I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

Didn’t realise there was this type of information out there

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

I listened to this fool say on his radio how about liberals: “Hit them in the mouth.” Look, these cretins in the White House have decided that as long as they have control of Congress, they will ignore, downplay, or just mouth any denial they choose (like Snow) any honest negative assessment of their failed policies as will all their fellow travellers on these message boards.

Only Democratic victory in November and the power of the subpoena will change the order of things. But, where oh where is our press?

Make it happen as best you can!

What you need to do is to convince the voting populace.

Why have you not been able to do that?

What will be your theory as to why you couldn’t do it again when they are not convinced (again) in November?

And, where IS your press?

Could it be that they are simply not very good at what they do?

And why are they not very good at it?

Why is the in-depth questioning and analysis being done on these message boards and blogs? I remember the 70’s era press. And now we have Katie Couric?

Comment by ejb — September 29, 2006 @ 11:00 pm

I see no in-depth analyses on these boards.

I see lots of “leftist facts”, which means disjointed tidbits of incongruent trivia presented in convenient mal-context to APPEAR to be facts.

Show me the cause-&-affect of any point you want to make, and leave it up to me to come to a conclusion as to what it “means”.

That is the only way you convince someone of the truth of your point of view.

If at any point your proposition relies on “believing you” simply because “you SHOULD be believed” your proposition will ALWAYS fail to convince those who “don’t like you very much”.

The only people you NEED to convince ARE those who don’t like you very much, because you can already count on those who do like you.

Thus, your ineffectiveness in convincing those who you are REQUIRED to convince to increase you power to affect politics.

The left’s job is to “annoy”, and you do it well,.. but when you annoy those who you need to convince, they become less likely to believe you, and since your (overly complex) reasoning relies on your audience “believing” you (since your arguments are impossible to follow) you are less likely to convince those you need to convince the more you are annoying in your attempt to convince them by DEMANDING that they “believe” you.

But other than that, you’re doing a great job,.. in driving people (sensibly) to the right.

Thanks..! :)

I know this is a tad off topic, but since all the Bushbots love using WW ll analogies, then they shoudl realize that we had diplomatic relations with Japan and Germany up to the minute they declared war on us. Also, since we survived the cold war: against huge, well equipped armies and h-bomb ICBM, many totalitarian countries, and a huge fifth column, why should this “War on Terror” require more restrictions and fear than that? Do they think they are really going to take over? By the way, we had diploamtic relations with the USSR all through that too! Watching our master stateman performing at the UN last week made me think of this one!

Comment by Jakester — September 28, 2006 @ 4:27 pm

Where are the terrorist’s Diplomats and Embassies?

The reason that there is more to be “vigilant” about (as opposed to “fear”) is that the terrorists have learned from history that asymmetrical warfare is really the only form of warfare that they have available to them, and asymmetrical warfare is more “insidious” than “conventional” warfare.

I love how the left projects it’s (inherent) fear of being “found out” for what it’s real goals are (slavery of the populus) onto those who would take reasonable measures to counter the insidious terrorist threat.

In other words, they see “the non-left” as “fearmongers” because they need an agent of fear promotion, who isn’t themselves, to explain their ever present fear of “being found out”.

The leftists in the present government (in the present administration) are prone to this same “projection”, of course.

suck dog #72

Whether Democrats win or lose in November…

…you STILL lose…

…even if you’re wealthy beyond your wildest dreams…

…your Karma dooms you…

…Democrats have plenty of plans:

Getting out of the disaster in Iraq…
Healthcare for all…(including your dumb ass)
Tax cuts for companies that KEEP American jobs on these shores…
Saving the pensions of American workers…
Beefing up port and border security…

and the MOST important IDEA of all…

…holding the criminal Bushite junta accountable for its incompetence, corruption, and treason…

How’s that for ideas dumb sh*t?

Comment by big+papa — September 28, 2006 @ 11:09 am

How do you get out of Iraq?
How do you structure health care for all?
Tax cuts for profitable companies from the left..!? Wow..! Let’s see them?
How do you save pensions when pensions aren’t a government matter?
The LEFT not allowing their constituency into the country?
..though,.. I CAN see the left trying to check every “anal cavity” that tries to enter our ports,.. which I’m not arguing against, actually.

We don’t want to hear you SAY you’ll do these things.

We want to hear HOW you’ll DO these things.

We also what to see you indict the Bush administration, if you can.

Go for it..! And scream the rallying call as loudly and as often as possible.

It will annoy the majority of the voting public SO much, and make you appear as you are, SO far left, that none but your own will vote for you.

That’s what we want.

All we ask is you do what you think is right..!

It’s helps us more than it helps you.

i just read a story about the eagles 49ers game. the story reported that the final score was eagles 38, 49ers 24 but nowhere in the article did it say the 49ers lost. so the 49ers won.

Comment by r — September 28, 2006 @ 12:04 pm

If it was the FINAL score, that implies a conclusion.

Show me the “final-ness” of the “battle” in Iraq?

More literal dogma requiring leftist dipshi++ery from “r”.a

Ooooo,.. a LONG one..!! :)

Iakeo (my bad before):

You aren’t taking the “house cleaning” far enough. Using your current line of logic, the house dirtied itself by magic…or the gouse was clean until the bugs showed up and somehow they made it messy. Not so in the real world. It is sloppy living that makes the house dirty. It is lack of due care and attention that allows bugs to breed and grow in numbers. Yes, you can clean up as you are suggesting, but without proper “clean” living, the home owner will only make another mess and bugs will return again. If you want to stop constantly fighting the “bugs” then changing your own policies will go a lot further than constant fighting. This is an agricultural fact. It’s called integrated pest management in the nature world…it means enacting policies that keep bugs away as opposed to always fighting them when they keep showing up. You are naive to think you will eradicate all “bugs” all over the world with force.

You’re absolutely right, and I agree with you fully..!

I would also add that Bush cutting border security and first responder funding every year he’s been in office is hardly fitting your view of “strict borders”.

Once again, yep,.. total agreement.

I agree that terrorists are incorrect in that view and will never change their opinion. I would argue EVERYONE agrees. However, as I’ve already stated, you will never eradicate them if you constantly act in such a way that justifies their paranoia. What this war in Iraq is doing has allowed a very small group of radicals, who previously were not even cared about by their own people, to run around saying “I told you so”. In the minds of many in the middle east, the war in iraq has made the terroriss insane claims seem more plausible and believable. Whether you think this is right or not is irrelevant. It’s the way it is and is precisely why Iraq is the “cause celebre” for terrorist recruiting.

I’m in full agreement. But how do you “remove” the cause celeb from the equation?

Going back to my previous Bully analogy. If someone is always running around your neighbourhood calling you an irrational bully, chances are most people on yourblock will think he’s a nut and not pay much attention. HOwever, if you decide the best way to stop him is to beat him up, the people on your block are going to start wondering if maybe the “crazy” guy had a point. Obviously this is a simple analogy. If I wanted to accurately portray what is going on, the bully would kidnap and torture the crazy guy, eliminate the local mailman in favour of delivering the mail HE sees fit and denounce anyone who asked why he had to do any of this to someone who wasn’t an immediate threat as being an enemy worth further action.

The “little guy” sees an opportunity to “be the bully” by making sneak attacks at the “big guy”, and getting his “buddies” in on the fun.

The big guy, who may be a bully of sorts, but who “I” am associated with, and therefore is “worth” defending, is getting tired of these little pin prick sneak attacks, and comes down on some of the “more obvious” “little guys”.

Their are no “innocent bystanders”. The “neighbors” are merely waiting to see what they can gain by this little drama.

Life simply doesn’t work that way. Niether does righteousness, morality, or justice. The proper course would be to prove to the majority of rational neighbours that the crazy minority is paranoid and possibly dangerous.

Absolutely true.

How doe we do that? And who CAN we convince of that?

And what is the effect if we COULD convince them of that?

Would the “non-national” “little guys” stop their assaults?

Would the “neighbors” band together to stop the “little guys”?

THey see the US as an enemy because they are radical extremists. Just like how far-right christians see gays as the enemy to their own way of life.

All right,.. gotta interject here. I’m a far FAR right christian (though non-”evangelical”, if that’s the right word) and gays are simply folks with different tastes than myself.

They are not an “enemy” of my way of life.

If anyone considers them (FRChristians) to be enemies, then I would suggest making violent and constant war on them, or not, as to do either would influence them not in the least.

In other words,.. there are some things you simply have to live with.

It is not one iota different. It is irrational and backed by religious extremism. It has nothing to do with “never visiting the US” as this same behaviour exists within the US. Take a look at anyone who says they will kill anyone who wants to take away their guns. Take a look at far left environmentalists or animal rights groups who think the lives of humans are worth less than the lives of animals or trees. Same thing. If your concern is about correcting this behaviour then you need to start at home before attacking other countries.

As they say, no good deed goes unpunished, and Iraq is an exellent example of that.

But sometimes,.. golly shucks,.. ‘ya just gotta do whatcha gotta do,.. ‘ya know..?

Otherwise you look like a hypocrit…not just as a person, but the country looks hypocritical as well if you turn a blind eye to your own problems while attacking others.

The idea that countries SHOULDN’T look hypocritical occassionally, is quite funny to me.

That is the JOB of a country. To promote itself, and it’s “contents”, and play the game of nations.

The game of nations is inherently one of shifting loyalties and weird little byzantine maneuvering.

The HOPE that nations (countries) should never look hypocritical is hilarious on the face of it.

To not realize that is to not know much of the way the world works,.. and to spout inappropriate philosophical concepts about the game of nations is just plain old infantilism.

I would also add that not everybody within the country agrees on “values”. So to assume that people ont he other side of the world would agree or want to live according to our values is not only naive, but willfully ignorant of the very people we are occupying.

Absolutely true. That’s why commerce and trade was invented.

Some people believe that business should be more important than government; some don’t. Some people believe that the economy should be more important than the environment; some don’t. Some people believe in the death penalty and some don’t. Some people believe that consumerism is a fulfilling way to live while others don’t. Some people believe that society should be more important than the individual and some don’t.

Frankly, I find it freightening that you seem to believe that all values are equal for everyone and anyone who disagrees should be killed.

The ONLY reason that it’s “moral” to kill anyone is if they are “really wrong such that they should die for it”.

This is a VERY flexible concept. The question of whether it’s a “good” concept to which to base killing is for the parties concerned to decide.

The “rightness” will come out in the aggregate.

I call Iraq innocent because they’ve never attacked the US and had no means to attack the US. What Sadam did to his own people is none of my concern.

I call the people of Iraq largely “innocent” of being tyrannical, though I don’t know that for sure.

I call Saddam’s government GUILTY of being “really wrong such that they should die for it” (to use the rule above).

I think it was very generous of America (and others) to try to first rein Saddam in, them get rid of his government.

What Saddam’s government did to it’s citizens is really none of America’s business, but it’s nice to know that there’s someone who cares about the abused.

What Saddam’s government COULD do to help out his enemy’s enemies IS America’s business, and the very possiblity convinced this weak little mind (mine) that it was time to take it out.

It is unfortunate and tragic what he did in the past, but for freedom and democracy to succeed, the people need to rise up and take it for themselves. Even then it may not take…but it has been more successful in history than forcefully invading and imposing democracy on an unprepared country.

I absolutely agree again..!

I find your comments directed towards my “thoughts” of freedom and democracy to be more than a little ironic. You know nothing about me and yet you assume I care about how you vote. No. Not at all. What I do know is that I am opposed to people who subscribe to one party and feel they must always identify with everything that party does.

You don’t know me either.

I’ve weighed the leadership of both (all) parties and chosen the Republican party as the one I wish to assist.

I don’t agree with everything they say. But I agree with enough to vote in that direction.

I know for a fact that I am a moderate and I have voted for both parties over time. I vote for the person i feel will do the best job, not the party.

I’m STILL (gotta get this changed!) a registered Democrat (believe it or not, I really don’t care), and had hopes that the dem party would evolve as I have,.. but since THAT’S not hapenning,.. I’m tossing over to the dark side.

And like all true and honest moderates, if the person or party I voted for in the past doesn’t represent me the way I felt they would/should, then I admit my mistake and vote for someone else next time.

What I am seeing in this country is a freighting trend to always vote one party all the time. And if that party makes mistakes, and people bring up those mistakes, people feel insecure and like they are being attacked. Then they vote for that party again. YOu say I am supporting tyranny and I laugh at such a suggestion. Supporting one party rule, which essentially is what we have now, is far closer to tyranny than anything I’ve ever suggested.

Once again, you’re right!

The counter-force to that tyranny is the excesses of both parties.

I have faith that if anyone gets TOO wacky, the parties (both) will reform to deal with the public outcry.

Hell, the right even has more judges on all levels of the court to boot! You say I am suggesting tyranny? Well voting for one party over and over and expecting change is the definition of insanity.

You make the mistake of thinking opposition means doing the work of the majority. It doesn’t. It isn’t the place of the Democrats to make the Republicans look good. Their job is to oppose…not to help them with their one party rule. Their job is to point out fault and problems…not pat them on the back and tell them “good job.” If that is what you believe then again, you are confused about how democracy works. Democracy is reliant on an opposition and debate…not total agreement and compliance.

Yup,.. agreement here too.

It is the opposition’s job to point out problems and suggest better ways of ding things.

It is NOT the opposition’s job to take the ememy’s side over the country’s side.

Once again, by stating the untruth that we are “losing” one is taking the enemy’s side over that of the country.

we also agree that Bush is trying to keep the economy going and trying to keep people safe etc. I refuse to believe that any government is willfully harmful to their country. However, the issue I have, and other people who call themselves “left wingers”have, is that the current government equates making mistakes as “weakness” and therefore think covering up mistakes is better than fixing them.

If that’s true, then simply make the case to the people (who have the power to vote the “mistake makers” out in the next election) about what the mistakes were, what “your side” would do different, and why your side should have more power next time.

You can also, of course, try to short-circuit the process by convincing a majority of the US representatives that they should impeach and replace the “mistake makers”.

Those are the ONLY legitimate methods of changing the majority in power.

Go to it..!! :)

I call making mistakes “being human” and I believe that nobody can ever improve or develop so long as they refuse to learn from their mistakes. And the Bush admin covering up, classifying, and hiding their mistakes is not good for the country.

I agree with the basic principle. The problem I have is that I personally don’t believe that that is a true statement about the Bush administration.

You’d have to prove it to me, to my satisfaction.

The problem you’d have THERE is that I’m incredibly skeptical of ANY “evidence” that “the opposition” would come up with, and that I consider ALL “sides” in this regard (secrecy, mistake making, blame flinging, etc) to be perfectly equivalent in their capacity to “be bad”.

Refusing to change is not good for the country and neither is not listening to dissent or the advice of people who disagree with you. Bush and his admin are politicians…not intelligence experts or generals or soldiers or media personnel. Yet they insist on saying they know better than any of those people in their own field.

And yet,.. who’s responsibility is it for the actions that the “current administration” takes?

It’s the current administration’s responsibility.

If you believe that they (BUSH) has made an error, take them to task in the usual legitimate way.

Sorry, but you are simply wrong. Bush trying to enact policies that are harmful but he believes are good is not a legitimate excuse.

Comment by Rosencrantz — September 27, 2006 @ 5:27 pm

I couldn’t disagree here more completely.

We, as sovereign individuals, and by extention “groups”, can only do what we believe to be for the best, IF “doing the best” is the goal.

If you think they ARE trying to do what they believe is for the best, which is what you SOUND like you meant above, then if you think it’s WRONG and HARMFUL you need to do whatever you can, within the bounds of what you call “right action”, to remove the “mistake makers” from power.

And would you choose and legitimate or illegitimate method to do that? (voting or not)

Would you choose an effective or ineffective method? (vote getting or whining)

Whether Democrats win or lose in November…

…you STILL lose…

…even if you’re wealthy beyond your wildest dreams…

…your Karma dooms you…

…Democrats have plenty of plans:

Getting out of the disaster in Iraq…
Healthcare for all…(including your dumb ass)
Tax cuts for companies that KEEP American jobs on these shores…
Saving the pensions of American workers…
Beefing up port and border security…

and the MOST important IDEA of all…

…holding the criminal Bushite junta accountable for its incompetence, corruption, and treason…

How’s that for ideas dumb sh*t?