well, again, Maria, you are talking about SAYING something.
And I am asking about DOING. If Obama said whatever it wouldn't help and it wouldn't stop anything. I agree about timely condemnation of despicable acts, but it doesn't help reality of those in prisons. What were you saying about other administrations not interfering in murderous regional conflicts in prior years? - in Africa? - and I am not only talking about Bush, but about ANY administration? Did America saying anything ever stopped any genocide or atrocity? Only military intervention does. And we intervene only wnen it's in our interests. Sadly.

__________________
Happy New Year to all! Virtual hugs!

I believe it was not a military intervention that helped collapse the Soviet Union.. it was the rhetoric plus using all the possible means to make them negotiate with us on our terms.. it is our interest to stop Iran from getting a nuke.. but AGAIN I think the admisnistration doesn't be believe it's imperative, they keep changing the rhetoric - in the beginning they were saying it was everyone's right.. and also they don't believe the Iranians are that bad.. look how the administration is treating our allies starting with Britain (giving back the bus that was a gift, not scheduling a special meeting with the PM) and ending with Israel.. his motto is - if you are our enemy - we are sorry, if you are our friend - you are sorry.. very, very troubling..:-|
btw, Libya did stop their nuclear program without us doing anything significant to THEM, but it was because of the hard stance we took with others..

and also we did go to Kosovo (rightly or wrongly) to supposedly stop the genocide, and why do we support Taiwan over China, what is our interest there?

I think it was correct politically for the Administration to hold on their comments about Iran's after election mess. To me, the reason is simple -- the level of anti-americanism in that country is rather high. Speaking on behalf of the opposition would immediately crush their chances to get any political gains -- the ruling "group of people" would simply go on the radio/TV and say: "Look, those protesters are encouraged by America, funded by America and only serve American interests" -- remember who controls the media in Iran! The endorsement of opposition would have played against them. That already happened once when Bush was the president -- so they didn't want to repeat their earlier mistakes.
Of course, it didn't work anyways, so you can Monday-morning-quarterbacking it as much as you want....

No, Aleksei, it exactly the opposite of what you are thinking. The opposition in Iran is very pro-American, and their numbers are growing. They desperately needed American moral support in their fight.
I agree, Obama chose the cowardly route of political correctness. That's why he will never be a great leader of the free world.(N)

Hitler was a Leftist
-------------------------------------------------
this is beyond absurd and yet sadly very predictable..
.
"Hitler outlawed labor unions in Germany. Yes that would be the "progressive" labor unions of the day like SEIU that Beck always complains about."
"Hitler worked with the industrialist of Germany and allowed a tremendous profit incentive to remain. The Nazis were a socialist party in name only. The State did not take over all the major factors of production in the German economy which is the hallmark trait of socialist state."
"Hitler greatly increased the portion of the German economy devoted to military spending and further believed that the best defense was a good offense."

"A look at recent history reveals that Republicans certainly favor more military spending than liberals. Reagan greatly increased "defense" spending even though a good portion of the increased budget was devoted to weapons of an offensive nature. President Bush was also noted for his large increases in the defense budget."
"
Finally Hitler's foreign policy was focused not on cooperation but on the use of force or the the threat of force to dominate the rest of the world. President Obama has consistently been criticized by Beck and other conservatives for "apologizing" and being "soft" in his foreign policy approach. They contrast this with people like Reagan who attempted to use military power and a "tougher" stance to achieve American foreign policy objectives."

"Conservatives use religious reasoning to justify their opposition to gay rights, the separation of church and state, and the general loss of "morality" in American culture. The myth is that Hitler was anti-religion. In reality Hitler used religious reasoning to justify his own policies. Hitler focused on how the Aryan people had a "Christian heritage" with principles that must be adhered in order to rebuild the country. This all sounds awfully similar to Beck's urging for us to return to the supposed Christian foundations of our own country."
"Hitler worked with the Catholic Church to implement his agenda."
"One of the targets of Nazi persecution, in addition to Jews, were homosexuals. Homosexuals were viewed as deviants under Hitler's government who were not deserving of equal rights along with other German citizens."

Lina, wake up.

One of the first lawsinacted byHitler was -
National Health Care!!!

__________________
Global Cooling for the next 30 years!!! - Does not expire!!!

so what??? your logic is beyond flawed. lots of countries have national health care, and they are far from becoming a nazi state.