Korean Job Discussion Forums

[stevemcgarrett]

If you're an independent but conservative leaning voter like me it will come as no surprise to hear the latest antics of the Democratic leadership in the U.S.

Yesterday, Senator Barbara Boxer of California had the audacity to accuse Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice of indifference to the plight of our troops because she is childless.

Rice, always tactful and professional, made no effort to retort. That kind of classless behavior is evidently reserved for those on the leftwing fringe of the Democratic Party.

Not to be outdone, her colleague from California, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, led the charge to increase the minimum wage except for a rather fishy exemption to American Samoa, home to StarKist Tuna processing with headquarters in San Francisco, her home district.

Barney Frank, had the temerity to lash out at those trying to point out the error of Pelosi's way. Of course, this from the man who told dissenting voters on gay marriage among his constituents to "shut up."

And then the old guard came out once again, led by former President and self-appointed ambassador of goodwill, Jimmy Carter. Almost his entire staff involved in Mid-East peace initiatives has resigned over his shoddy scholarship and his one-sided approach to Palestinian issues.

Yes, I know hypocrisy abounds among politicians of all stripes but it strikes me as particularly galling coming from the party that claims to stand for fair play and sensitivity toward others.

Anybody else chafed over these recent displays?

[shifter2009]

[bucheon bum]

What boxer actually said,

"Now the issue is who pays the price? I'm not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old, and my grandchild is too young. You're not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, within immediate family. So who pays the price? The American military and their families, and I just want to bring us back to that fact."

Is that not true? Do you dispute that? Boxer didn't say Rice didn't have indifference for the troops because she's childless. She was just pointing out Rice isn't making a sacrifice, it is our troops that are.

[twg]

[alffy]

[Ya-ta Boy]

[Gopher]

[bucheon bum]

[Ya-ta Boy]

[gang ah jee]

[stevemcgarrett]

twg:

No, it wasn't meant as a declaration of intent. I just knew it would bring the bitter little bugs out of the woodwork, so I simply acknowledged the spin in advance. Lots of spin from all the little LeftCoast bobbing heads on this board. No surprise there.

alffy:

Guess what, lame brain: I am not a Republican, as I made clear in the post if you bothered to look past your preconceptions (in fact, I'd love to see a viable third party come into the next campaign). But then, to acknowledge as much, you would have to think past oppositional posturing which allows you to be so dismissive of my comments.

bucheon bum:

Coming from a cheap shot artist, it's not surprising to me that you can't acknowledge a cheap shot when you see it. Must be a party apologist. Either that, or you're just bound and determined to contradict anything I post. You are really grasping at straws if you actually believe it wasn't Boxer's intent to belittle Rice, poor fellow. Rice, as a matter of fact, spends more time with the troops than Boxer and the rest of her quiche crowd.

Ya-ta Boy:

Your post reveals an ignorance of the military. It's a volunteer force and many of those now fighting in Iraq joined after the start of hostilities. Neither are most of their families poor. Stop with the outdated sloganeering from the Vietnam War era--that was a different kettle of fish in recruiting for war.

[twg]

[bucheon bum]

[On the other hand]

I think the fact that Boxer listed HERSELF, along with Rice, as among those who weren't going to pay a personal price pretty much demonstrates that she wasn't trying to smear Rice.

[stevemcgarrett]

Yet on the other hand:

Nice try. She made a point of letting everyone know she had kids, only hers are grown up now. She insinuated she knew what it was like to be a worried parent (as if any of her offspring would have joined the non-com ranks of the military in the first place) and then played petty one upmanship by further insinuating that Rice couldn't possibly empathize as a childless woman.

You can dress it up however you wish but it's still throwing pearls at swine.

Bum:

So if Boxer has little if no contact with the troops in the field much less any rapport, who the heck is she to question Rice's empathy? That's the crux of the issue.

The Dem leadership has always believed it has a monopoly on charity and charitable thoughts. My thread serves to call that notion into serious question.

Say, bum, since you're so bold, let's see you stick your neck out there and post a similarly provocative thread. Don't circle above like some vulture waiting to land on an imagined carcass.

It's no coincidence that most of the flame throwers on this forum are afraid of burning their own fingers.