A Comment About

Beirut Clashes Trap Citizens

May 9, 2008 - 11:04 am - by Charles Chuman
Carol Herman
2008-05-09 18:36:11

John Stamford, I LOVE your posts, here!

And, what surprises me, is that as Beirut erupts, we have lots of ships at sea. Including crap that’s there from the UN. So why is everything so quiet?

Was this a test to see how far Nasrallah would go? He’s hiding out in Tehren.

More surprising, was the surrounding of Harriri’s and Jumblatt’s houses! And, the takeover of Christian and Druze neighborhoods. Also, for some reason, the head military guy in Lebanon refused Siniora’s orders to protect Beirut. He actually gave the response that “he’d tell the troops to return to their barracks.”

Do diplomats cower by nature? Is that what Nasrallah expects?

I’m sure before Lebanon became this Mullah enriched “target,” it would have been Gaza. But the eygptians will now kill residents of gaza as soon as they break through a fence. And, Israel’s got solid controls on her side. “In spite of leaving,” which left the whole right wing in Israel bent out of shape.

Oh, and President Peres says this one isn’t Israel’s problem.

Yup. You noticed. In the summer of 2006, the Lebanese really had a stronger choice; but opted, instead, for the usual arab blather.

Riyadh, I hear, is also up in arms. Since the sunnis lose in this Hezbollah “surprise.”

Oh, don’t worry about the democrapic party. What you see is similar to what goes on in academia. Sure. Academia was supposed to crack, first. The feminists and the blacks, are on their last legs, there.

Here? Let me share with you, that as soon as Ronald Reagan appeared on the scene (1972), to run for president. He discovered an untapped resource. The foot soldiers of the republican party. Prior to Reagan? Country Club.

Today, what has given Obama such high numbers; while republican voters fell off the map, was the CROSS-OVERS. In other words? The “foot soldiers” signed up “for the other party.” And, yes. They do vote in primary elections. This has skewed the numbers. Giving Obama a chance to race; instead of the candidate that would have pulled votes. Could Hillary have won? At one point, I thought so. This is no longer true.

But then, again, back in 1948, the republicans made their last big mistake, by NOT running General Douglas MacArthur. Choosing, instead, at the Country Club level, to run Thomas Dewey AGAIN! Two times a loser.

By 1952? The republicans asked the non-affiliated Eisenhower to head their ticket. While over on the democrapic side, you get LBJ, Hubert Humphry, McGovern, Carter, and Dukakis. Then Gore. And, Kerry. WIth those people, there’s not one winnah in sight.

By the way, Dukakis pulled in 10 states. But the democraps are fractured. They can’t “halp” themselves.

Oh, and the day this Bush “does something?” His popularity will shoot through the roof! (No. I don’t know what’s holding him back.) But IF aggressive moves mean you can win, then hitler would have won. He really believed in lots of aggression to be used very quickly. And, he “mired down to hell.” As they say. Took years.