Comments on: Bush In ‘07: ‘Talking Is Not The Problem, We Can Talk To Iran’

By: Max-1

Max-1 — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 05:33:46 +0000

Oh but Hier Bush, isn’t your talk on the cheep?

By: Badger

Badger — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 23:22:43 +0000

Talking has never been the problem for the Bush Presidency. The problem has always been LISTENING!!

By: shoeless

shoeless — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 21:57:26 +0000

Bush In ‘07: ‘Talking Is Not The Problem…’

Well no, talking is not a problem for a person of average intelligence. George, say “nuclear”.

By: Cal Malenky

Cal Malenky — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 21:39:20 +0000

Not only does Bush not want Iran to have nukular weapons, he doesn’t even want them to have the knowledge of how to build them.
Who are the brain police?

By: RUCerious

RUCerious — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:54:36 +0000

BushitCo MO:

Agree to all of our pre-negotiation demands, and we’ll then sit down and talk about how your concessions to our demands can be negotiated such that we get what we want.

Oh? You wanted stuff too? No.

By: MCMetal

MCMetal — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:39:24 +0000

Bush said “we can talk to Iran“

Who exactly is this “we” you are referring to , dipshit ?

You believe anyone wants to sit there and listen to you butchering the English language with that smug , stupid look on your simian-like face , like you believe you actually know something , when truth be told , you know less than a pet rock does ?

Shut the hell up already , you criminal ………..

By: hussein toasterhead

hussein toasterhead — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:33:59 +0000

Juan C. Says:

Now, the real hard question: What’s wrong with Iran having nuclear weapons?

I mean, the whole nuke club is famous for its human rights’ systematic violations. What’s wrong with one more?

June 3rd, 2008 at 3:45 pm
_______

Well, besides the fact that Iran has far more urgent economic concerns such as an 11% offical unemployment rate, massive external debt, chronic budget deficits due to an inherently unsustainable subsidy regime, a terribly undiversified industrial sector, and an ongoing brain drain of highly-educated professionals to Europe and North America, not much.

By: Zimzone

Zimzone — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:08:05 +0000

For Bush to talk to Iran, one would think that the first thing Bush would have to do is learn to talk.

By: misshusseinmolly

misshusseinmolly — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:07:15 +0000

What Bush really means is that HE can talk to Iran, but if a Democrat does it (particularly a Democratic president), it’s “appeasement”.

The neocons don’t even TRY to hide their double-standards anymore.

By: hellinabucket

hellinabucket — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:06:16 +0000

VA Voter,

There’s been drilling for oil in the US for over 100 years now. Is there some connection between your oil fixation and Bush’s flip flopping?

By: gummitch

gummitch — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:03:56 +0000

rogers Says:

“We can have meetings. Talking is not the problem. We can talk to Iran. But Iran wants nuclear weapons and I’m not going to let that happen. Not on my watch.much“.

hmmm..sounds like he’s saying “we can talk to iran, but not as long as they’re persuing nuclear weapons”.

Is English your second language?

Bush said “Iran wants nuclear weapons and I’m not going to let that happen.” He made absolutely no connection between that and a willingness to talk to them. There is no “not as long as” except in your imagination.

He said “we can talk to them,” and he said, “I won’t let them have nuclear weapons.” Two distinct and separate statements with no correlation.

By: 1984

1984 — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:02:17 +0000

Of course talking is not the problem because any real talk will not happen. All you need to do is to give the public the impression that diplomacy/talking has “failed” and then say “see, it didn’t work. We need to act”. Of course it helps if you spice it up a bit by using peoples own emotions against themselves. Boo! They could nuke us tomorrow. “Noble” neocon lies.

By: nanlichi

nanlichi — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:01:15 +0000

How about hot dogs? Mustard? Ketchup? Both?

By: nanlichi

nanlichi — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:59:15 +0000

Are you willing to drill for oil in the US?

And do you think radachio is a bit strong?

By: PatrioticLiberalChristian

PatrioticLiberalChristian — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:49:10 +0000

VA Voter Says:
This issue isn’t our country talking to another. It’s about the president talking directly to another head of state that with no preconditions.

Here, let me talk in your language (take your pick):
I reject your premise.
So.
The president is the decider. He or she should decide.
Diplomacy, bring it on.
If you don’t think an American President has the capability
of talking to another leader, then you are unpatriotic.

By: Juan C.

Juan C. — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:45:44 +0000

Now, the real hard question: What’s wrong with Iran having nuclear weapons?

I mean, the whole nuke club is famous for its human rights’ systematic violations. What’s wrong with one more?

By: ralph the wonder llama

ralph the wonder llama — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:43:54 +0000

R-2, don’t try to imitate real arguments of any kind of subtlety. You’ll only hurt yourself.

By: GreenFoxOne

GreenFoxOne — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:38:59 +0000

Apparently Bush (or his mini-me McBush) have never heard the old saying “It is better to appear foolish and remain silent than it is to speak and remove all doubt”.

JT
Ultimate Anonymity

By: Juan C.

Juan C. — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:37:24 +0000

Mr. President, remember:

Coherent phrases.

By: StratRat

StratRat — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:34:53 +0000

We developed the nukes. We gave the technology to other nations. We have nuked another country. We let the genie out of the bottle. Who are we to demand that another country not have what we ourselves have developed, sold, and used? I know for the jingo ‘real’ American, what we say goes, but that is not possible anymore. We cannot stomp our feet and get what we want any longer. That is why we need smarter Presidents, not the ‘C’ student who is currently squatting in our WH.

Today’s world is complicated and nuance is necessary to defend our wants and needs, but also have an ear toward compromise when and where it is necessary. The days of us just ’saying so’ are over. That was the bully approach and it worked for a while. It can work no longer.

We are not the ‘keeper of the keys’ any longer. That makes the right side furious.