dagblog - Comments for "In uphill 2016 bid, Jim Webb brings conservative bent to Democratic field"

That is especially true in

ocean-kat — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 06:52:32 +0000

That is especially true in the current circumstance of having to beat a popular woman candidate at a time when a significant part of that candidate’s supporters are extra anxious to elect that person just because she is a woman.

Perhaps I misunderstood your intent. It seemed clear to me.

ps to add: When I posted, "wrong to say blacks supported Obama "just" because he was black" I wasn't referring to some old comment by you. I meant things I've seen said by some republicans in the news. I either missed your comment, simply forgot it, or it didn't strike me a significant because I agreed that it was directed at a person rather than blacks in a generalized sense.

How about "at a time when

PeraclesPlease — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 06:09:16 +0000

In reply to That is especially true in

How about "at a time when almost all of the candidates are unhinged out-of control raging feral monkeys - trump,Marco,Huckabee, sanatorium,Christie... - the option to give a woman who can keep her shit together (I.e. not Fiorina) seems very inviting. I've largely stayed out of this concersation, but I see Sanders largely in the John Anderson, Howard Dean and Bill Bradley tradition - someone to create some buzz but with no staying power or national reach. And he *looks* too old - Republicans would vote for a corpse if it was anti-abortion and no taxes - Democrats and independents aren't so devoted.

There's a shocking scene in

anonymous pp — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 04:32:40 +0000

In reply to Never assume. I don't think

There's a shocking scene in "I Served the King of England" where the swimming pool that earlier had the virile young German soldiers and the naked girls as some kind of ornament is replaced with all the German limbless vets somehow swimming without their body parts. As someone said, it's all good fun until someone puts an eye out.

If you Google, you'll see

anonymous pp — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 04:27:52 +0000

In reply to Never assume. I don't think

If you Google, you'll see women still aren't passing the elite training - even with latest scouring the military for the 38 most likely (couldn't hit their desired 100 cohort). Our military hasn't fought a traditional land engagement since Vietnam - you can probably say that most women would have been crap at a campaign like taking the Italian peninsula or the exhausting engagements in the Battle of the Bulge, and if we had female soldiers in the Bataan death march, the debate would have been rather different. And we were lucky - we didn't have a Stalingrad and missed most of the brutal trench warfare in WWI. Will all our new wars be so limited and detached? We can only hope, but it's a big hope. Lately war's evolved for us since we start off controlling most terrain and all the air and seas. At the time of Webb's article we were facing down Brezhnev's army waiting at Fulda Pass - not quite the army that hopscotched across thousands of Manchurian/Chinese/Korean miles in weeks at the end of WWII, but not a force I'd want to face in serious all-out combat It's funny - McCain gets to be a hero for being a POW - Webb gets to be a dinosaur for actually fighting through the duration. Which teaches more about actual combat conditions and the ultimate point - winning. In corporate competition, you lose and go get another exec position. In war you frequently get mass executions and mutilations and loss of all possessions and humanity. We're lucky because we can just retreat from our losses and even proclaim Afghanistan and Iraq and Libya as a kind of victory since we don't really have to clean up the shit and can stop counting non-US casualties.

Why should his thinking have

A Guy Called LULU — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 04:07:36 +0000

In reply to Never assume. I don't think

Why should his thinking have evolved, except for purely political expediency, if his thinking was correct to begin with? In what way does he have to prove that he has changed on this particular issue? If you think his thesis is incorrect, as opposed to being merely a point he can and will be attacked on, you should at least give a brief nod as to why. Maybe even provide a bit of evidence.

I think it's a gross

A Guy Called LULU — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 03:34:35 +0000

In reply to I think it's a gross

I think it's a gross misunderstanding to say people are supporting Hillary "just" because she's a women ... ...

I agree but did someone say that in this thread? I know that I didn't. What I did say is that many of Hillary's supporters are extra excited about her getting elected [just] because she is a woman. The word "just" referred to the extra excitement. Is that extra excitement among some not completely obvious and is the fact that it exists put into question one tiny bit by the fact that those same Hillary supporters did not rally behind Bachman who along with being a woman is also a blithering idiot and also in the other party?

... ... just as I think it was wrong to say blacks supported Obama "just" because he was black.

The comment you are refering to was an exaggeration to make a point and a bit out of line but I did not say 'blacks' in a way that would make my charge all inclusive. My reference was to one particular black man.

Never assume. I don't think

MrSmith1 — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 23:38:33 +0000

In reply to And I agree with you both. I

Never assume. I don't think the article, per se, disqualifies him, but I think it does for many people. I think he needs to deal with it in a "My thinking on this has evolved" kind of way or else the media will never let him get past it. If he has not evolved on this issue, I think he is completely dead in the water. I'm willing to give him an opportunity to explain how his thinking has evolved since 1979.

He made that statement before

trkingmomoe — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 20:32:12 +0000

In reply to And I agree with you both. I

He made that statement before women were battled tested like they are today. Technology is part of warfare and women do serve well. There were many officers at that time who felt the same way he did. I know because I served under some of them. Today a statement like that is no longer true and has not been true since the first Iraq War. It is up to him to make a public correction if he has changed his mind.

He is also going to face questions on his defense of southern heritage. He wrote and interesting book about it. That leaves him open to questions about should Civil War flags be flown today by southern states?

If he is in the debates, these issues will come up. That is a good thing because they need to be debated. Conservadems will be making up their minds as to whether they get on board with the new Democratic coalition or wait for another political train to come by.

My DD 214 and my NG 22 from a southern state is part of who I am. He has my respect but he does not have my vote.

Bingo...Lulu has said "you

NCD — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 19:04:57 +0000

In reply to I think it's a gross

Bingo...Lulu has said "you support and defend a President in everything he does just because he is black."

So he can't say the same thing about women?

We can assume Lulu is neither female or black.

I think it's a gross

ocean-kat — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 18:43:45 +0000

In reply to And I agree with you both. I

I think it's a gross misunderstanding to say people are supporting Hillary "just" because she's a women as I think it was wrong to say blacks supported Obama "just" because he was black. Gender and race were and are a factor that people consider but women didn't rally behind Michelle Bachman nor did blacks rally behind Herman Cain. It's pretty clear that policy is the major consideration over the minor influence of race and gender.