Is this the level of GOP thought?

[Tinker]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch ... olicy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Joe Biden goes to China, criticizes the one-child policy, and comes under fire from prominent Republicans for not insulting the Chinese to their face, in China.

God, I cannot understand how anyone, anyone at all, takes Rick Perry seriously.

Oh and Mr. Perfect, off-topic Tu Quacks will be moved to a different thread as soon as I see them. If you want to pull out your archive of Biden gaffes that you've shown us a 100,000,000 times, start your own thread.

[Mr. Perfect]

I think this is more the level of Dem desperation. I only found out about it by consuming left wing media product, did not run across any right wing media product. I think fake outrage of the week type thing.

[Tinker]

[Azrael]

Yes, it is the level of GOP thought. is accusing Biden of speaking in favor of the One Child Policy, when Biden was in fact criticizing it.

And this is being covered by the right wing press, too. covers it here; but of course doesn't include what Biden actually said.

[Tinker]

[Mr. Perfect]

[Demon of Undoing]

[Tinker]

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Wow. Talk about a topic set up to bait Mr. Perfect.

Which is it Tinker? The Republicans and Democrats are the same and on the same wave length; or is it the Republicans are dumber than their more sophisticated counterparts?

Any bitching by Republicans is to make their base feel good and this is a non-story from the get-go. Even Yosemite Perry wouldn't commit a huge faux pas in the same situation- it's one of the strengths of bureaucracy: you have professionals directing your words and habits when dealing with foreigners. The inverse of this of course is our relationship to Saudi Arabia. For all the moaning the Democrats did about Bush and the Saudi princes- no one has the guts (or is crazy enough) to severe ties with our oil daddies. From Bush to Clinton to Bush to Obama- these relationships run pretty smoothly as planned despite the false bravado and outrage meant to speak against the opposition and not the foreigners.

A more interesting aspect, to me, is that twenty years ago, if one party criticized the other on foreign policy for the sake of playing to their base; their criticism would most likely not cause a ripple or stir with the third (presumably aggrieved) party.

Now with the internet, as blocked as it is, the Chinese (in this instance) are more likely to hear these silly squabbles and take them as possible perception changers.

So it makes politicking more detrimental cause it could actually cause harm. But we also can't limit our speech to take into account the feelings of everyone- and as much as I loathe it, "rah-rah rally" type complaints are a cornerstone of democratic governance. An appeal to emotional responses is what gets voted hardened for parties and into the voting booth. That's how people work; so what future do we have where speeches can be misinterpreted so easily between the peoples of two states?

[Tinker]

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

[Mr. Perfect]

[Mr. Perfect]

[Tinker]

You are nit intelligent with to respond to.

I told yu it is about individuals not parties for me. If you make that comment again, then that to me is a clear indication that you do not want to talk to me.

I already have you on ignore and read maybe 30% of what you post. Grow up and step up your real adult game or there its no incentive for me to click your posts.

[Mr. Perfect]

I hope you continue to not respond. Forever.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -1044.html

[Demon of Undoing]

[Tinker]

Demon, you are too kind. It is rank idiocy to think that the criticism lacked a moral component.

[Mr. Perfect]

[Demon of Undoing]

[Mr. Perfect]

[Mr. Perfect]