No thanks. You're the one that keeps poking at something I never said. If you want to start a "Carter's performance in the middle east - your thoughts" thread, have at it.

Good thing I never said anything like that, right, Dell?

I was answering Bob's post you said,

"Obama has a strong interest in, and understanding of, the myriad of complexities involving the various countries in the middle east. Tribal relations, power struggles, economics, historic, religious, etc. Carter had (and has) the same. Both "get it" - that it's an incredibly complicated, multi-layered area of the world."

I just have a problem with what 'get it' means I guess? Of course I never got Clinton's 'is' either. :wf

That both men realize that it's an incredibly complicated, multi-layered area of the world? :zz: Realizing that there are tribal and familial relations that superceed country borders, or the complexities of the various religious affiliations, etc. Caring about educating oneself about such things, and being cognizant of such, is a very good thing, in my book. That's an interest that Bush II distinctly lacked (although Bush I had it)

That doesn't have anything to do with whether the individual policies or decisions of those men will be or were successes or failures.

And I believe that discussion stemmed from "Obama is a secret Muslim" talk. I think Obama's exposure to the Muslim religion through his father, as a child, is an excellent thing on his resume.

I also don't think all Muslims are terrorists.

I get it now and for the first time in weeks agree.

Shiat. Does that mean I have to buy you a beer or something? :D

:) not at Arlington

I hate to say I told you so, but...

...but....you read the recent article in Science which demonstrates that the polar ice caps are actually melting even FASTER than previously believed?
Or not?
Certainly you aren't giving validity to the argument that this "Climategate" controvery somehow PROVES that all of the evidence regarding climate change is fabricated?

Are you worried because you can't swim?

what do you take from it when one of the main research facilties is caught trying to perpetrate a hoax, to project their own agenda on others. who do we believe? all I have ever said is to be skeptical and don't be a follower, especially when there are huge special interests that have backed the accepted AGW theory.

nobody can prove anything concerning the research from the East Anglia facility. there was never ANY credible peer review. why? they dumped all the raw data. let me repeat, THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RAW DATA. all that they have to offer is the comical and complicated rube goldberg sham that they tried to massage for years. It is a fundamental rule of research and scientific study to preserve the raw data. its inexcusable for them to now say they dumped it. sounds to me like they're covering their tracks.

I'm interested in the science, and I don't see any here. I didn't read the article in Science about the ice caps. climate change exists, nobody disputes that. climate is not static.

it is very very complicated, that is all i know. so when i see charlatans pumping their fists and advocating swift emergency action and that the debate is over I just laugh.