Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Owlbread]

From what speeches of Joe Biden's that I've seen, he tends to ramble aimlessly because he doesn't prepare anything, and the whole damn speech turns into a convoluted mess directed only by a vague premise in a vague direction.

Besides, you don't need to be good at addressing crowds if you're selling something. Unless you're selling snake oil.

Don't forget his shameless copying of Neil Kinnock's speeches.

[Leafsnail]

...Why would you seek to emulate Neil Kinnock?

[mainiac]

I think Biden's "problem" is that he enjoys himself while speaking too much.  He's pretty earnest about what he's trying to do and he's been in politics so long that he doesn't feel nervousness talking to crowds anymore.  So he goes out there and talks pretty freely and that leads to him putting his foot in his mouth every few weeks.

I only think it's a "problem" though because I haven't noticed a whole lot of real offense generated by what he says.  The media just loves this stuff, or at least used to love it before it became old hat.  Biden wears his heart on his sleeve so it's not like there's any risk of him revealing a secret ulterior motive.

[Urist_McDrowner]

The only problem with Stuxnet (in my opinion anyway) was the sheer hypocrisy of it.  The US government (was it Obama's administration?  I guess it was) said that a cyber attack on the US would be an instant declaration of war.  Then they proceed to launch a cyber attack on a foreign country.  Guess what the US government would have said if said country had declared war?

Come at me, Bro?


I would love it if Iran declared war on us. Few things would make me happier. Then we send some B-2s and end the nuclear program and their genocidal oppressive regime.

[Urist_McDrowner]

Don't you fools get it? A chance of failure is inherent in the word "risk"! Clearly, the solution is that the government never ever takes a risk ever!

I don't detest government taking risks. I object to them taking stupid risks. This was a stupid risk.

And, as always, it's not the affair that gets you, but the "cover-up". The infinite stream of "I don't recall" selective amnesia and Eric Holder engaging in more CYA than a pair of pants is what the controversy is now about.

[darkrider2]

The only problem with Stuxnet (in my opinion anyway) was the sheer hypocrisy of it.  The US government (was it Obama's administration?  I guess it was) said that a cyber attack on the US would be an instant declaration of war.  Then they proceed to launch a cyber attack on a foreign country.  Guess what the US government would have said if said country had declared war?

Come at me, Bro?

I would love it if Iran declared war on us. Few things would make me happier. Then we send some B-2s and end the nuclear program and their genocidal oppressive regime.

Not sure if internet sarcasm.

[Dutchling]

The only problem with Stuxnet (in my opinion anyway) was the sheer hypocrisy of it.  The US government (was it Obama's administration?  I guess it was) said that a cyber attack on the US would be an instant declaration of war.  Then they proceed to launch a cyber attack on a foreign country.  Guess what the US government would have said if said country had declared war?

Come at me, Bro?

I would love it if Iran declared war on us. Few things would make me happier. Then we send some B-2s and end the nuclear program and their genocidal oppressive regime.

Not sure if internet sarcasm or republican statement.

Fixed that for you

[darkrider2]

The only problem with Stuxnet (in my opinion anyway) was the sheer hypocrisy of it.  The US government (was it Obama's administration?  I guess it was) said that a cyber attack on the US would be an instant declaration of war.  Then they proceed to launch a cyber attack on a foreign country.  Guess what the US government would have said if said country had declared war?

Come at me, Bro?

I would love it if Iran declared war on us. Few things would make me happier. Then we send some B-2s and end the nuclear program and their genocidal oppressive regime.

Not sure if internet sarcasm or republican statement.

Fixed that for you

Oh thanks I almost forgot. XD

[Il Palazzo]

I've just realised that the problem with America might be the fact that a significant part of its population thinks they're Batman.

[Leafsnail]

Suggestion: set Urist_McDrowner to ignore and only read his posts if they aren't doubled up.

[kaijyuu]

I've just realised that the problem with America might be the fact that a significant part of its population thinks they're Batman.

They said I could be whatever I wanted when I grew up!

[Frumple]

More along the lines of the punisher, really. Bats usually wasn't much for the mass murder of innocent civilians in order to get at someone he didn't like. Don't think the punisher was either, but that's a bit closer.

Really, though, the second someone starts proclaiming happiness at the thought of hundreds or thousands of innocents dead because of some political bullshit, you can pretty safely... I wouldn't say ignore, per se, but discount and revile? Yes. Bloodthirst is not a virtue. S'in fact kinda' disgusting, especially if you're intending to exercise it on actual human beings.

I guess a lot of people don't realize that "some B-2" would put dozens of innocents into the grave, but that doesn't really excuse the sentiment. It's either they don't realize it, or have dehumanized the population of whatever place they dislike to the point it's acceptable. Which is even worse.

[Nadaka]

I am certainly not eager and happy at the idea of going to war with Iran, but I can see it as a better option than not going to war with Iran under the right circumstances. And things seem to be heading towards those circumstances at some point in the next decade.

[Eagle_eye]

Tehran has over ten million people. That's the number of people you're putting at risk of death, at a minimum. You better have a damn good excuse if you're considering killing that many people. It would be better to just assassinate the leaders of the government and stage another coup.

[Zangi]

Tehran has over ten million people. That's the number of people you're putting at risk of death, at a minimum. You better have a damn good excuse if you're considering killing that many people. It would be better to just assassinate the leaders of the government and stage another coup.

And by proxy... kill a quarter... maybe half of that number.   Yay?