compound was reportedly burned.
A key difference in Yemen is that the current Yemeni government is not dominated by Islamists and/or those linked to al Qaeda. Yemeni security forces apparently were effective in restoring order shortly after the Embassy had been stormed.
No reports yet regarding casualties or damage to facilities.
US support for those Arab Spring uprisings is starting to look like a really good idea about now, isn’t it?
Category: Foreign Policy, Terror War
The headline was misleading Hondo. From the article: “But the consortium, looking at a broader group of rejected ballots than those covered in the court decisions, 175,010 in all, found that Mr. Gore might have won if the courts had ordered a full statewide recount of all the rejected ballots. This also assumes that county canvassing boards would have reached the same conclusions about the disputed ballots that the consortium’s independent observers did. The findings indicate that Mr. Gore might have eked out a victory if he had pursued in court a course like the one he publicly advocated when he called on the state to “count all the votes.” That article was also written at a time where the media was shoving the “rally around the Supreme Court Decision and let’s unite behind our President” Meme. The mood was set by Tim Russert who, that Sunday after the decision on Meet the Press was demanding that Tom Daschle unite behind the worst decision since Dred Scott. Cause if we don’t kiss Scalia’s robe we’re all poor Americans. Bur unfortunately for you a broader study shows Gore won. Again, my beloved New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/22/opinion/22krugman.html Plus, you’re a big damn hypocrite and you know it. Are you telling me that if that article had said Bush lost you’d be arguing that an injustice was done? That you’d be arguing that the SC was wrong to step in? No, you’d be arguing that the recount done by the consortium was irrelevant. And, since i- unlike you am not a big damn hypocrite- would agree with you. If you were half as much of the legal wiz you pretend to be you’d understand that a theft is still a theft. If someone breaks into your home and steals your TV, they’re still guilty of theft even if you manage to get it back. If someone hijacks a plane they’re still guilty of hijacking even if the plane eventually arives at its destination. The SC is still guilty of stealing the election regardless of whether or not the vote would of or wouldn’t… Read more »
It’s very difficult to get a significant portion of the popular vote when there’s a credible third party. Reagan’s 50.75 margin was impressive considering the fact that Anderson was running that year but it is the reason he walloped in the electoral college. Lincoln was running against three opponents Douglas of course and also John C. Breckenridge and John Bell. So capturing 40% is actually pretty good.
But you are right. President Obama is 10 times the President Ronald Reagan is despite a less impressive vote margin. So we agree on something Hondo!
I forgot to mention, despite Republican re-writes, exit polling shows Ross perot bit both sides equally. So Clinton would of likely of gotten a majority were it not for Ross Perot.
@51 Insipid.
“Acomprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year’s presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.
Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court’s order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court.
Even under the strategy that Mr. Gore pursued at the beginning of the Florida standoff — filing suit to force hand recounts in four predominantly Democratic counties — Mr. Bush would have kept his lead, according to the ballot review conducted for a consortium of news organizations.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/12VOTE.html
From your beloved NY Times.
“Are you telling me that if that article had said Bush lost you’d be arguing that an injustice was done? That you’d be arguing that the SC was wrong to step in? No, you’d be arguing that the recount done by the consortium was irrelevant”
Can I borrow your crystal ball when you are done with it Kreskin?
insipid: you do realize you just cited an opinion column by a known- and blatantly and obviously biased – political partisan as support for your position, don’t you? That’s almost as absurd as offering Al Franken’s thoughts as definitive evidence about anything concerning 9/11. Hell, the only thing Al Franken knows definitively about 9:11 is that Burger King is open that time of day.
Frankly, I thought a full statewide recount in 2000 in Florida was a damn good idea. What I objected to was the attempt by certain voter boards in selected counties only to divine “voter intent” my the MSU principle (making stuff up) – e.g., that famous “dimpled chad” standard. That “standard” of discerning voter intent was bullshit from day one. It frankly more plausible that any dimpled chad was an instance of a last-minute decision that “I can’t vote for either of these guys” and that the ballot was intentionally left blank as it is to infer voter intent. It’s not difficult to punch a ballot hard enough to break loose at least one or 2 of the perforations.
Your side lost the election in 2000. Get over it. You managed to steal one in 2008 (Franken) by other means. Feel good about stealing that one if you like.
He knows all the answers but can’t recall whether he ETS’ed as an E1 or E5. Right. Too bad the answer to that issue can’t be found at the Democratic Underground.
This just in this morning: the German embassy in Sudan has been attacked by protestors, who scaled the embassy’s walls topped with razor wire in order to break windows and get into that embassy. Looks like it’s becoming a free-for-all.
None of the protests shown on the various networks appear to be even slightly peaceful. They are violent and destructive of both property and lives. The embassy staff and US ambassador in Benghazi were not killed by peaceful protestors, they were killed by violence. The White House was forewarned about the pending attacks and did nothing.
Anyone who says otherwise is as despicable as it is possible to be, o tu moles muscari muscerdarum.
“But if brown people in far off places exercise their rights to peacably assemble”
“Peaceful people protesting a movie in far off lands: must be stopped!”
Storming five embassies in four days and torching buisnesses is hardly peacefull protesting. I guess to the left that is peacfull since you called the OWS protests peacefull.
Did anyone else also notice that we were just updating each other on the events unfolding until sip came in with his Conservitives don’t want others to have rights and y’all are bigots bullshit?
Well, make it 4 for 4 now.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/14/us-sends-marines-to-yemen-after-embassy-attack-protests-spread/
Looks like it’s 4/4 now:
“Reuters reports that protesters have jumped over U.S. Embassy walls in both Sudan and Tunisia. Reuters reports that protesters also set fire to trees and broke windows inside the U.S. Embassy compound in Tunis.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/14/us-sends-marines-to-yemen-after-embassy-attack-protests-spread/#ixzz26SgnQzH1
@55 Hondo- I am quoting a Nobel Prize winning economist a professor at Princeton and a columnist for the New York Times. He’s certainly more capable than you are of reading a study. Just because someone has different idealogy then you does not make them liars or harm their credibility. If you quoted George Will, for instance i would accept that as a credible source because the man has earned it. I might disagree with what the man has to say, but i’ve never seen him outright lie or spin facts in any of his columns. So yes, I do realize who i’m citing. Prove him wrong. Because the “Paul Krugman has cooties” defense is hella lame. If you actually knew anything about Florida law and recounts you’d know that determining “intent of the voter” is actually Florida law. That according to Bush’s own expert in sworn trials the very best way of determining intent is to actually look at the ballots. And yes, if the machine is empty and the ballots are perfectly lined up it is easy to punch through them but if the machine is filled with chads or the ballot is lined up poorly it is difficult. Hence the recount process calls for the ballots to be looked at. Judges look at the ballots and two out of three must agree that it is a vote in order for it to be counted. It’s the way it was done in Florida for 70 years before the SCOTUS got involved. Apparently you hate States rights when it doesn’t go your way. I already thoroughly debunked the findings of Minnesota Majority. Prosecutors, not the press, looked into their claims and found them wildly inflated. Even if you’re able to somehow magically “know” that all of the less-than-thirty voting felons voted for Franken- it’s still not nearly enough to of swayed the election for Coleman. Also, since you brought it up. I meant to ask you this: How would voter ID’s of stopped these people from voting? The problem was not that they were changing identities, it’s that they… Read more »
I’m still waiting to see a “I was wrong about these being peacefull protesters”.
Your description of Krugman’s background is true, insipid. That is also irrelevant.
In the piece you cited, Krugman was writing an opinion column for the Times. He was also operating outside of his area of expertise, in an area in which he has little or no credibility (election operations). He’s also a well-known left-leaning individual who never heard a Conservative (or conservative idea) he didn’t detest.
Oh, and did I mention he blatantly misrepresented the conclusions of the studies he cited – just like you’re doing here?
Regarding the stolen 2008 MN Senatorial election, you debunked nothing. The 2008 MN Senate election was indeed stolen. The number of felons proven to have voted illegally shows that very clearly to anyone who’s willing to thing for themselves vice be told what to think by their Fearless Leader.
Prosecutors are quite often political creatures who often put their politics before justice. For an example, see: lacrosse, Duke.
This topic was about the events unfolding in Africa until you came in with your Conservative bashing bullshit. Are you capable of joining a conversation without turning it into American politics? Congratulations you hijacked another topic.
It’s called agitprop, Twist.
It was NH Sparky that asked the question at 46, i answered it for him. It’s Hondo’s column, he’s been every bit as off-topid as me.
Insipid … long time. How is the job hunting going!
Uh, insipid . . . I’ve replied to you precisely three times including this comment. My other three comments here were replies to others.
You’ve made 22 comments on this article – very nearly 1/3 of the total comments. The vast majority of your comments do not address the subject of the article, but instead discuss recent US elections.
As usual, you’re talking out of your ass.
Insipid … I have been busy actually working. I have just read all your posts on this thread.
Are you out of your mind? Really, you are caustic to read, my eyes are watering, and I feel a sharp pain in the back of my head.
You are leaking liberal fluids from every orifice and it is getting very messy.
Tone it down … you sound foolish.