or is that psyco?
I listened to Lindsey this morning on CNN and MSNBC and even Joe, yes, Joe himself! had to call Lindsey on the fact that neither he nor Joe had read the deal. Even Joe said he is not saying that the deal is good, but he has to see what is in the deal before he makes up his mind.
Instead, Lindsey continued to come out with detailed reasons why this deal is leading to the end of the world. This is a good argument that he is a psychic. He can see into the future. He knows that it is horrible. "It is the most dangerous thing that could happen in the middle east!" He also pointed out how everyone, well at least all the liberals, he could think of is naive and misguided and of course Obama and Clinton and Kerry are all sending us to doom and will take everyone else with them.
However, once again, during that entire time I watched, I heard no alternatives except one recurring statement that is the key to his objection to the deal. (don't forget thta he has not read the deal any more than you or I have read the deal and THIS is the Red Flag (no pun intended to connect it with the deals we made with USSR in years past)
But that Red Flag is the key to understanding that this is all unfounded rhetoric by yet another (I think the current count is 15) one of the lucky Republicans to benefit from the GOP's jobs program. They have already created 15 new small business products to raise money by pandering to the base and generating lots of money to these candidates and salaries to those raising money to support all these candidates for president. Thank you for helping the unemployment figures to improve! But I digress.
The key point with Lindsey is that all the complaints he has about the deal he has not read actually were addressed in President Obama's speech outlining the results of the deal that is being closed out. Yes. The President said that all of his problems with the deal brought up by Lindsey were addressed. So what is Lindsey saying that justified his harsh criticism? Well, the recurring theme that signaled the Red Flag is that Lindsey said that he would FIRST have Iran demonstrate that they have changed their ways BEFORE we could even think of making a deal with Iran.
Think about that for a moment. IF Iran had already lived up to the terms of the deal, then we could make a deal with them and unless the President is lying to us, all the terms that he mentioned covered all of Lindsey's concerns except that they needed to do that UP FRONT.
Am I one of the very few that finds this to be really putting the cart before the horse? Am I the only one that doesn't see that his only argument is that the Iranians did not conform to the "deal" before it's worked out? Really?
No, of course not. It is too obvious to anyone who actually thinks about it, but we have to point out these totally irrelevant rants by presidential candidates who try to walk the line between the Radical Right and those that actually care about facts and logic.
Actually, in the President's announcement, he points out that we don't have to have negotiations with the good guys. Its only with the bad guys that we need to have these kinds of talks.
If you critically analyze Lindsey's points, we can only make a deal with them if they already did what we were asking for in the first place. We only have to go to the third level - Application to see that if they met Lindsey's criteria that they met his standards that they would have already agreed to the terms of the agreement.
But Lindsey skips entirely the first two levels, Knowledge and Comprehension and goes directly to making a conclusion after admitting that he doesn't know what he is talking about. That is the really scary part.
So, according to the logical conclusion of Lindsey's rant against Kerry, Obama, Clinton and all others that believe in negotiations is that if the Iranians live up to the terms of the agreement, Lindsey will come out with a Rosana Dana "nevermind" statement.
Really, Lindsey, what are you talking about? Your southern silver tongue seems to be working well enough to get coverage with this message but how is your statements anything other than a totally unsubstantiated rant against the Democrats, liberals and all of the major countries around the world except Israel and including people from the Regan and Bush administrations who agree that this is, as far as it goes, a good deal and the best that could be hoped for.
The real effectiveness of the deal is yet to be determined as are the actual facts of the deal but in the meantime, Lindsey, South Carolina old school conservatives have taken it on the chin recently, I understand that, but really. With this kind of logic, no wonder the approval rating of the Senate etc is at historic lows. You have the right to disagree, but don't you think that knowing what you are talking about should be some guide to saying anything at all?
LeZi