The "Tea Party" and Foreign Policy

• gut

  BGFalcons82;532385 wrote: because the Chinese will own us...literally and figuratively.

  
  
  The 80's called....Japan would like a refund.
• majorspark

  

  Good post cbus. A proper balance is the key. I can't speak for Manhattan Buckeye but I interpreted his comments as there was an imbalance of academics in the administration. He used the word "filled" which leads me to that conclusion. Academics are a necessary piece of the puzzle, but an improper balance of them is not a good thing. I think that is what he was referring to.
  
  Also I would point out that I find a difference between constructive knowledge and arrogant knowledge. The latter is where many of us in the right find disdain. The arrogant elite who believe they are God's gift to rule over the unwashed by virtue of their vast knowledge.
  
  In regards to the founders they were quite a diverse group. Academics, businessmen, farmers, laborers, teachers, lawyers, religious leaders, self made men, aristocrats etc... One thing they all had in common was they all pledged their life and treasure to form a more just form of government. They did this in the face of the greatest military power on the face of the earth at that time. Had they failed in their endeavor they would have been hung as traitors or been forced to flee their land in exile. Our only knowledge of them today in our history books would have been of treasonous traitors.
  
  They all had balls. Today our leaders possess no balls. They are nothing more than yes men. The American people have been patiently waiting to cast their vote for a leader with the balls to make revolutionary change in our government. My patience is running thin and so is the patience of many of my fellow countrymen.
• believer

  

  majorspark;534544 wrote:They all had balls. Today our leaders possess no balls. They are nothing more than yes men. The American people have been patiently waiting to cast their vote for a leader with the balls to make revolutionary change in our government. My patience is running thin and so is the patience of many of my fellow countrymen.

  Major... you almost brought me to tears with that one...sniffle!
• BGFalcons82

  

  A+ majorspark. There must be balance in our leadership, as there was in our founding fathers. You did bring up an interesting point in that had they failed, history would have a far different recollection of them. I wonder what would have happened to us?
• I Wear Pants

  Speaking of the founding fathers, I purchased a copy of the Federalist Papers yesterday at a thrift store for a quarter.
• jhay78

  

  cbus4life;534481 wrote:It is just an easy tool used by those who simply want to continue to live in an inane world of generalizations and stereotypes, and don't want to look at things with a critical, honest eye.
  
  Just as so many morons on the left mindlessly rail against "corporate" folks, many on the right like to mindlessly whine and moan about all the "academics" on the left. Both groups are doing themselves a tremendous disservice.
  
  Hell, arguably the greatest conservative of the second half of the 20th century, maybe even the entire century, William F. Buckley Jr., was a definite "academic" and intellectual. Yet he had a tremendous role to play American politics, and is a man i greatly admire. What a shame it would have been if his wise counsel and advice was pushed aside, as it were, because of his intellectual credentials.
  
  Each person should be judged on ALL their values, traits, etc., etc., not simply because they are an "academic" or not.
  
  Yes, currently, some of our "academics," however you want to define it, in politics haven't done a terribly good job. But, that certainly hasn't always been the case in the past, nor will it be in the future.
  
  Whether one has been in the "private" sector or not is certainly not the end all be all of determining whether they will be successful.
  
  But, it is an effective thing to scream when you want to pretend like you know what you're talking about. And, this goes for those on the left who rail against those who are from the corporate environment.
  
  All these folks have valuable, important things to bring to the table, and all should be welcome in politics. So much value to be had from study in .

  
  Good post. As for Buckley, he was great as an academic/intelllectual, but that kind of backs up the point of others on the thread. He was not a politician looking to save his job. Therefore, he could speak his mind and the truth as he saw it without pandering to the prevailing political winds or worrying about his reelection chances.
  

  majorspark;534544 wrote:Good post cbus. A proper balance is the key. I can't speak for Manhattan Buckeye but I interpreted his comments as there was an imbalance of academics in the administration. He used the word "filled" which leads me to that conclusion. Academics are a necessary piece of the puzzle, but an improper balance of them is not a good thing. I think that is what he was referring to.
  
  Also I would point out that I find a difference between constructive knowledge and arrogant knowledge. The latter is where many of us in the right find disdain. The arrogant elite who believe they are God's gift to rule over the unwashed by virtue of their vast knowledge.
  
  In regards to the founders they were quite a diverse group. Academics, businessmen, farmers, laborers, teachers, lawyers, religious leaders, self made men, aristocrats etc... One thing they all had in common was they all pledged their life and treasure to form a more just form of government. They did this in the face of the greatest military power on the face of the earth at that time. Had they failed in their endeavor they would have been hung as traitors or been forced to flee their land in exile. Our only knowledge of them today in our history books would have been of treasonous traitors.
  
  They all had balls. Today our leaders possess no balls. They are nothing more than yes men. The American people have been patiently waiting to cast their vote for a leader with the balls to make revolutionary change in our government. My patience is running thin and so is the patience of many of my fellow countrymen.

  
  Great post
• I Wear Pants

  Again with the elite comment. Every single politician that any of us support are the "elite". Acting like there is an everyman candidate is insane.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  Agreed with the comments on "academics" and elites.
  But, I'd also add it was defense academics and elites like Thomas Schelling, Mort Halperin, Herman Kahn, Bernard Brodie, Albert Wohlstetter, Henry Rowan, Andrew Marshall, and George Kennan really came up with the doctrines of containment, strategic stability, arms control, Mutual Assured Destruction, game theory, and deterrence policies that helped the U.S. eventually end the Cold War.
  Without those academics at Harvard, RAND and elsewhere, the Cold War would have been very different.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  ptown_trojans_1;534858 wrote:Agreed with the comments on "academics" and elites.
  But, I'd also add it was defense academics and elites like Thomas Schelling, Mort Halperin, Herman Kahn, Bernard Brodie, Albert Wohlstetter, Henry Rowan, Andrew Marshall, and George Kennan really came up with the doctrines of containment, strategic stability, arms control, Mutual Assured Destruction, game theory, and deterrence policies that helped the U.S. eventually end the Cold War.
  Without those academics at Harvard, RAND and elsewhere, the Cold War would have been very different.

  
  How is that relevant to our new elites? The Barbara (I worked hard for my office) Boxer, the Joe (I'm such an idiot I attenended a tier 4 law school and had to cheat to pass) Biden? We have a completely clueless political class. We are truly in a new age of dumbassery (if that is a word).
  
  If we are judging academics, then Barack should release his college transcript and LSAT. If all of these folks are so smart, let them prove it. Why not?
• I Wear Pants

  Why do you need his college transcript?
• CenterBHSFan

  

  I Wear Pants;534933 wrote:Why do you need his college transcript?

  
  Why does it need to be locked up/confidential/under seal? After all, he wanted the absolute most public job in the world and he wanted to tuck away his college stuff?
• BoatShoes

  Well, if it's anything like their domestic policies, it probably rejects empirical facts in the name of incoherent populist rhetoric.
  
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/26/AR2010102605216.html
• Manhattan Buckeye

  I Wear Pants;534933 wrote:Why do you need his college transcript?

  
  Because he has no experience, other than his supposed intellect. And its showing.
• I Wear Pants

  Wasn't he a Senator and State Senator?
• Manhattan Buckeye

  I Wear Pants;535392 wrote:Wasn't he a Senator and State Senator?

  
  Indeed for a few (with emphasis on FEW) years. He's the most inexperienced candidate we've had in our lifetimes, and again it is showing. Our economy is in the proverbial crapper, and him and Joe Joe don't know anything about job creation, because they've never been in that arena. They are part of the political class that simply pats their own backs.
• I Wear Pants

  His inexperience isn't what caused our economic problems. What his inexperience has caused are the guffaws, especially PR wise, that make us all go "why would he do that" or "why didn't he just say it a different way".
  
  The economy was going to be in the shitter no matter who was president, if you think otherwise you're insane. The argument is how to fix it and how fast we can get it turned around. That argument is definitely open to interpretations where Obama has not taken the correct measures.
  
  In hindsight we didn't have a good main party choice for President. McCain is a career politician and carries all the problems associated with that and he has backwards views on some things (privacy, media related especially). Palin is just as inexperienced as Obama with none of the charm or even appearance of intellect. Obama was as you've said, inexperienced and promised a lot. Had he managed to hold to his promises we'd be having a vastly different discussion, one of "how good of a president is Obama" rather than the current "how bad is Obama". Biden I honestly don't know too much about.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  I'll help you out with Biden. He went to a crap law school (Syracuse) and cheated his way through it, if he was a student now he'd be ineligible for the bar. He's incompetent. And if standards were in place then as it is now, he'd be a greeter at Walmart.
• I Wear Pants

  How do we know he cheated his way through it?
  
  And I was under the impression that Syracuse is a relatively respected school.
• BoatShoes

  Notice...Biden who was a Senator forever and a respected member of the Senate Foreign Relations committee and took a reasonable view toward the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan unlike his more liberal colleagues is incompetent because he want to a "crappy" law school. BHO who wasn't a legislator for a long time went to a "good" law school but he's incompetent too. As if John McCain as a plethora of knowledge about "job creation." I suppose nobody on BHO's council of economic advisors or Lawrence Summers, etc. probably don't know anything about job creation either.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  I Wear Pants;535510 wrote:How do we know he cheated his way through it?
  
  And I was under the impression that Syracuse is a relatively respected school.

  
  Because he admitted to it, he plagiarized, how dumbass does one have to be to plagiarize in law school? Answer: Biden.
  
  And Syracuse law sucks. If Biden has an IQ above 100, I'll be surprised, he's an idiot.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  For the record, I've never been one that thought a politician/President needs to have alot of Political experience. If somebody's political experience is very shallow, I would at least want them to have done something in that short time - instead of consistantly voting "present".
  That is why it never bothered me that Palin was a newcomer on the scene during the past elections. But, I will say this, she at least got some things done. She just didn't check in and check out.
  Obama's inexperience never bothered me. What bothered me was his record. Or lack thereof.
  
  I know I'm in the minority in this and that's ok. I'm just posting this to show that not even every conservative (or somebody like me who might support the tea party) thinks a glorious political history is required.
  
  Academia is fine as long as there is a noticable common sense hue to all the babble. All too often in the last years we have watched common sense in all political spectrums go by the wayside.