Rico,

This is what I wrote on another thread concerning Obama and the issue of taxes.

-

The fact is the democrat’s midterm election defeat has set a modern record.  The last time the democrats had fewer than 200 members in the House was 1947.

Nov. 2010: Under Obama’s leadership the republicans have added over 675 seats in this election cycle.  Across the country republicans picked up a net gain of 998 seats from democrats in 87 chambers.

According to Roll Call, Nov. 9, “Republicans flipped 19 chambers, including the House and Senate in six states: Alabama, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Wisconsin.  In Minnesota Republicans claimed 41 seats between both chambers, taking control of the Senate for the first time in history”.

-

Obama over-reached after the 2008 elections and the majority of voters pushed back.  Bascially the message was “Hell No”.

Nobody on this Web space enjoys hearing it, however, we live in a Center/Right Nation.  Democrats must now compromise out of fear of losing 2012.

GRYM:

The lack of main street Iranian hostility for, indeed the warmth displayed toward, the West doesn’t fit in with the stick figure, cartoon narrative so desperately clung to by West-hating liberals. And so it is ignored.

To make their worldview work, they must believe that Islam is monolithic in its antipathy toward the West. To conceive of an Islamic, albeit relatively liberal and cosmopolitan, country like Lebanon actually opposing one of the “heroic” movements of militant Islam, Hezbollah, and supporting Israel (of all countries!!!), must drive them absolutely batshit.

Of course, most truthdiggers, incapable as they are generally of arguing the point will resort to name calling and spit filled invective and believe that that will settle things.

PS: How about Obama and the tax cave! I think I’ll vote for the guy in 2012, assuming Hillary doesn’t beat him in the primary.

Rico, - “But the Shah failed because of his corruption. He betrayed modern Iran, not 14th century Islamist Iran.”

-

I remain conflicted.  Pahlavi was a strong-man in an extremely tough neighborhood of strong-men.  He was often brutal to his enemies.  Both domestic and foreign.  The man was certainly not bloodless.

On the other hand he was one of the more pro-Western, pro-education, pro-market, pro-woman’s rights, pro-modern infrastructure and pro-peace with Iraq-Egypt-Syria-Saudi Arabia strong-man Iran had seen in a century.

-

I was always struck by one particular thing while in Iran.  Iranian men (and woman) talked incessantly about the possibility of Western outsourced jobs.  Why, they asked, could they not benefit from the types of jobs enjoyed in India.  -  That narrative too is never mentioned in the Western press.  It’s completely ignored on Web spaces such as this.

GRYM:

Loved hearing your “inconvenient truth.” But as you say, the received narrative will hold sway regardless of the facts.

Most liberal Westerners need to believe that Iranians are universally in thrall to the ayatollahs primarily because they stand up to the hated West. They believe that since Khoumeini overthrew the Shah, then naturally Iranians must have supported Khoumeini’s agenda. Likewise, any noise from the West about “regime change” is purely counterrevolutionary and without support within Iran.

But the Shah failed because of his corruption. He betrayed modern Iran, not 14th century Islamist Iran. Khoumeini was a delusional stick figure who filled a political void left when Jimmy Carter abandoned, rather than tried to rehabilitate, Pahlavi, just as Hitler filled a similar vacuum left by Woodrow Wilson and the clowns at Versailles following WWI.

Assange’s outing of Lebanese antipathy toward Hezbollah and Iran’s support for it is just another inconvenient truth.

ashqar, SoTexGuy,

Nearly eight years in Hamadan after 1979 taught me that the Iranian people are some of the most hospitable on earth.  And while it’s extremely unpopular to suggest that the vast majority of Iranians adore the United States and Americans in general, it is, nonetheless, true.  With terrific curiosity I was received warmly by all but a handful.  Nearly everyone invited me into their home(s).  I was honored and blessed.

In my experience most Iranians quietly- some not so -blame, what they refer to as, the “belligerence” of the Ayatollahs for poor relations with the U.S..

-

We would think all of the above to be good news, yes?  Well, unfortunately that is not the case here.  On this Web space Iranians HATE the evil that is the U.S..  Any alternate narrative i.e., my experience, is tossed off as ludicrous and, get this, “an Neo-Con war-monger”.  -  The irony. 

Wait I got mixed up.  My question for the dude who spent eight years in Iran is for GRYM, not PH.

Sorry, PH

To PH:  Like SoTexGuy, you’ve piqued my interest, too, especially the eight years you spent in Iran.  Was that before the revolution by any chance?

You meant “Saudi” kings, right?

PatHenry:

Forgiven, (except for the Fox News shot)

ITW: “the game is rough here.” Don’t need to tell me bro’.

Hey, Rico—the game is rough here. GRYM dishes it out but can’t take it.  Despite the fact that PH pisses me off frequently, sometimes seriously, I know he’s capable of taking a breather and having a laugh, even at his own expense.

He also does one other thing: If someone says something he agrees with or at least can respect, he doesn’t deny it just because of who said it.

Capt Suave,

Forgive my Bush moment.  I was reading up on the Shia crescent and somehow got confused with my in between posting. i.e. Sunni kings in lieu of Shia kings.

As for your posting my selective quotes, please post the entire back and forth, not doing so puts you in the Fox news catagory.

ITW:

I know this is off topic, but, you said this about PatHenry:

“PH has been focusing on the issues, not the person.”

And PH said this to GRYM:

“Pulled that old carnard out of your ass did you?”
and,
“Just trying to educate the ignorant.”
and,
“Given your George Bush mentality..”
and,
“Freuds right about people giving themselves away.”

PH got a little out of focus there, I think.

Now, back on topic- It seems the Leaks have forced another choice for us to make- either the US is not the only duplicitous, conniving, self-interested actor in the world, or the Lebanese government is a wholely owned subsidiary of the CIA/Mossad axis of evil. Occam’s Razor strongly urges the first choice in my view.

PatHenry:

“The Shia [???] kings and princes of Saudia Arabia”.
You may want to check that.

Israel has no designs on Arab Countries only on the strategic parts the West Bank.  This is widely known by these countries and they have no fear of any Israeli invasion.  Their concern over Palestine is merely lip service their past concern was Iraq which is now neutralized and all that remains is Iran and plans are afoot to take care of them preferably through internal regime change.  If not then by a good old military adventure.

You know, GRYM, I would help you out, because I am more in agreement with your position than PH’s, but you’ve been so irrational, insulting and intransient, that I’d just rather let you stumble over your own mis-steps.

And PH has been focusing on the issues, not the person.

So, go ahead, put your foot in it again, because you can’t find the strong arguments to support you that are right under your nose.  It’s your fundamental prejudices that let you make a fool of yourself.

GRYM,

It depends on what you did in those countries for that time.  Sell waterboarding equipment?

Given your George Bush mentality, I doubt you got into Iran with an Israeli stamp on your passport and vice versa.

“Save your efforts on someone less ignorant than myself”.

Shouldn’t that be ‘Save your efforts for someone less ignorant than myself’

Freuds right about people giving themselves away.

OK! I don’t normally see a point in getting involved in exchanges in the comments section. but here goes..

By Patrick Henry,

“My almost eight years in Iran, eight months in Jordan, three years in Israel and three years working/moving across Europe has certainly kept me ignorant.”
.

Sir, you have my attention (at least).. who are the bad guys and good guys in the Middle East? What are the obstacles to peace? Do you qualify atrocities? .. by that I mean is an atrocity to be allowed in a ‘good’ cause? .. and which causes do you espouse and reject?
.

Basic stuff!

.
Adios!

PatrickHenry,

My almost eight years in Iran, eight months in Jordan, three years in Israel and three years working/moving across Europe has certainly kept me ignorant.

Save your efforts on someone less ignorant than myself.

GYRM,

Just trying to educate the ignorant.

PatrickHenry,

I’ve read it all before.  You’re wasting your time.

GYRM,

You assume too much. 

The Shia kings and princes of Saudia Arabia are worse than any regime in Teheran.

The underlying cause of all this hatred is the blatent disregard Israel has toward the Palestinian issue and the record number of U.N. censures because of it. 

Israels neighbors have their territorial rights routinely violated with impunity by overflights, live fire into disputed areas and direct confrontation in international waters leading to death of the innocent and unarmed.

“You assume all Arabs hate Jews as much as you do.”

Pulled that old carnard out of your ass did you?

Israel is run by a warped naziesque group of people who happen to be Jewish.  They don’t speak for the Jewish people. 

Do you?

PatrickHenry,

Sounds like you don’t like hearing how Hezbollah (read Iran) is not generally supported by most Arab nations.  Including the majority of Lebanese.

I have read your opinions.  You seem not to understand that most Arab nations fear Iran a great deal more than they fear Israel.  You assume all Arabs hate Jews as much as you do.

Sounds like a red herring.