RobertHenryEller's Comments (376)

“Well, you've surely produced a well written rejoinder, Mr. Plouffe. May history prove you right. Ms. Huffington is not alone or even remotely in some narrow minority in her concerns. I hope many of us are being myopic. I've never wanted to be very wrong about anything so much in my sixty years. May we have reason to tout both you and Mr. Obama as nothing less than sheer geniuses, head and shoulders above the rest of us. Hopefully, we will get to beg your foregiveness. You do understand why we're so suspicious and cynical, don't you, Mr. Plouffe? I hope so, for all our sakes. I don't wish you a tougher job in 2012 than you had in 2008.”

“Please do not smear and possibly confuse innocent children who might not understand that calling Joe Wilson a "poster child" does not imply being a "child" is automatically a bad thing.

Please refer to Joe Wilson in all future discussions as the "poster brat" of the Republican Party.

That should drive Glenn Beck insane with jealously.

On second thought, it will just make Beck jealous.”

“If Israelis don't have to spend their own money on weapons, then they get to spend it on settlements. Without US aid, Israelis would have to spend their own money on weapons, and could not spend it on settlements.

The effect is the same. Therefore, the US is indeed funding the settlements.

Learn accounting. And accountability.”

“TLG: I cannot tell if you are being literal or ironic. I'm not even sure how your comment applies to what I wrote. But I sense I'm not going to get an answer from you. I think you like being cryptic, or at least enjoy thinking you are being cryptic. So be it.”

“What Iraq and Afghanistan "receive" is mostly money that goes into the pockets of "friends of America," or at least the friends of the last administration, particularly Mr. Cheney, like Blackwater, Halliburton and KBR.

And it's not aid, it's money that going to the US war on terror.

US aid to Israel goes to the Israeli war on the Palestinians, and illegal settlement contruction in the West Bank.

Nice try, Mossad. You're so subtle.”

“The next challenge after the proper appreciation of Gorbachev, and depreciation of Reagan, is for Americans to understand how 25 million Soviet Russian soldiers and civilians died so that the United States could "win" WWII.

That there isn't a statue to WWII Soviet Russian soldiers and civilians in Washington, DC, goes far in explaining why we may have even had a Cold War. And why George W. Bush lost the Cold War Reagan "won."

We have yet to see what our "victory" over the Soviet Union will cost us. Georgia was just a hint.”

“"Obama is very much a man of his time: weak or absent convictions, dispassion about even grievous wrongs, incapacity for moral outrage, with a ready assimilation of fads and fashions."

So Republicans got here, how? By time machine?

I sure hope it has a reverse gear.”

“Please, anyone reading this, who has any direct or indirect contact to the President:

Forward this to that contact, and ask them to keep forwarding it until it reaches the President.

I have already done this myself.”

“My point, and I'm sorry if I did not make it clearer.

We have Gorbachev to thank for this in great measure.”

“Thank you for titling your piece about Mikhail Gorbachev "The Man Who Changed the World."

Too few Americans give Gorbachev the credit he is due.

Too many Americans believe that Reagan "won" the Cold War.

To the extent that any individual ended the Cold War, and made sure that the end of the Cold War was not the beginning of the Hot War, that individual was Mikhail Gorbachev. It was he that brought the Soviet Union in for a "soft landing." That "soft landing" was soft for the West. It was not so soft for the East. But it was much softer for the East than it could have been.

It was Gorbachev who truly looked at the World situation and decided, "We" (none of us, not Soviets, not Americans) could not afford to continue as we were. It was Gorbachev who set the wheels in motion to dismantle the Soviet Union, and did so under the noses of his military and political hardliners.

This man is one of the great heroes of humanity. He is that rare individual who chose to sacrifice much worldly, temporal power for the good of all. He will never be given enough credit.”

“I'm afraid so.”

“You don't have to choose, zoe27.

They're not mutually exclusive.

You can have your cake.”

“That's the audacity of hope. But I'm not betting against you.”

“No really.

Bigger than what? Than condoms?”

“Murdoch will make hay while the sun shines.

The rest of us will pay until this particular sun sets.

By then, Mr. Murdoch will have made his pile, and probably be dead.

But his success will inspire many to follow in his slime slick.

We probably can't shut Murdoch up, at least not legally.

But we might be able to force him to label his product correctly.”

“"You'd think Obama was showing kids on live TV how to slip a condom on a banana."

That's so silly!

Everybody knows you can't get pregnant, or catch an STD, having sex with a banana.

Unless you're another banana.

If you're not a banana, you don't need to put a condom on the banana.

Enjoy it just the way it came from the supermarket!”

“Mr. Hutchinson:

Many of us know exactly who President Obama is, and who he is not.

Our fear is that President Obama does not know who his opponents are, and what game they are playing.

You are right about what Obama learned as a Legislator. But what he learned as a Legislator will not serve him as President.

Why? Because, as a Legislator, his opponents were actually willing to compromise with him as well.

Those opponents are not willing to compromise with a President Obama, however. President Obama will have to change his game.

You apparently don't agree. I respectfully suggest, Mr. Hutchinson, that you think more about what game the President's opponents are playing. I've been thinking a lot about what game they're playing. My conclusion: The President will have a tough time achieving anything. But it will be impossible for him to achieve anything through compromise. Because the President's opponents' game is to give him nothing. Think about why that might be, Mr. Hutchinson. The answer is quite simple. Hint: As usual, follow the money.”

“Excellent.

The correct economic argument.”

“Be Bi-Partisan?

No.

Not any more.

If President Obama is still there, then we are nowhere.

Neither is it time to be Partisan. In fact, there's to much dissent (cowardice) among too many Democrats.

It's time for some good old fashioned butt kicking.”

“Gosh. Thanks!

I was scared to answer wrong. I thought it was a trick question.”

“"Rachel Maddow will not let former officials dodge responsibility for launching an unnecessary war in Iraq. Why do other journalists?"

Er, because they're not really journalists?”

“I don't know that TV series.

But you've given me some linguistic insight into the word roots.

Rep-tile. (Is that like a liz-being?)

Rep-ublican.

Rep-ulsive.

Rep-ugnant.

Rep-rehensible.

Rep-robate.

Rep-eat offender.

Rep-licant.

Rep-etitious.”

“Of course. "Pornography" does not exist because some people are consume or produce it are "bad."

"Pornography" exists because people are dishonest with themselves and each other. They're hypocrites.

Lastly, "pornography" exists because people who wish to control others must have power over others. What better way than to convince others that something that is natural and healthy in their un-conditioned behavior is "evil?"

Without such "sins," many churches would cease to exist, many clergy could not survive. And of course, where would the pedophiles be able to hide out?”

“"What Obama really ought to do, according to Dick Cheney, is seek out the former vice president's guidance and follow it.'

Oh yes, yes! Do it, President Obama! Please? Please?

Can I watch?”

“"Norris said he knew Beck when Glenn was just 12 years old."

Beck is still 12 years old.

How old is Norris?”