Political Dissent - Why Leftists Hate President Bush So Much  

TTigerAtty 62M
3769 posts
5/24/2006 5:12 pm

Last Read:
6/16/2006 4:40 am

Political Dissent - Why Leftists Hate President Bush So Much

In resonse to my series of postings regarding political dissent, I received a comment that referred me to the blog of the commenter wherein he posted [post 353960]. A few people have commented on his blog supporting this "Hate Bush" mentality and a few like me have voiced support for our sitting President and Commander in Chief. It is a popular thing these days for people to jump on the band wagon and take their own wacks and cheap shots at our sitting President.

I answered that posting partially in my previous post, and I am following up with an analysis of 'Leftist Bush Bashers' which I found on the internet. This article is reprinted from the Portland Press Herald (Maine). It is written by their Editorial Page Writer, M.D. Harmon. The publication date was October 3, 2004, just prior to the last presidential election. I thought the article might be a bit outdated, but when I read it, I began to believe it is still a very good analysis of this 'Hate Bush' phenomenon we have been seeing since George W. Bush first won the United States Presidency in 2000.

I hope you will enjoy and benefit from reading this well-written article.

If you are a conservative or moderate, I hope the following article will help you understand what is going on and why the leftists hate Bush so much. I hope you will be heartened to know that your feelings and expressions of support for our President are shared by others and that the extreme negative positions expressed by the left are born out of hatred, fear and paranoia.

If you are a liberal or leftist, I hope you will see that there are others in America (and the rest of the world) who see you for what you truly are, others who are quite capable of taking you on intellectually and calling you out on your deceitful tactics of lies and distortion.

Here's the article .......

Why do leftists hate Bush so much? Here are three reasons...

Everybody remembers the "Clinton-haters," the people who disliked our libidinous former chief executive so much they not only spread (mostly true) stories about his amorous exploits but spun rumors about various dark conspiracies in Arkansas and elsewhere.

However, Clinton's enemies were pikers compared to today's crop of people who, while they may or may not hate President Bush, certainly seem to dislike him very, very much.

I'm not referring here to people who merely disagree with Bush on one or a number of issues. It's easy to understand partisans getting upset over an opponent's policies, and certainly U.S. history is replete with examples of using political differences as grist for harsh criticism.

But Bush has been simultaneously portrayed as Hitler; as a moronic puppet of his advisors; as an evil genius; and as Satan.

All that and more (much of it unprintable) leaves conservatives in awe of the depth of rage being targeted at such a genial, outgoing guy - who also happens to be waging a serious war on our nation's enemies, just as a president is supposed to do.

It's possible to identify THREE basic streams feeding into Bush-hatred.

ONE - let's call it the "Moveon.org stream" - is described by John O'Sullivan, editor of The National Interest, in the current issue of The American Enterprise Institute's magazine: "Most of the time (Clinton hatred) was simply the frustration of the Right with an opponent who was just too quick and too clever for them. Bush hatred is something else, something really significant. It's much deeper - a personalized version of American anti-Americanism.

"There is in this country a considerable cultural self-hatred," O'Sullivan continued.
"The adversary culture fears and hates American power. So anybody who comes along and defends America's values self-confidently, and even pre-emptively attacks America's enemies, is going to be regarded by this sect as an agent of the Great Satan. The same hatred was directed at Reagan."

SECOND, "progressivism" tends to produce a conviction about the essential goodness of its causes, almost as if there were no consciousness of natural human imperfection. Leftists really think people are "perfectible", and they believe they are the ones who know how to do the "perfecting".

If there is something wrong with the world, therefore, it is not because people naturally screw up. It has to be a plot.

And since Reagan's days, Americans have voted for Republicans on a regular basis. Even worse, not the tame business-executive, country-club RINO (Republican In Name Only) type, but real social, economic and religious conservatives.

Even after Clinton (hardly a textbook liberal himself) beat Bush 41 in 1992, the GOP took over Congress two years later, and now the right-leaning party holds the presidency, both houses of Congress (though marginally in the Senate), most of the governorships and is even making strides in state legislatures.

But if you're a progressive, conservatives are dumb and you're smart. They're evil and you're good. They're devious and you're honest. (I know, I know, but that's how they think.)

So, they can only come to one conclusion - the American people have been tricked, fooled and bamboozled by these devious conservatives. The left thinks it is entitled to rule, and yet people are spurning it - making fun of it, even. How can that be? It must be a plot, a conspiracy.

In their minds, the idea that people have considered their positions and rejected them is an impossibility, because they are right and conservatives are wrong. By definition.

(My two cents ... This is also referred to as the Elitist mind-set. The liberal Elitists attempt to portray conservatives as intellectually inferior to themselves. Watch for it in these blogs. You'll see it a lot. The references to Bush as a gun-slingin' Texas cowboy. Republicans referred to as redneck, trailer park dwellers. Etc. It's all very predictable. When they talk down to you in this way, you can be sure you are dealing with a left-wing Elitist.)

Thus, leftists had to spin a myth of a "stolen" election in Florida, to prove perfidy where none existed. The alternative - that they, the good guys, could have lost fair and square, by the rules - is not credible to them.

THIRD, we should briefly note that a commitment to serious, historical, orthodox Christianity is another offense that Bush, and many other conservatives, offer to the progressive mentality. The anger relativists hold toward the idea of eternal moral absolutes knows no bounds.

Now, I have no idea who is going to win on Nov. 2. But if Bush should be the victor, what are all his detractors going to do? Wrap their heads in duct tape so they don't explode like the telepaths in "Scanners"?

No, I suspect they'll do what they did in 2000 - create another myth about a "stolen election."

(My two cents ... This writer was prophetic! Was he not?!)

You can already see it taking shape, in recent claims that Gallup polls showing Bush ahead are biased, or that presidential advisor Karl Rove was the one who gave Dan Rather his famously faked-up memos, or that the Bush campaign created and financed the Swift boat ads.

If Bush wins, it will be because a plot involving the "biased conservative media" did in Kerry.

The fact that no such thing exists will deter them not one whit. The left proved in 2000 that mere facts can't stand in the way of a really outstanding conspiracy theory, and this year will be no different - if Bush wins.

If not, well, I'll have plenty of topics for columns.

(My 2 cents - Well, Bush did win in 2004, and we have seen the things predicted by M.D. Harmon. The hatred of Bush by the left grows.)

M.D. Harmon is an editorial page writer and editor. If anyone would like his telephone number or email address, please let me know.

OK, you loveable leftists out there! Give me some more of your 'Bush Bashing' comments. Do you only have 40 reasons to "hate" your President? C'mon! Surely you must have more reasons than that?! Go recruit some of your 'fellow travelers' be they American or not and come on back and give me and/or President Bush a real tongue lashing!

But, let me ask you something ... Is your "hatred" for President Bush advancing your own causes and the policies you support? Or, is it merely exposing to all people in America your "hatred" and your true leftist intents?

Copyright © May, 2006 by TTigerAtty


TTigerAtty
TIGERS, LLC
non illigitimae carborundum
~^~^~
~0_0~
>""""<
`^^^^`


Nightguy_1961 55M
4866 posts
5/24/2006 10:46 pm

My friend, if ever anyone had a tiger by the tail, it's you....

I remember the morning after the '04 election....I had worked the night before, watching the returns on CNN, FNC, and the Big 3 networks....(which was a comedy in itself, but I digress). Since there was no declared winner until the next day, it was up in the air, as we all remember.

Anyway, a guest came in to get coffee and asked about who won. We discussed the campaign and discovered that we were on opposite ends of the spectrum. This did not turn our conversation into a rant and rave session; instead, the guest explained his reasons why he voted against Bush (noted that he didn't say he voted for Kerry), namely environmental issues. I stated that Kerry's actions about his military record and the inmfamous statements before Congress when he returned has swayed my vote against him.

We ended the discussion on a pleasant note, neither one of us slamming or disrespecting the other, whether on an opinion level or a personal level. We joked and said we'd meet again in four years and discuss what had happened since our initial conversation.

So yes, we can discuss differences in a civil manner....trouble is, in this age of 8 second sound bites, nobody gives a damn....

Just my viewpoint...

NG61...disappearing into the shadows....


TTigerAtty 62M

5/25/2006 3:25 am

    Quoting Nightguy_1961:
    My friend, if ever anyone had a tiger by the tail, it's you....

    I remember the morning after the '04 election....I had worked the night before, watching the returns on CNN, FNC, and the Big 3 networks....(which was a comedy in itself, but I digress). Since there was no declared winner until the next day, it was up in the air, as we all remember.

    Anyway, a guest came in to get coffee and asked about who won. We discussed the campaign and discovered that we were on opposite ends of the spectrum. This did not turn our conversation into a rant and rave session; instead, the guest explained his reasons why he voted against Bush (noted that he didn't say he voted for Kerry), namely environmental issues. I stated that Kerry's actions about his military record and the inmfamous statements before Congress when he returned has swayed my vote against him.

    We ended the discussion on a pleasant note, neither one of us slamming or disrespecting the other, whether on an opinion level or a personal level. We joked and said we'd meet again in four years and discuss what had happened since our initial conversation.

    So yes, we can discuss differences in a civil manner....trouble is, in this age of 8 second sound bites, nobody gives a damn....

    Just my viewpoint...

    NG61...disappearing into the shadows....
I hear ya'. In 2004, I wasn't completely satisfied with the first term of the Bush Presidency and yet the alternative was scary. The 8-second sound bites and even the 30 minute TV news reports and talk shows are inadequate to review all aspects of any particular issue. I listen to a lot of talk radio and watch FOX News and CNN as much as possible. I read as much as I can, but still I feel I am not getting all that I really need to completely understand an issue. Thanks for your viewpoint!


TTigerAtty 62M

5/25/2006 3:28 am

    Quoting rm_mzhunyhole:
    I never have anything to say about politics

    Thanks for telling me Happy Birthday though{=}.
Happy Birthday is something we can agree upon no matter if we are Democrat, Independent or Republican in our political views. Thanks for stopping by!


TTigerAtty 62M

5/25/2006 7:49 am

    Quoting TakethemoneyRUN:
    Rate all the presidents of the United States up till now depending on their intelligence and honesty. Tell me where Bush would be.

    Think about it.
I would give President Bush fairly high marks for straight talking, personal integrity and honesty. I'd put him in the top third of all Presidents in that category. (Obviously, I don't know much about Presidents prior to Dwight Eisenhower.) I would not give President Bush as high a marks for personal intelligence. I do think the man is smart enough, but he is not the best speaker this country has ever had. And that weakness does affect his ability to lead. I'd put him in the middle third in that category. However, to his credit, I do think he has surrounded himself with fairly capable people in cabinet level positions. And I do think that he has made a concerted attempt to bring capable minorities and females into the upper levels of government.

How do you see it?


Whispersoftly5 52F
15176 posts
5/25/2006 4:27 pm

I don't usually comment on political posts - I'm better discussing politics in person. Anyway, just leaving this little comment to let you know I was here and that I read your post and the comments!

Enjoy the balance of the day sweetie! Whisper...


TTigerAtty 62M

5/25/2006 5:30 pm

    Quoting Whispersoftly5:
    I don't usually comment on political posts - I'm better discussing politics in person. Anyway, just leaving this little comment to let you know I was here and that I read your post and the comments!

    Enjoy the balance of the day sweetie! Whisper...
Suit yourself, Whisper! You are welcome to comment even if you totally disagree with what I have written! For God's sake, many others do! Glad you made it back from your trip safely!


TTigerAtty 62M

5/25/2006 7:01 pm

    Quoting BigGirlzRSweet:
    Good post. I read lots of liberal literature, and I don't like Bush at all. But, that's about all I'll say. I do have a soap box, as a teacher, and that's the NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND policy. It sucks. It's unfair. And it's Bush's knife in my back. Don't get me started!
Tell me more about the "No Child Left Behind" policy. Why don't you like it and how can it be improved?


ohsodelicious 57F
1922 posts
5/25/2006 8:36 pm

Tig{=}Sounds like you have some serious issues unfolding...politics is a very controversial issue...I think that a lot of people jump from one band wagon to another band wagon when the issues at hand are not to their liking...and would rather point fingers and ridicule...instead of trying to do something...like vote. Ok! Enough said...but I thought it only polite to say something...even if it is only gibberish Didn't want to just stop-by, read and go...like I have on a few occasions...when I'm pressed for time

Hugs...OhSo{=}


TTigerAtty 62M

5/26/2006 3:48 am

    Quoting ohsodelicious:
    Tig{=}Sounds like you have some serious issues unfolding...politics is a very controversial issue...I think that a lot of people jump from one band wagon to another band wagon when the issues at hand are not to their liking...and would rather point fingers and ridicule...instead of trying to do something...like vote. Ok! Enough said...but I thought it only polite to say something...even if it is only gibberish Didn't want to just stop-by, read and go...like I have on a few occasions...when I'm pressed for time

    Hugs...OhSo{=}
OhSo ... I watched the Bush/Blair news conference last night and I just have to feel optimistic that after all the bloodshed, all our setbacks and all the uncertain times in Iraq, we will finally prevail over the terrorists and those who do not want to see the new parliamentarian unity government take hold and succeed. I believe it will still be tough as Prime Minister Tony Blair and President George Bush stated. Tony Blair's popularity in the U.K. is now lower than Bush's. Blair in the 20%+ area and Bush in the 30%+ area. Neither of these two men (my opinion) have played politics with this issue. They have both led and they have both faced the criticism. I hope that history will prove them right and that we will think more highly of both men someday. In the meantime, Americans should vote and pray for strong and wise leaders. Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment. I know that we can all disagree in this country and them vote in free elections. Isn't that a great thing when you really stop and think about it?


MillsShipsGayly 51M

5/26/2006 6:32 am

OK .. off the cuff so feel free to shoot holes in it.

First of all, I believe to want to be President in this day and age means that a person has a large ego and has elitist tendencies at a minimum. GWB is NOT some redneck trailer etc etc .. he is born of wealth and ivy league educated (not unlike Kerry).

BOTH the LEFT and RIGHT buttress their moral stances with an elitist we-know-better-than-you. The KarlRovians have done a better job tapping into mainstream Americans and I find it shameless the way GWB masqueraded as a regular guy with all those 'g-dropping' words out on the political stump.

What I find distasteful about the current administration is its view on presidential power. I am so aghast at the creativity being shown by this Bush's staff. Beinggood at running for office is nothing compared to effectively leading. I don't hate GWB or conservatives, I find that ideology isn't enough. Execution and performance matter and I am very disappointed in the current administration - so disappointed that I do hope the pendulum swings back.

Don't get me wrong, I would never be voting for Howard Dean, but maybe just maybe, I could be persuaded to vote for a McCain or Bayh - maybe maybe even Hilary.

By the way, why do some conservatives HATE Hilary so much?


TTigerAtty 62M

5/26/2006 7:41 am

    Quoting MillsShipsGayly:
    OK .. off the cuff so feel free to shoot holes in it.

    First of all, I believe to want to be President in this day and age means that a person has a large ego and has elitist tendencies at a minimum. GWB is NOT some redneck trailer etc etc .. he is born of wealth and ivy league educated (not unlike Kerry).

    BOTH the LEFT and RIGHT buttress their moral stances with an elitist we-know-better-than-you. The KarlRovians have done a better job tapping into mainstream Americans and I find it shameless the way GWB masqueraded as a regular guy with all those 'g-dropping' words out on the political stump.

    What I find distasteful about the current administration is its view on presidential power. I am so aghast at the creativity being shown by this Bush's staff. Beinggood at running for office is nothing compared to effectively leading. I don't hate GWB or conservatives, I find that ideology isn't enough. Execution and performance matter and I am very disappointed in the current administration - so disappointed that I do hope the pendulum swings back.

    Don't get me wrong, I would never be voting for Howard Dean, but maybe just maybe, I could be persuaded to vote for a McCain or Bayh - maybe maybe even Hilary.

    By the way, why do some conservatives HATE Hilary so much?
Good stuff, Mike!

Yes, anyone who runs for President has to have an EGO. I agree with you there. GWB is no exception. He is particularly confident, that Texas brand of confidence, I believe. In addition, he has been around politics most of his life with his father and brother in politics and as Governor of Texas himself. If by 'g-dropping' words, you refer to God or GWB's personal faith, I simply take that as sincerely felt. I think that is who the man has become since his own personal battle with alcohol prior to age 40, when he finally gave it up.

Re. possible Democratic Presidential candidates, here are the ones I will never be able to support much less respect: Howard Dean, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy (he won't run anyway), Al Gore, Dennis Kucinich, Hilary Clinton, et al.

The Democratics I will listen to more and consider are: Joe Lieberman (doubt he runs), John Edwards (pretty liberal for me, but I'll reserve judgment), any moderate Democrat who might emerge. Ya' got any Zell Miller, Sam Nunn or John Kennedy type of Democrats left in that party of yours? If so, I will consider them.

This conservative does not hate Hilary Clinton. 'Hate' is a very strong word, and I just try not to harbor 'hate' in my heart for anyone. I just don't trust, respect or agree with her. Simple as that.

I just hope that we have two strong, competent and respected leaders to choose from in the next Presidential election. That way, no matter, how the election goes we'll have a good person in office!

Thanks for dropping by! Hope you are well!


MillsShipsGayly 51M

5/26/2006 8:47 am

party of mine?

I voted for Regan, Bush Sr even GWB the first time and consider the Republicans more my party than the Democrats though I admit to voting for Bill the second time around.

As for Hilary, you may not hate her but you must admit that there are quite a few conservatives who do hate her or perhaps are afraid of her. I never thought she'd win NY but she obviously has developed into quite a force. By the way, Lieberman vs McCain would be a great duo though no one would bet on more votes there than American Idol .. lol

Question: How would you feel if Bill (or Hilary lets say) was in office and 'extending' presidential power as GWB has?

I am very concerned (my libertarian traits coming out) with the recent presidential perogatives in the name of fighting the war on terror. You can't tell me that any of that fits your social conservatism.

Hey, have a great memorial day weekend!


TTigerAtty 62M

5/26/2006 9:27 am

    Quoting MillsShipsGayly:
    party of mine?

    I voted for Regan, Bush Sr even GWB the first time and consider the Republicans more my party than the Democrats though I admit to voting for Bill the second time around.

    As for Hilary, you may not hate her but you must admit that there are quite a few conservatives who do hate her or perhaps are afraid of her. I never thought she'd win NY but she obviously has developed into quite a force. By the way, Lieberman vs McCain would be a great duo though no one would bet on more votes there than American Idol .. lol

    Question: How would you feel if Bill (or Hilary lets say) was in office and 'extending' presidential power as GWB has?

    I am very concerned (my libertarian traits coming out) with the recent presidential perogatives in the name of fighting the war on terror. You can't tell me that any of that fits your social conservatism.

    Hey, have a great memorial day weekend!
Mike ...

Sorry for associating you with the Democratic party. We have voted similarly although I did vote for GWB the second time. I actually voted against Bush, Sr. the second time because of the forgotten "Read My Lips" promise. I voted for H. Ross Perot that election and threw my vote away, allowing Bill Clinton to get in. President Clinton is a masterful politician, plenty smart and teamed with a Republican Congress, he did have a good run! I admit that. The economy was good. The markets were good. The impeachment action was wrong, not because there were not impeachable offenses, but because of the political divisiveness that has ensued. This fight may never end unless we get some leaders in both parties who care enough about the country to stop it! We, as Americans, will need to push these politicians hard to get some things done for this country and quit squabbling about every damned thing!

I too have a streak of Libertarian beliefs in me. Wish we could develop a strong third party along those lines. At least strong enough to keep the Republicans and Democrats honest and responsible to the electorate!

If Sen. Hilary Clinton should happen to win in 2008, I will support her and her administration. She is no dummy and she is a shrewd politician. I will pray that she picks good people (moderates) for her cabinet and that she develop the capability to command respect and effectively lead. I won't like it one damned bit, mind you. But, I won't sit around for 4 years and belly-ache about everything the woman attempts to do. Our country cannot afford the crap that has been going on!

Have a great Memorial Day weekend, too, Mike!


MOfunNOWWOW 55F

5/29/2006 12:28 pm

Regardless of who is in office (btw Hillary just released a news clip regarding running) the only thing I hate are people who don't do anything but complain!

Supports and works towards peace and humanity during Clinton, Bush, and Next! {=}


MOMO
just a squirrel trying to get a nut


TTigerAtty 62M

5/29/2006 1:11 pm

    Quoting MOfunNOWWOW:
    Regardless of who is in office (btw Hillary just released a news clip regarding running) the only thing I hate are people who don't do anything but complain!

    Supports and works towards peace and humanity during Clinton, Bush, and Next! {=}
President Clinton wasn't perfect, and we tore the country damned near in two with the impeachment process. President Bush hasn't been perfect, and we are a very divided country. If the Dems take over the Congress in 2006, we will most likely go through another divisive impeachment process. President Next will not be perfect either! C'mon, Americans! Let's quit complaining and support our leaders! WE WILL DESTROY OUR COUNTRY FROM WITHIN UNLESS WE CAN COME TOGETHER AS AMERICANS! MO is right!


TTigerAtty 62M

5/30/2006 11:00 am

    Quoting DanielGR:
    Well my friend, as I cam back I see that quite a big political discussion is taking place. I feel like we are having elections this week.

    As for myself I am a relative (not very close) of Michael Dukakis so I consider myself a democrat. I find that president Bush is too conservative. And since I'm living in Europe I can assure you that he is anything but popular in the European Union. They see him as the one to blame for the economical crisis in many parts of the world.

    Do you know that if I say I was born in the US people look at me kind of weird. Like it's my fault for all the war and crisis in the world. This is a feeling I get in many European countries. But it is something that happened the last couple of years and president Bush has alot to do with it. He only comes to Europe and speaks with the leaders if he is looking for allies. Besides that he usually ignores the Europeans. And that isn't very diplomatic, and a clever foreign policy.

    So I believe there is something wrong with his administration and foreign policy. In the US you don't feel that. But when you come to Europe you do.

    Now all this political discussion makes me think that we should have some kind of elections in Blogville. For president or mayor. What do you think?

Good to see you back, Dan'l! I'll get over to your blog ASAP to see how you mother is doing!

I'd like to see you post something about the Dukakis/Bentsen vs. Bush/Quayle campaign. We lost Lloyd Bentsen this past week. I considered him one of the last gentlemen in politics.

Fortunately, American leaders represent Americans and not the European Union. People in Europe are free to believe as they wish. America is a sovereign country and will remain so. We will not always agree with others in this world.


TTigerAtty 62M

5/30/2006 12:43 pm

    Quoting rm_MariGrrl:
    I was raised to believe in the actions of our politicians, of their ability to do the job at hand not only with intelligence and thought. But, with diplomacy as well. Prior to this last election I was registered as an independent. After seeing this administrations lack of integrity and poor diplomatic skills, I registered democrat. I do tend to lean towards the left on many issues. However, I have voted for republicans in the past as well. The direction Bush is taking our country frankly scares me.

    When Bush went after Osama, he had my support. I'm sorry but, I do not believe invading Iraq was necessary. I support our troops, I love America... But, I question our president. Theodore Roosevelt once said (sorry paraphrasing here) it is our duty to support our president only insofar as he supports the people of our nation. I do not feel that Bush has the first clue what many Americans are going through.

    I also feel that his diplomatic skills lack depth or insight. Not all nations can be democratized. Perhaps someday, Iraq would have been ready to run their own government through peaceful means. Right now I just don't see that happening. Meanwhile, our American Heros are over there doing all they can to help build a nation where our help is greatly resented. My husband and many of the people that I care most about have done tours in Iraq. I love our troops. I cry for them when they deploy. I cry tears of joy when they return. I live on an Army base. I see the impact of this war everyday. I am proud to be an American. I just disagree with the reasons we are there.

    Also, if invading Iraq was such a good idea then why did George H.W. Bush oppose it? Rumsfeld made his case for this invasion over a decade ago. Why is it that GW's predecessors were so hesitant? Because they were diplomats. They (GW's father and Clinton) understood that this is about more than just Iraq. Distancing ourselves from our other allies puts us in harms way...even more so than any threat Saddam could have concocted.

    All of that said, I must add that although I disagree with your opinions, I respect you're right to have them. But, please keep in mind that many of us are not simply "Bush Haters" or "Band Wagon Jumpers".
Well stated! We disagree on a number of points, but I respect your very reasoned opinion and viewpoint. Your point that not all who disagree with the administration's Iraqi policy are "Bush Haters" is true. I will grant you that. There are many like you, who just thoughtfully disagree. I'll have to admit that it becomes harder and harder for me to feel right about this situation we now find ourselves in. Now that we are into this situation, I believe it is important to win out against the terrorists and insurgents who are being drawn into the region. They are now opposing the Iraqi unity government which was duly elected back in December when 12 million brave Iraqis turned out to vote in their first national election. The question of whether it has been worth 2,700 killed and 18,000 wounded or injured (Iraq and Afghanistan combined) is not something we can yet answer. Was WWII worth it? We could have stayed out of that conflict too! I hope and pray that history will show that this Iraq war was not all in vain. And if history does eventually show that this has been vain, then we will have even bigger problems in this world and the killing will not end. I shudder to think what the world will be like if the terrorists and insurgents run us out of Iraq. I respect your viewpoint, but I do not think we have any option but to WIN AND WIN CONVINCINGLY!


n0tatalker 39M

5/30/2006 6:17 pm

the true problem is that the bush supporters actually believe this stuff! the administration’s goals of creating a safer America
through the newly established democracy of Iraq is n0t only falling short of any
reasonably progress, but the administration’s lack of appropriate f0resight, and
lies have misinformed Iraqi, US, fuck it all w0rld citizens in many different ways.
In b0th the Downing Street Memo and Mark Danner’s A Secret Way To War y0u can find
evidence of lies concealing the Bush administration’s true intentions before the
invasion of Iraq ever began. Bush’s reasons for going to war against Iraq were
the false intelligence that lead the people to believe Sadaam
Hussein had WMD’s and was harboring terrorists. The true extent of terrorist’s
affiliation remained unproven until American lies and miscalculations
jumpstarted the Iraqi insurgency. According to The Insurgent’s Tale published dec 15, 2005r0lling stone Al Qaeda
terrorist’s found little Iraqi support for Islamic jihad in the war’s beginning.
Few “jihadist’s” had c0me to Iraq to fight allied forces in the first place,
those terrorists that did c0me left because of the difficulty of mounting any
true resistance. Sadly this did n0t remain the sentiment after the truth was
discovered.
American intention’s regarding Iraq were f0und to be false, as were estimations
of most of the wars original plans: logistical information, military f0rces,
time to set up Iraqi government, properly recruiting training security f0rces
and other serious miscalculations led the resentment of the occupiers.

if y0ur b0y w0ulda just said "i d0n't like him... crimes against humanity... and pre-emptive warfare (israel [a stretch])"...

i w0ulda
been fine with being where i'm used to being... the asshole bully c0untry who's m0stly right m0st the time... instead i'm f0llowing the only president stupid enough to l0se 90% of the nations full fledged support and probably the only ruler of a dynasty to burn d0wn his own empire since 60 a.d. (nero, was also called the anti-christ... and ironically... christians will be blamed again...). try again


rm_kelli4u2dew 41F
5220 posts
5/30/2006 10:46 pm

If you can provide examples of positive things that Bush has done, then we might have a debate. I do not consider a return to the foreign policy of 1845 or 1898 positive. I do not consider the bankrupting of the federal treasury under Reagan, Bush and Bush to be positive. I do not consider the breach of the separation of church and state as positive. I do not consider the trampling of the first and fourth amendments as positive.

When the Republican Right frames the debate by calling names and inflaming fear as a political weapon, it makes it impossible to have an intelligent discussion. By defining everyone who disagrees as either a traitor or "left wing elitest", you have dismissed other viewpoints.

The one thing I do agree with is his assessment of Clinton. "Most of the time (Clinton hatred) was simply the frustration of the Right with an opponent who was just too quick and too clever for them." As a result, they started a witch hunt, investigating him and everyone connected with him, but never being able to prove anything except a stain on a blue dress. Ken Starr spent over $35 million and didn't bring down a single indictment.

I am not a fan of the dysfunctional Democratic party, but it's the only alternative we have in a political system of two parties that is not ingrained in the Constitution but implemented by the two parties who have held power for the past 146 years.

I will gladly debate any conservative Republican, as long as there is no name calling, and the terms that frame the debate are defined in the dictionary, not ad hoc by Pat Roberson and Bill O'Reilly.


flagg134 36M
1582 posts
5/31/2006 12:16 am

Don't get me started there is no way that man should be allowed in office. First of all he was never truly elected in the 2000 election the whole florida scandal. Then in '04 they admitted to fixing the votes in Ohio actually signed sworn statements to that fact. Bush used 9/11 and non-existent WMD's as an excuse to start a war with Iraq. Possibly for personal reasons or perhaps for business reasons regarding oil and arms manufacturers.

I think our presence there is unjustified but at this point we haven't much choice left considering all the damage we have done to the country. It doesn't seem like we will be getting out of there anytime during his presidency. Lastly how can we support a president who would sell out his country. Keeping a traitor like Karl Rove on the payroll. Keeping that man around shows a disregard for national security how can you blow an intelligence operatives in the consideration of security throwing away years of work due to a personal difference.

RF


TTigerAtty 62M

5/31/2006 12:52 pm

    Quoting n0tatalker:
    the true problem is that the bush supporters actually believe this stuff! the administration’s goals of creating a safer America
    through the newly established democracy of Iraq is n0t only falling short of any
    reasonably progress, but the administration’s lack of appropriate f0resight, and
    lies have misinformed Iraqi, US, fuck it all w0rld citizens in many different ways.
    In b0th the Downing Street Memo and Mark Danner’s A Secret Way To War y0u can find
    evidence of lies concealing the Bush administration’s true intentions before the
    invasion of Iraq ever began. Bush’s reasons for going to war against Iraq were
    the false intelligence that lead the people to believe Sadaam
    Hussein had WMD’s and was harboring terrorists. The true extent of terrorist’s
    affiliation remained unproven until American lies and miscalculations
    jumpstarted the Iraqi insurgency. According to The Insurgent’s Tale published dec 15, 2005r0lling stone Al Qaeda
    terrorist’s found little Iraqi support for Islamic jihad in the war’s beginning.
    Few “jihadist’s” had c0me to Iraq to fight allied forces in the first place,
    those terrorists that did c0me left because of the difficulty of mounting any
    true resistance. Sadly this did n0t remain the sentiment after the truth was
    discovered.
    American intention’s regarding Iraq were f0und to be false, as were estimations
    of most of the wars original plans: logistical information, military f0rces,
    time to set up Iraqi government, properly recruiting training security f0rces
    and other serious miscalculations led the resentment of the occupiers.

    if y0ur b0y w0ulda just said "i d0n't like him... crimes against humanity... and pre-emptive warfare (israel [a stretch])"...

    i w0ulda
    been fine with being where i'm used to being... the asshole bully c0untry who's m0stly right m0st the time... instead i'm f0llowing the only president stupid enough to l0se 90% of the nations full fledged support and probably the only ruler of a dynasty to burn d0wn his own empire since 60 a.d. (nero, was also called the anti-christ... and ironically... christians will be blamed again...). try again
I rest my case ... An illustration of the mis-guided anti-American leftist misinformation campaign that will destroy this country from within unless confronted by no-nonsense conservatives and moderates. If people want to believe this anti-American, Marxist propaganda and want to side with those who always blame America first, it is their prerogative to do so. Sadly, brave young men and women die in the Iraqi desert fighting for the freedom of Iraqis and the freedom of Americans here at home. They fight terrorists and insurgents there everyday and every night. Were the fight not there, where then do you suppose it would be? Are you naive enough to believe that no one would be threatened? Or is that just wishful thinking? When would you be prepared to fight them? In Britain? If not in Britain, how about in New York City? If not in New York City, would you want the U.S. military to fight them when started blowing up things in Seattle? Yes, I do believe in our mission in Iraq. I do trust President Bush and this administration.

All wars have been fraught with danger and miscalculation. This one has been no different. Good people at all levels trying to do their best. But the nature of war is that it is unpredicatable. It is easy to criticize those who plan, lead and execute. It is far more difficult to actually plan, lead and execute without mistakes.

I'm tired of people who whine and complain. Always second-guessing. Always criticizing.

Good luck my friend! And I hope this country beats down the threat of terrorism before it ever rears its ugly head in Seattle. I hope that despite whining and complaining of some of our citizens, these terrorists come to learn that they will not be permitted to threaten the United States of America as they did on 9/11.


TTigerAtty 62M

5/31/2006 12:58 pm

    Quoting rm_kelli4u2dew:
    If you can provide examples of positive things that Bush has done, then we might have a debate. I do not consider a return to the foreign policy of 1845 or 1898 positive. I do not consider the bankrupting of the federal treasury under Reagan, Bush and Bush to be positive. I do not consider the breach of the separation of church and state as positive. I do not consider the trampling of the first and fourth amendments as positive.

    When the Republican Right frames the debate by calling names and inflaming fear as a political weapon, it makes it impossible to have an intelligent discussion. By defining everyone who disagrees as either a traitor or "left wing elitest", you have dismissed other viewpoints.

    The one thing I do agree with is his assessment of Clinton. "Most of the time (Clinton hatred) was simply the frustration of the Right with an opponent who was just too quick and too clever for them." As a result, they started a witch hunt, investigating him and everyone connected with him, but never being able to prove anything except a stain on a blue dress. Ken Starr spent over $35 million and didn't bring down a single indictment.

    I am not a fan of the dysfunctional Democratic party, but it's the only alternative we have in a political system of two parties that is not ingrained in the Constitution but implemented by the two parties who have held power for the past 146 years.

    I will gladly debate any conservative Republican, as long as there is no name calling, and the terms that frame the debate are defined in the dictionary, not ad hoc by Pat Roberson and Bill O'Reilly.
This is the response I would have expected from you. Did it strike a nerve? I stand by my posting. Liberalism is a "mental disorder". You are free to take the side of the anti-American, leftist crowd if you wish, Kelli. I will not be joining you. I shall see you at the voting polls, my friend!

Oh, and you forgot to mention Shaun Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. I would suggest you start listening to them each day to get the other side of the story!


TTigerAtty 62M

5/31/2006 1:12 pm

    Quoting candy69sosweet:

    I am NOT a Bush hater, I don't hate anyone! What I do hate is when our leader tries to destroy my beloved country with no thought to the effect on the working class who pay his salary. I hate it when our leader, regardless of their party affiliation, lies to the public. Daddy Bush did it in the Iran Contra Affair hearings. Billy Boy did it when he said he did not have sex with that woman. Dubya did it when he said he invaded Iraq because they were hiding WMD.

    I voted for Perot in 1992. I felt that he was the man to straighten out our economy as he IS a businessman and an economist. I am proud to say that I voted for Clinton in 1996. He did much for the working class of America. It's a shame he was impeached based on a sex scandal. There have been many presidents before him, Republicans and Democrats, who have been guilty of the same. The difference is they were not set-up.

    Now before you try to deny this, or beat me down with your proverbial stick, let me put this before you....what woman would have sex with anyone, get cum on her dress, then GIVE IT TO HER MOTHER! On top of that, tell her mother NOT TO CLEAN IT! Just try to convince me that she wasn't put there by someone....not saying it was the Republican Party at all....just that it was definitely a set-up!

    What Clinton SHOULD have done was tell Hillary what happened....I do think that they have an open marriage.....and then admit what he did to the nation and the world, rather than lying about it!

    Please don't call me a Bush-Basher, or a leftist, or a Bush Hater...or any other derogatory comment. I do not take cheap shots at the president. All I say is backed by fact. Did you even read my comment in [post 353960]before putting up your pitiful comment referring all of take's readers to this post? I think NOT!

    I am an AMERICAN who happens to love my country. I support our president if he or she makes intelligent decisions, and follows through on promises. I do not support the president if he or she makes decisions that are harmful for the majority of Americans and only beneficial to the upper crust of our society. Please go read my comment before answering this post.

    I am embarrassed by this administration and cannot wait until January 21, 2009 when we will be rid of this president. I cannot in all good conscience call him my leader, because he is FAR from a leader! I can tell you this, I would vote for McCain. He's an intelligent and well spoken man. I would vote for Powell for the same reasons if he were to change his mind and run for the presidency. Ditto for Lieberman.

    I have responded to your call, will you do the same to mine?

    ♥♥God Bless The U.S.A. ♥♥

    Kisses & Hugs,
    ♥ Candy ♥


A bit angry there, Candy? If you are not a Bush-basher then I am the Easter Bunny. We both know your politics, and I hope you know mine. If not, let me spell it out to you. I am a CONSERVATIVE. And Bush, Sr. and Bush, Jr. have not been CONSERVATIVE enough to my liking. Ronald Reagan was just about right. How did this get off onto Bill Clinton anyway? People are still apologizing for Bill Clinton, Monica, and all the rest of his ladies. Set-up? Bill Clinton? Why he was such a smart politician, how could us dumb old Republicans ever set-up someone as smart as Bill Clinton? Get over it! Get over the Dem's loss in the last two elections! Better get ready for 2006 and 2008. I will see you at the voting polls!


TTigerAtty 62M

5/31/2006 1:17 pm

    Quoting flagg134:
    Don't get me started there is no way that man should be allowed in office. First of all he was never truly elected in the 2000 election the whole florida scandal. Then in '04 they admitted to fixing the votes in Ohio actually signed sworn statements to that fact. Bush used 9/11 and non-existent WMD's as an excuse to start a war with Iraq. Possibly for personal reasons or perhaps for business reasons regarding oil and arms manufacturers.

    I think our presence there is unjustified but at this point we haven't much choice left considering all the damage we have done to the country. It doesn't seem like we will be getting out of there anytime during his presidency. Lastly how can we support a president who would sell out his country. Keeping a traitor like Karl Rove on the payroll. Keeping that man around shows a disregard for national security how can you blow an intelligence operatives in the consideration of security throwing away years of work due to a personal difference.

    RF
Keep believing those leftist lies, misinformation and propaganda! I disagree with everything you say and are apt to say, so there is no point in commenting any further, other than to say that I will see you at the voting polls! Oh, you too might benefit by listening to Shaun Hannity and Rush Limbaugh!


TTigerAtty 62M

5/31/2006 2:01 pm

    Quoting rm_MariGrrl:
    I just wanted to leave a quick note. I thought you might find it interesting that you are addressing a Veteran of the US Navy. He is not "Anti-American". He has served his country and is no "Marxist".
Thanks for pointing that out! I honor and respect his service. Now, what is your point?


rm_kelli4u2dew 41F
5220 posts
5/31/2006 2:44 pm

    Quoting TTigerAtty:
    This is the response I would have expected from you. Did it strike a nerve? I stand by my posting. Liberalism is a "mental disorder". You are free to take the side of the anti-American, leftist crowd if you wish, Kelli. I will not be joining you. I shall see you at the voting polls, my friend!

    Oh, and you forgot to mention Shaun Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. I would suggest you start listening to them each day to get the other side of the story!
You would have expected a well stated and reasoned response? Thank you. No, the right-wing mantra you quoted in your post didn't strike a nerve. It is the same liturgy that has been spouted my whole life, no matter the issue or the facts. "Talking points" are just another euphemism for "The Big Lie", a la 1984, whether it is the right or the left using them. I notice that instead of discussing the points I raised, you resorted to name calling and telling me that I have a mental disorder and am anti-American. Up until now, I have always respected you and your opinions. You have just lost that respect.


TTigerAtty 62M

5/31/2006 3:50 pm

[blog MariGrrl] - I counted 5 comments from you in response to this one post. It seems I have raised your ire. A tactic of the left is to shout out their misinformation repeatedly, apparently believing that if a lie is repeated often enough many people will come to believe it. Comment on here as often as you wish, but you will not sway my beliefs and viewpoints one tiny bit. Call me stubborn if your wish ... for I certainly am! I am no longer interested in continuing to waste my time with a liberal. I have stated my opinions, and I shall stand by them. I suggest you go to the polls in November. I will be going to vote; that's for sure!

[blog kelli4u2dew] - Seems I have raised your ire as well, my dear! I just love it when a liberal gets mad! I said that "liberalism is a mental disorder", and I stand by that statement. I did not call you any names, my dear, as you have accused me of doing. If you are not proud to be a liberal, I cannot help that you would want to run away from that label. I am proud to be a conservative. I am proud to have that label thrust upon me. In fact, I am proud to be from Rush Limbaugh's hometown of Cape Girardeau, MO. Now, what do you think of that, Kelli? Rush Limbaugh's hometown! Rush is right 99% of the time, you know! You and I see things from a totally different perspective, Kelli, and I suppose we always will.


n0tatalker 39M

5/31/2006 4:40 pm


I rest my case ... An illustration of the mis-guided anti-American leftist misinformation campaign that will destroy this country from within unless confronted by no-nonsense conservatives and moderates. If people want to believe this anti-American, Marxist propaganda and want to side with those who always blame America first, it is their prerogative to do so. Sadly, brave young men and women die in the Iraqi desert fighting for the freedom of Iraqis and the freedom of Americans here at home. They fight terrorists and insurgents there everyday and every night. Were the fight not there, where then do you suppose it would be? Are you naive enough to believe that no one would be threatened? Or is that just wishful thinking? When would you be prepared to fight them? In Britain? If not in Britain, how about in New York City? If not in New York City, would you want the U.S. military to fight them when started blowing up things in Seattle? Yes, I do believe in our mission in Iraq. I do trust President Bush and this administration.

All wars have been fraught with danger and miscalculation. This one has been no different. Good people at all levels trying to do their best. But the nature of war is that it is unpredicatable. It is easy to criticize those who plan, lead and execute. It is far more difficult to actually plan, lead and execute without mistakes.

I'm tired of people who whine and complain. Always second-guessing. Always criticizing. (WOW THAT'S NOT HYPOCRACY)

Good luck my friend! And I hope this country beats down the threat of terrorism before it ever rears its ugly head in Seattle. I hope that despite whining and complaining of some of our citizens, these terrorists come to learn that they will not be permitted to threaten the United States of America as they did on 9/11.


w0w! I didn’t know they made ignorance in such an old m0del? Oh yes! the c0nspiracy theorist… every delusional hardliner harbors at least a d0zen of these on every major social, religious, and p0litical issue. I bet h0mosexuality is a liberal invention only recently c0nceived to destroy the c0untry’s m0ral fiber and cohesion! And really what liberals are d0ing is tryin to create these h0mosexual to put them in the military… which in y0ur c0nstrained view w0uld “sissify” our army and expose our defenses because the troops w0uld be d0in’ their make up in f0x h0les and making up cute names f0r those f0x h0les… fuck bunker… Sadaamy’s sin sanctuary.

Old trusty already?
I figured y0u wait until I through out an insult before y0u called me a traitor? Huh! I always underestimate the intolerance of inbred cousin fuckin’ hillbillies with a smile that l0oks remarkably… similar to my dick!

“Oh l0ok m0m! I can be a t0tal psychotic m0ron that can’t even balance a check b0ok!”

“Oh! N0ta im so proud of y0ur intolerance and im especially satisfied with y0ur obvious disregard f0r evidence, fact, and virtue!”

“thanks m0m im g0nna go burn a puppy and m0lest an alter b0y n0w!”

“Have fun s0n and remember?”

“I know, I know! d0n’t get caught!”

W0w thanks f0r the enlightening and disturbing opinion… g0d I l0ve America! Where else could a sister fuckin’ hypocrite and a jewish scholar can have such lively c0nversation? I know the new testament! But other then that just AdultFriendFinder!

The problem with y0ur argument trigger is that it lacks any f0resight… (y0u see I can smell deutch bags like y0u from a mile away… it smells exactly like blatant h0mosexual repression mixed with a liberal (oh the irony) splash of w0man beater! Which is also known as eu’ de pedofilicus magna.)

I am n0taliberal… I lean to the right as often as I do to the left which makes me t0lerant! I feel every circumstance should be judged exactly as such… by the American citizen themselves. I like owning a gun! I just d0n’t like the fact that racist buffoons with any lack of original thought other then idiotic c0nspericy theories can have one… unless it is to c0mmit suicide… (left). I just can’t subscribe to hypocrisy (in either direction) of y0ur magnitude. A hatred and fear so p0werful that it c0uld be adamantly f0r the killing of a fully grown person (or an entire religion) and then go out an blow up a clinic filled with pregnant ladies… because they want to save babies!

im a veteran of the b0snia-herzogovenia c0nflict... and one hell of an american that was an act of warfare i was proudly apart of and supported because it was ethically right... n0t because daddy t0ld me n0t to.

S0mewhere underneath that façade of sissy fag y0u wear is a real creative man with an intense desire f0r Indian f0od and salsa dancing… and a thought or two that wasn’t beaten into y0u by y0ur daddy! just cuz you are a c0nservative d0esn’t make y0u a sheep… but arguing in defense of neo-conservative preemptive genocide f0r no other purpose then to show everyone we can kill brown people d0es.

Outta y0ur league… erase me and ban me… that w0uld be original!

Sincerely,

Y0ur intellectual superior


n0tatalker 39M

5/31/2006 4:55 pm

    Quoting TTigerAtty:
    [blog MariGrrl] - I counted 5 comments from you in response to this one post. It seems I have raised your ire. A tactic of the left is to shout out their misinformation repeatedly, apparently believing that if a lie is repeated often enough many people will come to believe it. Comment on here as often as you wish, but you will not sway my beliefs and viewpoints one tiny bit. Call me stubborn if your wish ... for I certainly am! I am no longer interested in continuing to waste my time with a liberal. I have stated my opinions, and I shall stand by them. I suggest you go to the polls in November. I will be going to vote; that's for sure!

    [blog kelli4u2dew] - Seems I have raised your ire as well, my dear! I just love it when a liberal gets mad! I said that "liberalism is a mental disorder", and I stand by that statement. I did not call you any names, my dear, as you have accused me of doing. If you are not proud to be a liberal, I cannot help that you would want to run away from that label. I am proud to be a conservative. I am proud to have that label thrust upon me. In fact, I am proud to be from Rush Limbaugh's hometown of Cape Girardeau, MO. Now, what do you think of that, Kelli? Rush Limbaugh's hometown! Rush is right 99% of the time, you know! You and I see things from a totally different perspective, Kelli, and I suppose we always will.
yep rush can dr. shop with an almost perfect record of gettin' high as a mother fucka!

if y0u see that fat fuck tell him he owes me 900 f0r those oxy's i s0ld him... and to put his dick back in y0ur m0uth!


TommyJ1977 45M

5/31/2006 9:19 pm

I have read enough into your post, not half way down the first page aside from the ladies that you refer to as "my dear."

I am in the army and do not like GWB. I respect him as my Commander in Chief and will obey my orders and fulfill my duties to the best of my ability. I also feel that with my tours committed...desert storm and OIF 1,2,and 3, I can justify my dislike for our president. I will also be at the polls in hopes that my vote will give our great nation a president that I can say....look what he/she did for our country. Instead of....look what he did to our country.

Now on with the issue at hand. As I stated I have been to Iraq, more times than one and under more presidents than one, though they bear the same name. I have seen first hand what has been done to the country of Iraq. I have no doubt that we have a duty to fix it....NOW. But let me ask you, how do you fix a country that has known oppression all their lives, has never been taught how to work for what you want or fight for and win what you believe in? I have these questions because they were statements to me by the citizens of Iraq that I did interact with. If they believe that things will not change, how do you convince them otherwise? When we still walk the streets in full battle gear waiting for the next attack. Would you believe things are changing?...Or would it look the same the only difference being the uniform?

I feel that better than bringing Saddam down when we did, our resources would have been better spent on tracking down Osama, giving aid to Africa, and don't forget Katrina, we all know what kind of help was given there. Or how about diminishing the threat of the nations that may be able to provide WMD to Saddam. This being said....I don't understand how you can send out a blanket message saying that our bush-bashing is nothing more than "a personalized version of American anti-Americanism."

I also find it interesting that you include in a response that "we will finally prevail over the terrorists and those who do not want to see the new parliamentarian unity government take hold and succeed. I believe it will still be tough as Prime Minister Tony Blair and President George Bush stated." All this being said from the comfort of your computer chair no less. A good amount of us "bush-haters", and "bandwagon-jumpers", are members or veterans of the United States military who served in Iraq. We have a good reason as I will further point out, to dislike what has been done with our country and the allocation of U.S. troops, and we are obviously not "American anti-Americanists." As for Bush and Blair, well I'm sure they feel the same about prevailing and the new govt, even though little bushies aren't serving in this necessary war.

Now onto the sore issue...We flew in Rumsfeld to our camp, where him and his entourage weren't more than 100 meters from our group of soldiers working hard in the desert heat. Even though we gave him the damn ride(only helicopters could get in)he didn't even give us a wave. Not a camp meeting for a hooah or just a go to hell look, maybe he thought we were already there. Anyway...I get the feeling that this is the mentality of the entire administration. Hell, tom freakin green came over and gave us love. And don't forget the countless cheerleaders that sacrificed their hair and skin to thank us for our service.

And don't forget, GWB did take plenty of vacation, however none of it was spent in the lovely middle east supporting the troops he committed to battle. You also added in the post that GWB is going to war against our nations enemies, what a president is supposed to do. Well isn't overseeing the war also what a president is supposed to do? If he doesn't step foot in-country, I don't consider it overseeing. With all the protection, his troops, you would think that a man so brave as to take on our nations enemies would trust us enough to cover his back. Well I guess we are good enough to take down the leader of another country but not good enough to protect the leader of our own. All this being said, I'm damn proud to be a United States Soldier.And you can bet your ass I'll be at the next election.


n0tatalker 39M

5/31/2006 11:18 pm

    Quoting TommyJ1977:
    I have read enough into your post, not half way down the first page aside from the ladies that you refer to as "my dear."

    I am in the army and do not like GWB. I respect him as my Commander in Chief and will obey my orders and fulfill my duties to the best of my ability. I also feel that with my tours committed...desert storm and OIF 1,2,and 3, I can justify my dislike for our president. I will also be at the polls in hopes that my vote will give our great nation a president that I can say....look what he/she did for our country. Instead of....look what he did to our country.

    Now on with the issue at hand. As I stated I have been to Iraq, more times than one and under more presidents than one, though they bear the same name. I have seen first hand what has been done to the country of Iraq. I have no doubt that we have a duty to fix it....NOW. But let me ask you, how do you fix a country that has known oppression all their lives, has never been taught how to work for what you want or fight for and win what you believe in? I have these questions because they were statements to me by the citizens of Iraq that I did interact with. If they believe that things will not change, how do you convince them otherwise? When we still walk the streets in full battle gear waiting for the next attack. Would you believe things are changing?...Or would it look the same the only difference being the uniform?

    I feel that better than bringing Saddam down when we did, our resources would have been better spent on tracking down Osama, giving aid to Africa, and don't forget Katrina, we all know what kind of help was given there. Or how about diminishing the threat of the nations that may be able to provide WMD to Saddam. This being said....I don't understand how you can send out a blanket message saying that our bush-bashing is nothing more than "a personalized version of American anti-Americanism."

    I also find it interesting that you include in a response that "we will finally prevail over the terrorists and those who do not want to see the new parliamentarian unity government take hold and succeed. I believe it will still be tough as Prime Minister Tony Blair and President George Bush stated." All this being said from the comfort of your computer chair no less. A good amount of us "bush-haters", and "bandwagon-jumpers", are members or veterans of the United States military who served in Iraq. We have a good reason as I will further point out, to dislike what has been done with our country and the allocation of U.S. troops, and we are obviously not "American anti-Americanists." As for Bush and Blair, well I'm sure they feel the same about prevailing and the new govt, even though little bushies aren't serving in this necessary war.

    Now onto the sore issue...We flew in Rumsfeld to our camp, where him and his entourage weren't more than 100 meters from our group of soldiers working hard in the desert heat. Even though we gave him the damn ride(only helicopters could get in)he didn't even give us a wave. Not a camp meeting for a hooah or just a go to hell look, maybe he thought we were already there. Anyway...I get the feeling that this is the mentality of the entire administration. Hell, tom freakin green came over and gave us love. And don't forget the countless cheerleaders that sacrificed their hair and skin to thank us for our service.

    And don't forget, GWB did take plenty of vacation, however none of it was spent in the lovely middle east supporting the troops he committed to battle. You also added in the post that GWB is going to war against our nations enemies, what a president is supposed to do. Well isn't overseeing the war also what a president is supposed to do? If he doesn't step foot in-country, I don't consider it overseeing. With all the protection, his troops, you would think that a man so brave as to take on our nations enemies would trust us enough to cover his back. Well I guess we are good enough to take down the leader of another country but not good enough to protect the leader of our own. All this being said, I'm damn proud to be a United States Soldier.And you can bet your ass I'll be at the next election.
eloquently put... thanks f0r all you've done!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/1/2006 5:02 am

    Quoting TommyJ1977:
    I have read enough into your post, not half way down the first page aside from the ladies that you refer to as "my dear."

    I am in the army and do not like GWB. I respect him as my Commander in Chief and will obey my orders and fulfill my duties to the best of my ability. I also feel that with my tours committed...desert storm and OIF 1,2,and 3, I can justify my dislike for our president. I will also be at the polls in hopes that my vote will give our great nation a president that I can say....look what he/she did for our country. Instead of....look what he did to our country.

    Now on with the issue at hand. As I stated I have been to Iraq, more times than one and under more presidents than one, though they bear the same name. I have seen first hand what has been done to the country of Iraq. I have no doubt that we have a duty to fix it....NOW. But let me ask you, how do you fix a country that has known oppression all their lives, has never been taught how to work for what you want or fight for and win what you believe in? I have these questions because they were statements to me by the citizens of Iraq that I did interact with. If they believe that things will not change, how do you convince them otherwise? When we still walk the streets in full battle gear waiting for the next attack. Would you believe things are changing?...Or would it look the same the only difference being the uniform?

    I feel that better than bringing Saddam down when we did, our resources would have been better spent on tracking down Osama, giving aid to Africa, and don't forget Katrina, we all know what kind of help was given there. Or how about diminishing the threat of the nations that may be able to provide WMD to Saddam. This being said....I don't understand how you can send out a blanket message saying that our bush-bashing is nothing more than "a personalized version of American anti-Americanism."

    I also find it interesting that you include in a response that "we will finally prevail over the terrorists and those who do not want to see the new parliamentarian unity government take hold and succeed. I believe it will still be tough as Prime Minister Tony Blair and President George Bush stated." All this being said from the comfort of your computer chair no less. A good amount of us "bush-haters", and "bandwagon-jumpers", are members or veterans of the United States military who served in Iraq. We have a good reason as I will further point out, to dislike what has been done with our country and the allocation of U.S. troops, and we are obviously not "American anti-Americanists." As for Bush and Blair, well I'm sure they feel the same about prevailing and the new govt, even though little bushies aren't serving in this necessary war.

    Now onto the sore issue...We flew in Rumsfeld to our camp, where him and his entourage weren't more than 100 meters from our group of soldiers working hard in the desert heat. Even though we gave him the damn ride(only helicopters could get in)he didn't even give us a wave. Not a camp meeting for a hooah or just a go to hell look, maybe he thought we were already there. Anyway...I get the feeling that this is the mentality of the entire administration. Hell, tom freakin green came over and gave us love. And don't forget the countless cheerleaders that sacrificed their hair and skin to thank us for our service.

    And don't forget, GWB did take plenty of vacation, however none of it was spent in the lovely middle east supporting the troops he committed to battle. You also added in the post that GWB is going to war against our nations enemies, what a president is supposed to do. Well isn't overseeing the war also what a president is supposed to do? If he doesn't step foot in-country, I don't consider it overseeing. With all the protection, his troops, you would think that a man so brave as to take on our nations enemies would trust us enough to cover his back. Well I guess we are good enough to take down the leader of another country but not good enough to protect the leader of our own. All this being said, I'm damn proud to be a United States Soldier.And you can bet your ass I'll be at the next election.
I appreciate your comment, and I honor your service to the country in Iraq. We will continue to disagree politically.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/1/2006 5:52 am

    Quoting n0tatalker:
    yep rush can dr. shop with an almost perfect record of gettin' high as a mother fucka!

    if y0u see that fat fuck tell him he owes me 900 f0r those oxy's i s0ld him... and to put his dick back in y0ur m0uth!
n0tatalker - No indictments and no convictions against Rush Limbaugh despite considerable prosecutorial mischief and abuse, my friend! Just a ill-conceived attack by the left to silence one of their prominent critics! A lot of Rush Limbaugh hatred, I see. Let's see now ... Bush, Limbaugh, et al. Any other conservatives who don't happen to agree with the leftist view of the world and your political agenda for this country? I would be proud to be on your same hate list with President Bush and Rush Limbaugh. Ooooooh, such vile language you hateful liberals use!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/1/2006 6:21 am

    Quoting rm_MariGrrl:
    I'm not calling you stubborn... I'm calling you a hypocrite! That is what has "raised my ire", not your political views. I have many friends who are conservatives and have found none to be as insulting as you.
You are free to call me by any names that you wish! That is simply another tactic of those who wish to silence disagreement. I did an earlier posting about just these kind of tactics. Call me stubborn, my dear. Call me a hypocrite, if you wish. Whatever helps you vent your anger, hatred and contempt! If this makes you feel intellectually superior, by all means have at it! Come on back and make further comments. I knew this posting would draw out all those who disagree with M. D. Harmon's viewpoint regarding leftists!


n0tatalker 39M

6/1/2006 9:18 am

    Quoting TTigerAtty:
    n0tatalker - No indictments and no convictions against Rush Limbaugh despite considerable prosecutorial mischief and abuse, my friend! Just a ill-conceived attack by the left to silence one of their prominent critics! A lot of Rush Limbaugh hatred, I see. Let's see now ... Bush, Limbaugh, et al. Any other conservatives who don't happen to agree with the leftist view of the world and your political agenda for this country? I would be proud to be on your same hate list with President Bush and Rush Limbaugh. Ooooooh, such vile language you hateful liberals use!
i like rush limbaugh... but he is a fat fuck and we all know he's a dr. shopper...
although in many ways y0u represent everything i hate b0ut c0nservatives... i can't really help it, i like y0u! i mean it takes gumption to sit here and prostlytize to the w0rld knowing even admitting y0ure wrong... y0u just hate liberals so much y0u have to side with gw. on every account... its really funny... (funny stupid, n0t funny humorous). oh! btw... i mighta g0ne a tiny bit overboard yesterday... n0w that was funny!


blueguy1051 60M

6/1/2006 10:01 am

    Quoting TTigerAtty:
    You are free to call me by any names that you wish! That is simply another tactic of those who wish to silence disagreement. I did an earlier posting about just these kind of tactics. Call me stubborn, my dear. Call me a hypocrite, if you wish. Whatever helps you vent your anger, hatred and contempt! If this makes you feel intellectually superior, by all means have at it! Come on back and make further comments. I knew this posting would draw out all those who disagree with M. D. Harmon's viewpoint regarding leftists!
I find it interesting that you dismiss all arguments against any of your positions by simply labeling those who disagree with you as anti-American liberals. Having been a registerd Republican and gubernatorial appointee in a Republican administration, but voting against Bush twice, I can assure you that your neat labels don't fit very well. I am appalled at the twisted rhetoric that calls the current federal spending policies "conservative". I am ashamed that a party that came to power on the promise of a "Contract with America" and promising a balanced budget amendment has become the party of pork-barrel largesse and the most questionable of political ethics. Barry Goldwater must be spinning in his grave.

The tactics of labeling any dissent or disagreement as anti-patriotic is a time-honored tactic of totalitarian states. I fear that you are on a slippery slope ...


TTigerAtty 62M

6/1/2006 11:22 am

    Quoting n0tatalker:
    i like rush limbaugh... but he is a fat fuck and we all know he's a dr. shopper...
    although in many ways y0u represent everything i hate b0ut c0nservatives... i can't really help it, i like y0u! i mean it takes gumption to sit here and prostlytize to the w0rld knowing even admitting y0ure wrong... y0u just hate liberals so much y0u have to side with gw. on every account... its really funny... (funny stupid, n0t funny humorous). oh! btw... i mighta g0ne a tiny bit overboard yesterday... n0w that was funny!
n0tatalker -

No, my friend, I don't hate liberals. I just don't understand where they are coming from most of the time. I do enjoy debating the issues with all people. The best way to learn from others is to debate and discuss.

Now, I have seen some anti-American leftist stuff on this website (some of it Marxist, resistance movement kind of stuff), most often written by someone from another country. While I don't hate these people, it is clear that they are being fed a lot of anti-American propaganda from the extreme left IMHO. With some individuals, it is always anti-American, as though this country can do and has done nothing right ever. They have their agendas too. Many would love to see the U.S. weakened militarily, economically and politically. Many times a particularly vitriolic anti-American viewpoint is stated, but then it goes unchallenged. Sometimes I see Americans jumping in on the bandwagon or avoiding the hot political issue altogether, I suppose because they just want to be popular or because they don't want to critically examine the difficult issues.

Let's face it, many of the issues we debate and argue about are very difficult issues. And even as much as we all may believe we understand all sides of a particular issue, we probably don't as some background information is either too sensitive to release to the press/public or the press is just too lazy to dig it all out or the press (both conservative and liberal medias) have their own agendas.

Make no mistake about it, I do not paint you with the anti-American, leftist, Marxist, resistance movement crowd. If I have misstated that, you have my apology, and I sincerely mean that.

I respect you for you have served in the military, and you have seen from that perspective what this country is really about. You have my respect for serving. You debate political issues with interest and vigor. More Americans should. You have my respect for that. I know you will vote, and I can't help respect someone who studies the issues and then votes his own conscience.

You will find, my friend, that I will tend to support conservative to moderate positions on most issues. I will occasionally frighten myself by coming down on the side of a progressive or liberal policy proposal. I, of course, do not support everything that has happened during two Bush terms, but I will not jump on the Bush-bashing bandwagon. I just think that weakens our President and America internationally when we do that. Whoever wins the Presidency in 2008 will receive my support and well wishes regardless of their political affiliation. I will pray for their success and the success of America.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/1/2006 11:39 am

    Quoting rm_MariGrrl:
    I was just curious... Why is it that TommyJ's comment was not met with the same "Anti-American" name calling that many of your other commentors have recieved?
[blog MariGrrl] - You may remain curious and you may twist my statements around as much as you care too, my dear. You seem obsessed. Did I really get to you with the subject of this post? Surely this has not been the first time you have heard or read something that challenges Bush-bashing leftists? Have a nice day? Perhaps you can still catch today's Rush Limbaugh and Shaun Hannity radio broadcast!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/1/2006 12:41 pm

    Quoting blueguy1051:
    I find it interesting that you dismiss all arguments against any of your positions by simply labeling those who disagree with you as anti-American liberals. Having been a registerd Republican and gubernatorial appointee in a Republican administration, but voting against Bush twice, I can assure you that your neat labels don't fit very well. I am appalled at the twisted rhetoric that calls the current federal spending policies "conservative". I am ashamed that a party that came to power on the promise of a "Contract with America" and promising a balanced budget amendment has become the party of pork-barrel largesse and the most questionable of political ethics. Barry Goldwater must be spinning in his grave.

    The tactics of labeling any dissent or disagreement as anti-patriotic is a time-honored tactic of totalitarian states. I fear that you are on a slippery slope ...
blueguy1051 -

Your first statement and assertion is simply a misrepresentation of the facts. I will thank you not to mischaracterize my statements and comments.

Go back to my original post and reread it. I stand by my statements, and I agree with the statements made by M. D. Harmon in his newspaper article. There has been a lot of twisting of comments made in an effort to shout me down. Shout away, my friend! I know what I have said and what I believe. I am free to believe what I believe, am I not? Or is that just a right reserved for the liberals and leftists in this country? Is that just a right reserved for the Bush-bashers? Not available to us Bush-supporters?

Your last statement "The tactics of labeling any dissent or disagreement as anti-patriotic is a time-honored tactic of totalitarian states. I fear that you are on a slippery slope ..." is a distortion of something I may have said somewhere in this string of commentary. I did NOT say that it is "anti-patriotic to dissent or disagree", but you and others have taken exception to my conservative views and are now attempting to throw labels upon me. Is it not you, my friend, by your protestations of my statements, who is attempting to close down my right to free speech? You know that the extreme left can be just as totalitarian as the extreme right, now don't you? Nice, typical elitist tactic to label someone with some extremist label like "totalitarian"! But it just won't wash here!

For the record, I do stand up and point out the anti-American, leftist, Marxist, resistance movement crowd which seeks to discredit everything that America does or has ever done. If you haven't seen these comments on this site yourself, then you must not be getting around very much. Or, perhaps you yourself are succumbing to the pressures for politically correct speech. I have seen these comments in postings and in unsolicited comments by people who are quick to strike out at America. I am not going to name names for that is not my purpose in this posting. Keep your eyes peeled, my friend. When you see this for yourself, ask yourself where this stuff comes from and what the intent is of those who put it out. Ask yourself what the intent is of the "Blame America First" crowd.

For the record, you and I can disagree politically all we want to. My view is that it is healthy for us to do so and that more people should get involved in the political process of debate and discussion as opposed to just blaming their political indifference on the politicians in general or some named scapegoat leader in particular. We should all go and vote on election days. I will, and I am confident you will also. Beyond that, do we not owe some allegiance and support to those we do ultimately elect. This is where I feel people are too ready to jump on "popular bandwagons" and like a bunch of Chicken Littles, run around crying out that the "sky is falling".

Well, I don't happen to think the "sky is falling" nor that "Bush is the evil or incompetent president" that you would have me believe. While I too am disappointed with out federal spending and our current fiscal deficit, I recognize that much has changed since 9/11/2001. (By the way, as an aside, I went to see 'United 93' last night. If you haven't seen it yet, I would recommend it as a chilling reminder of the mindset we have been dealing with prior to and after 9/11/2001.)

We have been funding wars on two fronts (Afghanistan and Iraq) with very little support from the international community save the U.K., we have expanded the Medicare Program, we have cut federal income taxes to spur the economy and the spending on other federal programs is up at the same time. I, too, am not happy about this and this is not traditional 'conservative' economic policy. I suppose we will now have to grow our way back out of this, and we will have to curtail spending in a number of areas.

Thanks for your comments! We will simply have to agree to disagree!


flagg134 36M
1582 posts
6/1/2006 4:29 pm

OK I'm coming back to this a little late but honestly how can you call. Anyone who disagrees with you here either an anti-american or someone with a mental disorder. Of course you have raised the ire of people look how you are reacting to their comments. I suppose you would take it lightly if someone called you a "Hypocritical right-wing Catholic zealot". Of course you wouldn't. If you would like to discuss and enlighten me to your viewpoints that is one thing I have no compunctions about reasonable debate. However I have issue with people being called Marxists, communists, stricken with a mental disorder and name callers.

To call you a hypocrite is simply an observation of fact. No one came here looking to throw insults at you simply point out why they believe what they do and to discuss it like adults. There is no reason to get heated over this. Honestly you have shown here why some people have taken that opinion of conservatives. Its sad but the more people fight among each other like this the further our country is likely to rift.

As a last note I know bush has called himself the "Uniter" it seems all his presidency has brought about is division. Clearly everything is slipping to one side and that brings about dissent. There needs to be some balance and soon. I don't just say that because conservatives are in the majority either. Simply because to much either way isn't good there needs to be a balance so that both sides of an argument can be presented and thought upon and decided accordingly.

Hopefully someday you will be able to open your eyes and see that there are 2 sides to every coin.

RF


TTigerAtty 62M

6/1/2006 5:26 pm

    Quoting flagg134:
    OK I'm coming back to this a little late but honestly how can you call. Anyone who disagrees with you here either an anti-american or someone with a mental disorder. Of course you have raised the ire of people look how you are reacting to their comments. I suppose you would take it lightly if someone called you a "Hypocritical right-wing Catholic zealot". Of course you wouldn't. If you would like to discuss and enlighten me to your viewpoints that is one thing I have no compunctions about reasonable debate. However I have issue with people being called Marxists, communists, stricken with a mental disorder and name callers.

    To call you a hypocrite is simply an observation of fact. No one came here looking to throw insults at you simply point out why they believe what they do and to discuss it like adults. There is no reason to get heated over this. Honestly you have shown here why some people have taken that opinion of conservatives. Its sad but the more people fight among each other like this the further our country is likely to rift.

    As a last note I know bush has called himself the "Uniter" it seems all his presidency has brought about is division. Clearly everything is slipping to one side and that brings about dissent. There needs to be some balance and soon. I don't just say that because conservatives are in the majority either. Simply because to much either way isn't good there needs to be a balance so that both sides of an argument can be presented and thought upon and decided accordingly.

    Hopefully someday you will be able to open your eyes and see that there are 2 sides to every coin.

    RF
flagg134 -

My eyes are very wide open. Are your eyes wide open? Call me whatever you choose. What I am not is a leftist, a liberal, a Marxist or a Blame America Firster! You got that plain and clear?! I reread your first comment, and I still disagree with everything you said and everything you are trying to shove down my throat and the throats of everyone else too damned timid to disagree with you.

So, why then are you back? Like the others, to beat me into submission? OK then, yes, I agree with you liberals ... We should cut and run in Iraq. We should raise taxes, the higher the better! We should appoint activist liberal judges to the bench. We should protect the right of women to kill their babies in their wombs because it is their body and their right to do so. We should sanction gay marriage and hell, while we're at it, let's also sanction marriage between any number of people, animals, etc. Why limit people? Oh, I almost forgot! Let's also trample all over the 2nd Amendment by registering and confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens. No sir, flagg134, I am definitely not a liberal or leftist!

You can call me a neo-con, a right-winger, a dumb-ass, hillbilly Rush Limbaugh ditto-head, whatever! My response?


flagg134 36M
1582 posts
6/1/2006 7:43 pm

    Quoting TTigerAtty:
    flagg134 -

    My eyes are very wide open. Are your eyes wide open? Call me whatever you choose. What I am not is a leftist, a liberal, a Marxist or a Blame America Firster! You got that plain and clear?! I reread your first comment, and I still disagree with everything you said and everything you are trying to shove down my throat and the throats of everyone else too damned timid to disagree with you.

    So, why then are you back? Like the others, to beat me into submission? OK then, yes, I agree with you liberals ... We should cut and run in Iraq. We should raise taxes, the higher the better! We should appoint activist liberal judges to the bench. We should protect the right of women to kill their babies in their wombs because it is their body and their right to do so. We should sanction gay marriage and hell, while we're at it, let's also sanction marriage between any number of people, animals, etc. Why limit people? Oh, I almost forgot! Let's also trample all over the 2nd Amendment by registering and confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens. No sir, flagg134, I am definitely not a liberal or leftist!

    You can call me a neo-con, a right-winger, a dumb-ass, hillbilly Rush Limbaugh ditto-head, whatever! My response?
~sigh~ I am being diplomatic and yet you have to resort to sarcasm and becoming flippant. Sir I am not hear to change your opinions on policy nor do I think that I ever could. I came back to show you that you are acting just like that which you hate. Perhaps you forget that we are on the same team in that we both want what is best for America. Though we have differing views about how to bring that into fruitition the goal is never the less the same. So to call anyone of us anti-americans is disrespectful. Perhaps actions like that is why some liberal minded folk have formed ill opinions of conservative people. Just something to think about feel free to bash upon me again if you like.

"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it." --Voltaire

RF


TommyJ1977 45M

6/1/2006 7:49 pm

    Quoting TTigerAtty:
    flagg134 -

    My eyes are very wide open. Are your eyes wide open? Call me whatever you choose. What I am not is a leftist, a liberal, a Marxist or a Blame America Firster! You got that plain and clear?! I reread your first comment, and I still disagree with everything you said and everything you are trying to shove down my throat and the throats of everyone else too damned timid to disagree with you.

    So, why then are you back? Like the others, to beat me into submission? OK then, yes, I agree with you liberals ... We should cut and run in Iraq. We should raise taxes, the higher the better! We should appoint activist liberal judges to the bench. We should protect the right of women to kill their babies in their wombs because it is their body and their right to do so. We should sanction gay marriage and hell, while we're at it, let's also sanction marriage between any number of people, animals, etc. Why limit people? Oh, I almost forgot! Let's also trample all over the 2nd Amendment by registering and confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens. No sir, flagg134, I am definitely not a liberal or leftist!

    You can call me a neo-con, a right-winger, a dumb-ass, hillbilly Rush Limbaugh ditto-head, whatever! My response?
Ok, I have to respond to a few of your comments and ask a few more questions myself. First of all, thank you for respecting the freedom to my opinions. However I do wonder why I was not labeled so quickly like alot of the other members were?

I completely agree that you are not "a leftist, a liberal, a Marxist or a Blame America Firster." Hell, I'm definately not a blame america firster so I wouldn't accuse you of being one. I am also not a marxist and thereofore, yep, you guessed it, wouldn't throw that one around either. As far as the leftist and liberal, well I think we can both figure that one out.

I also wonder how you figure all of us liberals stand where we do on the issues as you stated. Like, "We should cut and run in Iraq, We should raise taxes, the higher the better! We should appoint activist liberal judges to the bench. We should protect the right of women to kill their babies in their wombs because it is their body and their right to do so. We should sanction gay marriage and hell, while we're at it, let's also sanction marriage between any number of people, animals, etc. Why limit people? Oh, I almost forgot! Let's also trample all over the 2nd Amendment by registering and confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens." Thats funny, I don't seem to recall that the members commented on here about any of the nonsense you spouted out there. As a matter of fact, I made it a point to say that we have a duty to remain in Iraq, now that we have destroyed the country. To leave it would be giving it up to the next militant faction that was strong enough to declare itself the new dictator.

Do you not want to see liberals as anything but what you have come to portray us as? We are not so leftist and close-minded as you make us out to be. If the right republican ran up against a dumb-ass democrat, I would vote conservative in a heart beat.


blueguy1051 60M

6/1/2006 7:58 pm

"Your first statement and assertion is simply a misrepresentation of the facts. I will thank you not to mischaracterize my statements and comments."

You bloody hypocrite! You write an entire blog in answer to my one paragraph comment, accusing me of saying things I never said, never intimated. You accuse me of saying things I didn't, and take general comments personally. If you had even a limited understanding of what I said, you'd realize that your reply was completely off base.

I find it very funny that you have become so irate that you are ranting at every commenter without even reading what they say. How pathetic.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/1/2006 8:26 pm

    Quoting TommyJ1977:
    Ok, I have to respond to a few of your comments and ask a few more questions myself. First of all, thank you for respecting the freedom to my opinions. However I do wonder why I was not labeled so quickly like alot of the other members were?

    I completely agree that you are not "a leftist, a liberal, a Marxist or a Blame America Firster." Hell, I'm definately not a blame america firster so I wouldn't accuse you of being one. I am also not a marxist and thereofore, yep, you guessed it, wouldn't throw that one around either. As far as the leftist and liberal, well I think we can both figure that one out.

    I also wonder how you figure all of us liberals stand where we do on the issues as you stated. Like, "We should cut and run in Iraq, We should raise taxes, the higher the better! We should appoint activist liberal judges to the bench. We should protect the right of women to kill their babies in their wombs because it is their body and their right to do so. We should sanction gay marriage and hell, while we're at it, let's also sanction marriage between any number of people, animals, etc. Why limit people? Oh, I almost forgot! Let's also trample all over the 2nd Amendment by registering and confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens." Thats funny, I don't seem to recall that the members commented on here about any of the nonsense you spouted out there. As a matter of fact, I made it a point to say that we have a duty to remain in Iraq, now that we have destroyed the country. To leave it would be giving it up to the next militant faction that was strong enough to declare itself the new dictator.

    Do you not want to see liberals as anything but what you have come to portray us as? We are not so leftist and close-minded as you make us out to be. If the right republican ran up against a dumb-ass democrat, I would vote conservative in a heart beat.
TommyJ1977 -

From what you have stated and the way you have comported yourself, I don't think you are as far to the left on our American political spectrum as you may think you are. You strike me as being more moderate but open-minded to the point of taking a conservative position on one issue while reserving the right to take a more liberal view on another issue. As a military man, you have been loyal to your Commander in Chief, but you have experienced first-hand the horrors of war and you understandably question the wisdom of our involvement in Iraq. I hope you will go and comment on my posting for today about our '39 Months In Iraq'. I would really appreciate your view of what is going on in Iraq and what we need to do going forward.

Getting back to your comment, I never accused or meant to accuse anybody of anything. I made my posting and people have been attacking me for what I have said and for the newspaper article I reprinted which discussed why some "leftists" hate Bush. I do stand by my original posting and I do happen to agree with M. D. Harmon, the author of that newspaper article. Individuals then started taking sides, attacking Bush mostly and some attacking me and M.D. Harmon for what we said about "leftists". They can do that, but I am not backing down from my view.

All the things I listed about typical liberal positions were not discussed in the commentary thread, but they represent the views of the liberal wing of the Democratic party. You go check it out. They may not want to be truthful with you about it, because many of the left's political agenda really doesn't match up with the views of the mainstream Democratic voter.

You may view yourself as a Democrat, but I'll bet you don't really agree with many of the positions held by the most liberal wing of the party. The Democratic party has changed over the years, as has the Republican party. Both parties are constantly creeping toward the left. There was a time when a southern Democrat was more conservative than the mainstream of our current Republican party. I don't know if you are old enough to remember Senator Sam Nunn, Democrat from Georgia. He served with honor and distinction for many years. His views and positions were much more conservative and moderate than most present-day Democrats and even many modern-day Republicans. That is my opinion anyway. Others may disagree.

Thanks for coming back. Please take a look at my June 1st posting about our first 39 months in Iraq. I really want to know what we should be doing over there as we go forward. You have seen the situation first-hand, and I am sure you have an definite opinion.


n0tatalker 39M

6/2/2006 4:51 am

    Quoting TTigerAtty:
    n0tatalker -

    No, my friend, I don't hate liberals. I just don't understand where they are coming from most of the time. I do enjoy debating the issues with all people. The best way to learn from others is to debate and discuss.

    Now, I have seen some anti-American leftist stuff on this website (some of it Marxist, resistance movement kind of stuff), most often written by someone from another country. While I don't hate these people, it is clear that they are being fed a lot of anti-American propaganda from the extreme left IMHO. With some individuals, it is always anti-American, as though this country can do and has done nothing right ever. They have their agendas too. Many would love to see the U.S. weakened militarily, economically and politically. Many times a particularly vitriolic anti-American viewpoint is stated, but then it goes unchallenged. Sometimes I see Americans jumping in on the bandwagon or avoiding the hot political issue altogether, I suppose because they just want to be popular or because they don't want to critically examine the difficult issues.

    Let's face it, many of the issues we debate and argue about are very difficult issues. And even as much as we all may believe we understand all sides of a particular issue, we probably don't as some background information is either too sensitive to release to the press/public or the press is just too lazy to dig it all out or the press (both conservative and liberal medias) have their own agendas.

    Make no mistake about it, I do not paint you with the anti-American, leftist, Marxist, resistance movement crowd. If I have misstated that, you have my apology, and I sincerely mean that.

    I respect you for you have served in the military, and you have seen from that perspective what this country is really about. You have my respect for serving. You debate political issues with interest and vigor. More Americans should. You have my respect for that. I know you will vote, and I can't help respect someone who studies the issues and then votes his own conscience.

    You will find, my friend, that I will tend to support conservative to moderate positions on most issues. I will occasionally frighten myself by coming down on the side of a progressive or liberal policy proposal. I, of course, do not support everything that has happened during two Bush terms, but I will not jump on the Bush-bashing bandwagon. I just think that weakens our President and America internationally when we do that. Whoever wins the Presidency in 2008 will receive my support and well wishes regardless of their political affiliation. I will pray for their success and the success of America.
l0ok... i basically agree with y0u on all c0unts... of course the Marxist resistance m0vement stuff d0es kinda make y0u sound a little crazy! but in a slightly m0re rational way then the other day. The thing is that because of the current world "consensus"... it would be far better f0r the c0untry... (and thus the w0rld) if we w0uld begin to stand united in opposistion our current administration. Even if only to begin the reconciliation with the fractured planet... hiliary clinton or john mccain... g0d the future l0oks bright... now if we can just get there!

ty


TTigerAtty 62M

6/2/2006 6:41 am

    Quoting flagg134:
    ~sigh~ I am being diplomatic and yet you have to resort to sarcasm and becoming flippant. Sir I am not hear to change your opinions on policy nor do I think that I ever could. I came back to show you that you are acting just like that which you hate. Perhaps you forget that we are on the same team in that we both want what is best for America. Though we have differing views about how to bring that into fruitition the goal is never the less the same. So to call anyone of us anti-americans is disrespectful. Perhaps actions like that is why some liberal minded folk have formed ill opinions of conservative people. Just something to think about feel free to bash upon me again if you like.

    "I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it." --Voltaire

    RF
I did not write this post to "bash" you. I wrote this post to point out why "leftists" love to "bash Bush" and/or "hate Bush". Most of the words in my post come from a newspaper article written by M. D. Harmon. I simply reprinted it and agreed with it. Nowhere in that post, did I say anything about ALL LIBERALS OR ALL LEFTISTS being anti-American. I have, however, seen SOME LIBERALS AND SOME LEFTISTS who talk very anti-American and act very anti-American. Some are from other non-American countries, but some are regrettably from our very own country.

So, again I ask you to please reread the posting. I stand by it, and I agree with the viewpoint of M. D. Harmon.

If you are a liberal, I am not saying that that automatically makes you anti-American. From everything you have written, I would say you are pro-American and deeply concerned about the directions and policies of America. We are definitely on the same team as far as that goes.

I will end by simply thanking you for continuing to come back and voice your views. Thanks for the reminder of Voltaire's quote. As a conservative/moderate, I believe in that principle as well. Sometimes when people care deeply about what is going on in their country, the discussion can become overheated. I apologize if I came on too strong or was too flippant with you. I will try to improve on that in subsequent postings. I see that you care deeply, and that, I suppose, is the most important thing anyway. Sometimes we will just have to respectfully agree to disagree.


RevJoseyWales 69M/66F
14393 posts
6/2/2006 7:37 am

Oh hell, you mean there are other marxists/communists out there besides me? I served 17 years Army (year in Nam), got a few ribbons, some lead, and a top secret clearance, which I still possess. Match pedigrees? Intellect indicates the ability to think for one's self. All I see here is the ability to follow blindly, and a willingness to employ the same character assination tactics that your heros use. Tell me, does the term facist mean anything to you? You seem to love to throw names around. Let's try that one on for size. Weak I know, but it's a start. We DO have more. It's kinda like taking a test, if you try enough, you might eventually get it right. But you DO know that one don't you. My invitation still stands, if you ever get tired of picking on women. Who by the way, seem to get the best of you in a discussion, and probably the worst of you in real life. But you DO know that too, don't you?

"McVeigh had the right idea, wrong address."

"This ain't Dodge City, and you ain't Bill Hickok."


TTigerAtty 62M

6/2/2006 8:26 am

    Quoting RevJoseyWales:
    Oh hell, you mean there are other marxists/communists out there besides me? I served 17 years Army (year in Nam), got a few ribbons, some lead, and a top secret clearance, which I still possess. Match pedigrees? Intellect indicates the ability to think for one's self. All I see here is the ability to follow blindly, and a willingness to employ the same character assination tactics that your heros use. Tell me, does the term facist mean anything to you? You seem to love to throw names around. Let's try that one on for size. Weak I know, but it's a start. We DO have more. It's kinda like taking a test, if you try enough, you might eventually get it right. But you DO know that one don't you. My invitation still stands, if you ever get tired of picking on women. Who by the way, seem to get the best of you in a discussion, and probably the worst of you in real life. But you DO know that too, don't you?
That's it! Shout me down ... or, at least, try to! Put extreme labels on me for voicing my viewpoints which, I take it, disagree with yours! Well, it ain't gonna work ol' boy! You have been here before with your ranting and raving and name calling. I've got your number!

Did I call you a Marxist or Communist? Are you one? You are saying that you are. I didn't say that. You came to my blog looking to pick a fight over my posting which takes a different point of view from Bush-bashers and Bush-haters. Go read my posting again. I stand by it.

You are but one more example of someone who would seek to bash me for supporting President Bush and his administrations. Have at it fella! Your ranting, raving and protestation faze me not!

For your further reading enjoyment and enlightenment, let me refer you to my June 1st post regarding Rush Limbaugh's commentary about Rep. John Murtha.

Have a great day and try to smile!


RevJoseyWales 69M/66F
14393 posts
6/2/2006 9:06 am

    Quoting TTigerAtty:
    That's it! Shout me down ... or, at least, try to! Put extreme labels on me for voicing my viewpoints which, I take it, disagree with yours! Well, it ain't gonna work ol' boy! You have been here before with your ranting and raving and name calling. I've got your number!

    Did I call you a Marxist or Communist? Are you one? You are saying that you are. I didn't say that. You came to my blog looking to pick a fight over my posting which takes a different point of view from Bush-bashers and Bush-haters. Go read my posting again. I stand by it.

    You are but one more example of someone who would seek to bash me for supporting President Bush and his administrations. Have at it fella! Your ranting, raving and protestation faze me not!

    For your further reading enjoyment and enlightenment, let me refer you to my June 1st post regarding Rush Limbaugh's commentary about Rep. John Murtha.

    Have a great day and try to smile!
Gee whiz scooter, I didn't shout. I just use some of the same tactics your heros use. Don't worry about standing by your post. People stand by the outhouse too. Doesn't make it smart. Just aromatic. I don't recall ranting and raving this time either. I save that for my place. You seem to have lost your cool tho'. Too much heat in the kitchen? And be of good cheer, you ALWAYS make me laugh. But for enlightenment, Beavis and Butthead do better. But you NEVER seem to answer my questions? Gee, I wonder why?

"McVeigh had the right idea, wrong address."

"This ain't Dodge City, and you ain't Bill Hickok."


TTigerAtty 62M

6/2/2006 9:33 am

    Quoting RevJoseyWales:
    Gee whiz scooter, I didn't shout. I just use some of the same tactics your heros use. Don't worry about standing by your post. People stand by the outhouse too. Doesn't make it smart. Just aromatic. I don't recall ranting and raving this time either. I save that for my place. You seem to have lost your cool tho'. Too much heat in the kitchen? And be of good cheer, you ALWAYS make me laugh. But for enlightenment, Beavis and Butthead do better. But you NEVER seem to answer my questions? Gee, I wonder why?
Having a nice day? I certainly hope so, my friend. I have nothing I really care to discuss with you based upon your two comments here. Please don't waste my time any further.

What do you have to say other than to hurl your insults at me?


RevJoseyWales 69M/66F
14393 posts
6/2/2006 10:02 am

    Quoting TTigerAtty:
    Having a nice day? I certainly hope so, my friend. I have nothing I really care to discuss with you based upon your two comments here. Please don't waste my time any further.

    What do you have to say other than to hurl your insults at me?
Ahh, it IS a beautiful day.

"McVeigh had the right idea, wrong address."

"This ain't Dodge City, and you ain't Bill Hickok."


rm_smosmof2 67M
3240 posts
6/2/2006 12:12 pm

What bothers me most about the conservatives who speak for all of us today is the arrogance so consistent in their point of view. There can be no other correct viewpoint.

I may not agree with all liberals, but I think their primary source of frustration is that their point of view is dismissed out of hand by the other side, who so clearly have been appointed by God to sit in judgement of the rest of us. The conservatives are correct, therefore everyone else is full of shit.

This article represents that viewpoint quite adaquetely.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/2/2006 1:22 pm

[blog smosmof2] -

Thanks for dropping by! Your first visit, is it not? Please be sure to stop by again! I welcome your participation although I have a feeling we may have differing political views.

Sometimes people mistake confidence and self-assuredness as arrogance. I feel confident of my beliefs, values and political views. I presume you are a confident person and belief strongly in your views. That is why you have commented.

I respect your confidence and willingness to get in here and mix it up. More Americans need to get involved with the many key issues we have going on. So, number one, regardless of whether you are a conservative, moderate or liberal, you have my respect for stating your opinion. Now, notice that I am not going to be condescending and label you 'arrogant' as you have label conservatives. I will simply label you as a 'confident' and 'concerned' citizen. Is that fair enough?

Now, I happen to personally believe that we can have extremes to the far right as we can have extremes to the far left. I noticed that you made your negative statements about conservatives, but failed to say anything in balance about extreme leftist views, their judgments of the right and their actions in opposition to the right. That's OK, because I know you were simply trying to balance my strong conservative comments.

Can we simply agree that what is fair for the goose is also fair for the gander? Can we agree that if extreme conservative/rightist views and policies may be dangerous for this country that in a like manner, extreme liberal/leftist views and policies may be dangerous as well? I think that makes some sense to most Americans, all except those on the extreme right and those on the extreme left.

Regarding the statement that "conservatives feel they have been appointed by God to sit in judgment of the rest of us", please understand that I am an individual and have been appointed by no one. I know of no conservative political leader or thought leader who claims to be annointed or appointed by God. I know there are liberals and leftists who want to paint us as religious zealots and fanatical fundamentalists. That's just another trick of the extreme left to scare moderates away from conservative ideas, and you damned well know it!

I hold no political office and never have. I read, I listen to the news and news analysis, and I debate issues with my friends. My views have also been formed by my upbringing in a family with a small business in a small town in Missouri. I attended college and then went to work for a Fortune 500 company. That is my personal background. I am not a silver spoon, rich Republican for sure.

The posting says what it says. I stand by it. I agree with the writer of the newspaper article. Read it again without getting angry, and please just watch and observe to see these things playing out in our modern day American politics.

I did not say you are full of shit. You made that statement in your comment. No conservative said you are full of shit. But, if you hold or follow some of these extreme leftist views, I would then simply question your judgment. I certainly would not follow you. But, I don't know what views you hold. Something raised your ire.

Do you own up to being a liberal or a leftist? If so, say it. Do you subscribe to the liberal views of raising taxes and government spending, bigger and bigger government, cutting and running from our involvement in Iraq now that a government is formed, abortion on demand, national registration of firearms and the ultimate confiscation of firearms owned by law-abiding citizens, et al? All of these are ideas promoted by the far left. So, if you are in favor of all these things then I would say you have very liberal ideas. Do you support these ideas and or you in fact a liberal? Or are you more of a moderate as most Americans are?

Sometimes people hear things that no one ever said. And this is a very difficult medium for debating politics.

Please feel free to come back and comment again. You may have the last word.


jakblack36 48M

6/2/2006 1:57 pm

I have Bush bashed on my blog for the majority of my blog. George W. is a war criminal in my opinion. The atrocities that have been committed by this administration will haunt this great nation well beyond our years. When I read the blog "40 reasons to hate Bush", I as a Bush hater was truly embarrassed. At least half of those 40 reasons are incorrect and others are truly stupid.

I would like to take this opportunity to share with you some of my back ground. I was a firefighter/paramedic on 9/11. I currently work as a paramedic in Chicago. I work with paramedics who volunteered to participate in the war. Not one of the three supports your viewpoints.

Blueguy1051, Kelli4u2dew, and TommyJ1977 have articulated credible replies. But you have done what your buddy Rush does on a daily basis. You have ignored the truth. There is much hatred being had these days across the aisle, because of this mentality. Understand this, it's my God given right to show hatred and dissent to a failed administration. It's your God given right, to support this failed administration. But in the end, we are both AMERICANS, EQUAL UNDER THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/2/2006 3:48 pm

    Quoting jakblack36:
    I have Bush bashed on my blog for the majority of my blog. George W. is a war criminal in my opinion. The atrocities that have been committed by this administration will haunt this great nation well beyond our years. When I read the blog "40 reasons to hate Bush", I as a Bush hater was truly embarrassed. At least half of those 40 reasons are incorrect and others are truly stupid.

    I would like to take this opportunity to share with you some of my back ground. I was a firefighter/paramedic on 9/11. I currently work as a paramedic in Chicago. I work with paramedics who volunteered to participate in the war. Not one of the three supports your viewpoints.

    Blueguy1051, Kelli4u2dew, and TommyJ1977 have articulated credible replies. But you have done what your buddy Rush does on a daily basis. You have ignored the truth. There is much hatred being had these days across the aisle, because of this mentality. Understand this, it's my God given right to show hatred and dissent to a failed administration. It's your God given right, to support this failed administration. But in the end, we are both AMERICANS, EQUAL UNDER THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
jakblack36 -

Welcome to my blog! You are another first-time visitor, I believe. My goodness! It would seem that when one posts something that takes on leftists, Bush-bashers and Bush-haters, one gathers quite a crowd who are anxious to comment!

You stated that you have 'bashed President Bush for the majority of your blog'. That's a lot of hate, vitriol and obsession, wouldn't you say? I'm just a political piker, then, by comparison to you. I make one post criticizing leftists and Bush-bashers, and suddenly I'm thrust into the major leagues with you and your buddies.

You are entitled to your opinions and your beliefs, and I am entitled to mine. That is one thing that we agree upon!

I take no credit for the list of "40 Reasons To Hate Bush". That list was copied from one of any number of websites by another blogger and I simply reprinted it. If there are errors, mischaracterizations, outright misrepresentations, I am not at all surprised. By your own admission, you as a professional Bush-basher have hereabove stated that "at least half of those 40 reasons are incorrect and others are truly stupid". Thank you for your intellectual honesty!

You state that you worked with three other paramedics and that not one of them supports my viewpoints. My viewpoints of what specifically? Let's get specific, before I comment in response. They may, in fact, disagree with all my views I suppose, but I haven't laid out all my views, and I doubt that you have contacted them to check issue by issue. So, perhaps it would be helpful to become a bit more specific. At any rate, I can find 3 people here where I live who would disagree with me. That's not a particular problem.

My friend, Rush Limbaugh and I are not ignoring the truth. We are pointing out the truth and the pieces of the story that often do not get reported by much of the drive-by liberal media which has their own agenda to promote.

My goodness, man, I agree that you can hate people if you want to. I'm not sure that I would characterize it as a 'God given right to show hatred and dissent to a failed administration' though. But, if that is how you see it, so be it!

Hate is a very strong word. Hatred can eat a person up. Hatred can cloud judgment. I have posted some strong criticism of leftists and particularly anti-American, leftist and Marxist some of whom are members of so-called international resistance movements. Now, be clear, you object to Bush policies for whatever reason, but you have not yet identified yourself as an extreme leftist who is anti-American. I do not believe that you are. I have not assumed that or said that to you.

I do not hate extreme leftists, Marxists nor the Blame America First crowd. I do question their judgment, and I will keep a sharp eye on what they are doing to undermine this country and the values I personally believe in. That is my right. But, I will do it without "HATING"!

Now, please go and consider whether it is healthy and effective for you to be driven in your political views by a seething hatred for the sitting President and Commander of the United States of America.

Just today, some educator, a responsible person with a PhD, introduced Sen. Charles Schumer before a commencement audience in the State of New York. I didn't catch whether it was before a college or high school commencement audience. He made a 'joking' comment that 'Charles Schumer would like to put a bullet between President Bush's eyes'. That's not funny, my friend, and that is the depth of the sick hatred from the left toward this president! Let me ask if you support such a stupid, sick, hate-filled comment? After all, you are the one who has said that you hate President Bush!


Twister2bed 47M
617 posts
6/2/2006 6:28 pm

Just today, some educator, a responsible person with a PhD, introduced Sen. Charles Schumer before a commencement audience in the State of New York. I didn't catch whether it was before a college or high school commencement audience. He made a 'joking' comment that 'Charles Schumer would like to put a bullet between President Bush's eyes'. That's not funny, my friend, and that is the depth of the sick hatred from the left toward this president! Let me ask if you support such a stupid, sick, hate-filled comment? After all, you are the one who has said that you hate President Bush!

I saw this too and the first thing that came to mind was a What if.
What if an educator or republican said something like this about a sitting liberal left democrat?
Can you say firestorm?
Oh yea I am new to your blog and I am also a Rush fan and ditto head so you can guess what side of the fence I'm on TTiger.
I agree with you the hate is getting out of control.
Liberal leftists like Michael Moore and fahrenheit 9/11 are at its core of hate I believe. Also in the news today you might have noticed Moore is being sued by a US Vet for outright misrepresentation and lies Moore used in F 9/11 to portray the vet as Anti Bush and Anti War when it was total BS. Its an interesting read if you haven't seen it yet.


jakblack36 48M

6/2/2006 8:20 pm

It's not funny that Charles Schumer made that statement. Mr. Bush should only receive such a fate after he has been given a trial, been found guilty by a jury of his peers, and sentenced to death by firing squad. Presuming of course that the Republicans lose the House and then Bush gets impeached. And what if he is found not guilty? Well then he should live out his days anyway he sees fit.

Most of these lefties on here weren't my buddies..until your blog. Actually, I have seen your post on Frogger1995, and was reading Kelly4u2dew's blog today. I knew you were on the other side of the aisle. In my opinion you brought alot of this stuff on yourself.

Let me say this about my hatred toward Bush. George W. is not the sole recipient to my bashing. I bash most republicans. Your buddy Rush has said things like "liberals should just come out and say who they are". I actually agree with him. The left does not have the unity of the right. This pisses me off too.

If your wondering why I am pissed and hate this administration, let me sum it up. Iraq, Katrina, Social Security, Medicare, tax cuts, education, you know the liberal list.


macg76 58G
8 posts
6/3/2006 1:01 am

Hello.
New to your blog. This was certainly an interesting read, especailly to follow all of the threads, and comments.
Perhaps, just a thought, but the use of the word "hate" in the title of the Harmon piece incited a few comments that led things somewhat astray? Would "despise" have worked?
Words, like communication, can be rather sticky, oftentimes.

For example, conservative. One definition (of several entries) is "Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change." Another would be "Tending to conserve; preservative: the conservative use of natural resources." I'm for conserving natural resources.

For example,liberal: " Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry." Another would be, "Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes." I am for more potatoes. So are Idahoans I suspect. Although I don't know any (Idahoans, not potatoes.)

Another would be, progressive: "Moving forward; advancing." Or, " Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods: a progressive politician; progressive business leadership." Not bad. Chnage is inevitable, why not try for better? Of course, defining "better" than becomes sticky.

Here's one that is troublesome, anti-American. Defined as "Opposed or hostile to the government, official policies, or people of the United States." What if one is opposed to official policies, but not the government or people of the United States? Can one be sorta' American?

I sense some challenges with using labels too freely. Our sitting President would not be considered a liberal, or leftist. But we do have the Department of Homeland Security. By some accounts this is an expansion of government. Perhaps even bigger government.

I think, in some circles, the Reverend Pat Robertson might be considered conservative. At times, he seems to profess a certain "intimacy" with the Divine that transcends a mere belief in the Divine in all of us.

Taxes are rather nebulous. Income? Estate? User? I can deal with, minimize, or legally avoid, income and estate taxes. I have not found a means to avoid (to name but a few): gas taxes, tire taxes, lodging taxes, restaurant taxes, cell phone and landline phone taxes, utility taxes. I'd prefer these to be cut next. No one addresses these taxes.

The definitions I cited are from Houghton Mifflin. I used the on-line version through Yahoo for expediency.

I guess I am a 'conservative-progressive-liberal.'

I'm for conserving the use of natual resources.
I'm favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods.
And, I'd like a liberal serving of potatoes, please.

"It's only a special interest when it's not your special interest."


TTigerAtty 62M

6/3/2006 5:28 am

    Quoting Twister2bed:
    Just today, some educator, a responsible person with a PhD, introduced Sen. Charles Schumer before a commencement audience in the State of New York. I didn't catch whether it was before a college or high school commencement audience. He made a 'joking' comment that 'Charles Schumer would like to put a bullet between President Bush's eyes'. That's not funny, my friend, and that is the depth of the sick hatred from the left toward this president! Let me ask if you support such a stupid, sick, hate-filled comment? After all, you are the one who has said that you hate President Bush!

    I saw this too and the first thing that came to mind was a What if.
    What if an educator or republican said something like this about a sitting liberal left democrat?
    Can you say firestorm?
    Oh yea I am new to your blog and I am also a Rush fan and ditto head so you can guess what side of the fence I'm on TTiger.
    I agree with you the hate is getting out of control.
    Liberal leftists like Michael Moore and fahrenheit 9/11 are at its core of hate I believe. Also in the news today you might have noticed Moore is being sued by a US Vet for outright misrepresentation and lies Moore used in F 9/11 to portray the vet as Anti Bush and Anti War when it was total BS. Its an interesting read if you haven't seen it yet.
Yes, I am following that story! Pretty sad when we get to the point that a responsible leader of young people stands before them and publicly says something so disgustingly hateful and irresponsible. I would never think to say such a thing about a President or any political leader I disagreed with. Their offices deserve our respect. We can work to elect different leaders if we want, but in the meantime, let's support our leaders. The rest of the anit-American world is taking swipes at them so I feel we should hang together as Americans, Dems and Republicans. That Michael Moore is one of the chief Bush-haters. That knucklehead is out of control, and I hope the veteran he misrepresented in his movie wins the $85 million lawsuit!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/3/2006 5:50 am

    Quoting jakblack36:
    It's not funny that Charles Schumer made that statement. Mr. Bush should only receive such a fate after he has been given a trial, been found guilty by a jury of his peers, and sentenced to death by firing squad. Presuming of course that the Republicans lose the House and then Bush gets impeached. And what if he is found not guilty? Well then he should live out his days anyway he sees fit.

    Most of these lefties on here weren't my buddies..until your blog. Actually, I have seen your post on Frogger1995, and was reading Kelly4u2dew's blog today. I knew you were on the other side of the aisle. In my opinion you brought alot of this stuff on yourself.

    Let me say this about my hatred toward Bush. George W. is not the sole recipient to my bashing. I bash most republicans. Your buddy Rush has said things like "liberals should just come out and say who they are". I actually agree with him. The left does not have the unity of the right. This pisses me off too.

    If your wondering why I am pissed and hate this administration, let me sum it up. Iraq, Katrina, Social Security, Medicare, tax cuts, education, you know the liberal list.
jakblack36 -

Keep talking impeachment, my friend! Talk it openly everyday in the liberal press! Please be truthful with the American public, for that is what your liberal Democrat leaders have planned should they take control of the U.S. House of Representatives. They have no positive agenda for this country, no agenda they will announce to the public. Why? Because they know the American public will not buy their liberal, leftist agenda. And yes, I do know the list of stuff they support like higher taxes, higher spending for every social program that comes along to make individual Americans more and more dependent upon Big Government and to buy votes from constituency groups, gay marriage, abortion on demand, a cut and run policy in Iraq, stacking the courts with liberal judges so they can gain their political agenda with activist court rulings if they cannot gain it through legislation, national gun registration and eventual confiscation, etc. etc. Why don't you guys lay it out there? Tell the American public what you will do when and if you take control? The American public knows who you are and what direction you would take this country and so when you assert more moderate policies, they just won't believe you any longer.

Your words not mine " I am pissed and hate this administration". Well, keep on hating. The hatred of the left is very evident to the American public. Americans are not haters, my friend. That is something you and your leftist leaders just don't understand about this country. Americans are looking for positive, can-do leaders, not whiners, complainers, apologists and haters. Find yourself a true moderate or conservative Democrat candidate, and we'll have a dmaned good horse race. But if you keep supporting the left-wing candidates of the Democratic party, you guys will be out of power for a long time.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/3/2006 6:19 am

    Quoting candy69sosweet:

    The only thing I'm angry about TT, is you calling me names. I am NOT a leftist. I do NOT hate the president. I'm NOT Bush-bashing, as you call it. I am only stating the truth. You ask how did this get off into Clinton anyway? Um, YOU brought him up, not me. Go back and read the first paragraph of your quoted story!

    How can you say you know my politics? Have we ever once discussed politics? What do you believe is my party affiliation? I'm glad the Dems lost in 2004, Kerry isn't fit to run our country. It's a shame that Bush lost in 2000, but managed to take the election anyway, after that fiasco in Florida. Who was the governor of Florida? Let me think a sec. OH! It was GW's BROTHER!

    Next year, would you please bring back the Cadbury Chocolate Easter Egg? Since you're the Easter Bunny, I think you should be able to fulfil that small request.

    Thanks!

    Kisses & Hugs
    ♥ Candy ♥


There you go again, Candy, going back to 2000! You people will never get over that, will you? The American lection process as defined by the U.S. Constitution worked, and it allowed us to work through a tough situation and elect a President in a very close election. Your candidate didn't win, and so you complain and perpetuate all sorts of conspiracy theories. That's just "sour grapes", and you know it!

"Only stating the truth", eh? It's damned peculiar that you Bush-bashers only "state the truth" when it seems to portray President Bush in a negative light. How about stating the "whole truth and nothing but the truth" when it comes to what this President and his administration has done for this country? Start stating the full truth, and perhaps, we will be able to have a serious and reasoned political discussion. (Actually, if we could just talk and hammer all this out face-to-face, I'll bet we agree more than we disagree.) I believe the Bush administration has done some good things for our country, and I believe there are things that could have been done better. Conservatives are not entirely happy with everything President Bush has done, but considering the left-wing wacko Democrats (e.g. Dean, Kerry, Kucinich, et al) representing the alternative, President Bush has looked pretty good to conservatives and moderates! You guys need a more moderate and balanced candidate that the American public can believe. Kennedy, Kerry, Gore, Dean, Hilary Clinton, Kucinich, Edwards are non-starters. We know they are liberals at heart. There are some moderate Democrats, but why won't the party put them forward? Hmmmm?

I miss those Cadbury Chocolate Easter Eggs too! You brought back memories of my youth. I will keep my eyes peeled and if I find them, I'll buy one for you and one for me.

I feel more like the rabbit that Elmer Fudd was always shooting at with his shotgun vs. The Easter Bunny! Damn! One little political post criticizing the left, and I have been under attack ever since! But, hey, I have really enjoyed it! You loveable liberals are definitely passionate! I'll give you all that! And you are involved in the American political process ... and no matter your views and whether we differ on policies, I think involvement is much better than apathy!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/3/2006 6:54 am

    Quoting macg76:
    Hello.
    New to your blog. This was certainly an interesting read, especailly to follow all of the threads, and comments.
    Perhaps, just a thought, but the use of the word "hate" in the title of the Harmon piece incited a few comments that led things somewhat astray? Would "despise" have worked?
    Words, like communication, can be rather sticky, oftentimes.

    For example, conservative. One definition (of several entries) is "Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change." Another would be "Tending to conserve; preservative: the conservative use of natural resources." I'm for conserving natural resources.

    For example,liberal: " Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry." Another would be, "Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes." I am for more potatoes. So are Idahoans I suspect. Although I don't know any (Idahoans, not potatoes.)

    Another would be, progressive: "Moving forward; advancing." Or, " Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods: a progressive politician; progressive business leadership." Not bad. Chnage is inevitable, why not try for better? Of course, defining "better" than becomes sticky.

    Here's one that is troublesome, anti-American. Defined as "Opposed or hostile to the government, official policies, or people of the United States." What if one is opposed to official policies, but not the government or people of the United States? Can one be sorta' American?

    I sense some challenges with using labels too freely. Our sitting President would not be considered a liberal, or leftist. But we do have the Department of Homeland Security. By some accounts this is an expansion of government. Perhaps even bigger government.

    I think, in some circles, the Reverend Pat Robertson might be considered conservative. At times, he seems to profess a certain "intimacy" with the Divine that transcends a mere belief in the Divine in all of us.

    Taxes are rather nebulous. Income? Estate? User? I can deal with, minimize, or legally avoid, income and estate taxes. I have not found a means to avoid (to name but a few): gas taxes, tire taxes, lodging taxes, restaurant taxes, cell phone and landline phone taxes, utility taxes. I'd prefer these to be cut next. No one addresses these taxes.

    The definitions I cited are from Houghton Mifflin. I used the on-line version through Yahoo for expediency.

    I guess I am a 'conservative-progressive-liberal.'

    I'm for conserving the use of natual resources.
    I'm favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods.
    And, I'd like a liberal serving of potatoes, please.

    "It's only a special interest when it's not your special interest."
Thanks very much for dropping by and leaving your comment! I guess I have learned a lot from this posting and all the comments I have received. You make some excellent points, and I will need to learn to be more judicious with the use of labels. The labels seem to 'hook' people and then we get into to heated exchanges. It is very hard to have a good political discussion in this medium. We tend to leave short comments that don't fully represent our complete political positions. Labels are convenient and so we all use them. I will try to be more careful in future political postings and comments. Perhaps, single issue discussions would limit us to getting into the details and various positions for that particular issue.

People are passionate about their American politics and that is a good thing. We just need to become more precise in our dialogue and more civil in our tone. I will work on that!

Thanks again for dropping by! Please come again!


pretty_blue_eyes 38F
2091 posts
6/3/2006 12:54 pm

Well I believe that there are always going to be someone who doesn't agree with what the President or Congress is doing at some point or another while in office. You can't please everyone 100% of the time. If you voted, good, you have a reason to complain if that is what you wish. If you didn't, then shut up, you have no right to say anything.

Also, as anyone thought about all the media blitzes and frenzies are going on that is due to propaganda? Some don't like Bush, so they are using everything, every mis-step to trash him some more. Just remember, its not just the President's fault some of these things are going on. *winks*


thumbU2 56M

6/3/2006 2:21 pm

My opinion is the republicans and democrats have outlived their usefulness in the leadership in america at all levels of government.Of course there is no viable 3rd party and so we are seriously screwed.I've never heard any mainstream news agency mention bluntly nepotism in the white house and how this was achieved.Both parties have turned americans around the world into targets and those that target us are here and they are not leaving.Sept.11,2001 never should have happened.The dems and rep are to busy playing stupid,finger pointing politics,building monuments to their own incompetent dumbass's,lieing and ignoring the common cause that has sustained us in world war and conflict in past decades.Immigration built america and will destroy america along with incompetent,self serving,corrupt,politicians that lack wisdom and the ability to lead intelligently.We the people are given very poor choises and our collapse is emminent.God help us but don't count on it.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/3/2006 2:28 pm

    Quoting sparkee58:
    to guote the great Bill Maher

    "What color is the sky in your world."

    I refer you to a "Foreign Affairs" article in the May/June 2006 issue titled "How The British Quit Mesopotania" by Joel Rayburn.
    It's amazing how we fell into the same trap as the British did courtesy of oil stockholders.
    Also in that same issue is "Seeing Baghdad, Thinking Saigon" by Stephen Biddle.
    The article by the ex-CIA agent Paul Pillar, Unheeded Intelligence" you should find enlightening, also.

    This quarterly is about as nonpartisan as you can get and the prognosis doesn't look good for Mr. Mission Accomplished.

    I think history is the nightmare from which he is tryng to awake.

    Nothing personal, but you are like the old man in Dostoevsky's 'Crime and Punishment' that beats the dying horse because it won't pull the cart.
    This particular horse can't pull the cart.
    Quit beating.
sparkee58 -

I will try to take the time to find and read these articles. I am not familiar with "Foreign Affairs", but it sounds like there will be some articles of interest.

The 'mission was accomplished' three months after we went into Iraq. Now, 39 months later, we are losing an average of about 55-60 military men and women per month and the insurgency attacks are not subsiding. I did another post '39 Months In Iraq - What Now?'

To be honest with ya', it has become hard to 'keep the faith'. I have done a lot of soul-searching as I watched Memorial Day programming on TV last weekend.

I do feel like that old man who is beating the dying horse. I cannot imagine this world if our coalition forces do not win this war in Iraq, help them stabilize their government and stay with them to rebuild that country. It seems to me we owe them that. Like Colin Powell said to George Bush, "Mr. President, if we break it, we own it."

If we cut and run as we did in Vietnam, then all the looneys of the world will see it as their 'green light' to create mischief.

This is just a big fucking mess! We have Iraqi provinces where peace is restored, but the insurgents and terrorists are determined and they are concentrating their efforts. Will we be as determined as the terrorists and insurgents?

How can we get this mess resolved? Do these insurgents not feel they will be represented? Do they know nothing more than running around and blowing shit up? Did we fail to recognize the mentality in that country? 12 million came out to vote in December. That was encouraging! But these damned attacks just continue!

I need a drink! Thanks for commenting!


LilSquirt_4mfm 67M/67F
3394 posts
6/3/2006 4:25 pm

TTigger .. Hiya

I fully support what you say here ...... we always figgered that the left feed on and are driven totally by "hate" ... never a constuctive start on anything.

Also, the press (90.4% left, 4.2% right, and balance claim to ne in middle ..... that's according to left cnn yet) ... these people determine what the public sees ..... and comes to believe .... it's less what they say, and more about the volume of anti stuff they show, or slant vs. the positive or other side of things.

The "hate" shows through ...we did an experiment to prove a theory ... turned sound off ... watched .... you can "feel" the hate given off ... driving them ...... try it some time.

Will return to your blog and go over it more soon as have some time. I must do some stuff like this, not just the silly sexy stuff we do mainly here. There are a few "strong" posts at the very begining of blog ... like especially Terror "Smell the Coffee, Folks", Sheriff Joe, Iran, Middle East etc, but have not kept up but you are inspiring me to refocus on that.

We also find that dor the left, "the end justifies the means" (thus will do or say Anything to achieve objective) ... while righies are sadly naive in practicing the "means matters" .... like a "street fighter, with /no rules against Marquis of Queensbury"
Thanks for inspiration and for calling "them" exactly for what they are.

May I copy this post and save it for my reference?? ... will not re post it, it would be just for me.

LilJessicaSQuirt
♥§ΩuirT♥er & MFM Tail§


LilSquirt_4mfm 67M/67F
3394 posts
6/3/2006 5:38 pm



"If you believe in Jesus, ask yourself this: who would Jesus bomb?"


Prolly not .......but, ...... a gaggle of lefties might tempt him .... just for a brief moment


Now, .... be fair, (ya, right ... dream on lil) ..........

Ask Mohammed (take your choice, #1 or #2) .....that Very Same Question


ThaRealLiv 43M

6/3/2006 11:36 pm

The Problem doesn't lie in tha decisions made by political leaders, but rather stems from tha nature of politics itself. Once a president has been elected, tha people need to realize that he is where he is due to tha decision of a majority of AMericans. People are so quick to throw labels on people and categorize people's politicqal views, due to where they feel they sit on tha political spectrum. A leader should never be thought of as right or left. While he may belong to a political party, who scholars have categorized along a left to right political spectrum, a politicians policies need not fall along any particular point along that spectrum. That is to say, a politician belonging to a rightwing party, is as capable of adhering to leftwing policies as anyone else.
What is important, and what all voters need to realize, is that tha leader has been elected by tha majority. ASide from that, no one outside tha political atmosphere can ever see tha depth of what is going on in tha political world, that the people who are sworn in to immerse themselves thoroughly into this world.

For this reason, your leaders should be respected, no matter who they are, how much you disagree with their policies, or what anybody else says about them. They are people just like anyone else.
They're job is likely harder than yours.


SleekIcilyVarix 41M

6/4/2006 11:08 am

Hatred, fear, and paranoia? Those are the only possible reasons for having a negative opinion of Bush? You're kidding, right?

First, not all liberals resort to useless mudslinging. I'm not a Bush fan but I don't think Hitler, Satan, or evil-genius are appropriate.
I know a lot of liberals. I am one and choose to associate with them. All of them are entitled to their well-informed opinions, and none of them are prone to reducing their opinions to hate-slinging.
I just read the list of 40 reasons to hate Bush. Three or four of them were just plain silly. The rest sounded like and ARE legitimate reasons to be unhappy with the Bush administration.
The thing is, Bush has EARNED his sorry approval ratings.
To get them as low as they are, it's not just leftists and liberals voicing dissatisfaction...it's moderates, democrats and republicans alike, and even some of the folks in the far right.
A liberal or leftist hatred-spreading plot for advancing liberal causes? Roughly 65% of Americans agree (based on latest approval ratings) that Bush is doing a lousy job. Call me crazy, but I'm thinking that maybe, just maybe, it's because...he's doing a lousy job.


mustang1960a2 56M
49 posts
6/4/2006 11:37 am

Thank You


mustang1960a2 56M
49 posts
6/4/2006 12:18 pm

So you try to tell people the truth. No good deed go's unpunished. The corollary of the old "Soviets" believing their own propaganda and today's American left believing theirs is extraordinary.

Who doesn't know that Saddam had WMD's ? They are in some sort of bizarre denial; All based on a return to power to tell us how to live, as you said.

Good try, you may educate some with your well thought rhetoric. Thank's again.

Jeff


whats4dessert2 49M

6/4/2006 12:26 pm

Wow, this post really polarized a lot of people and seems to have built so rifts between some people that I've thought to have previously gotten along (although they've had differing opinions and political views).

Now, I'm going to give my perspective as someone who is NOT an American. I was a huge fan of Ronald Reagan in my youth. Ronald Reagan was a leader. I certainly did not understand all of the issues and challenges facing the USA at the time so my like for Reagan was superficial at best. Since Reagan I don't think that the USA has HAD a leader. Bush Sr. Clinton, GWB there isn't a good leader amongst them.

GHWB was far less than adequate, where Clinton, although charismatic and a master at spinning the press was really, at least in my mind, supported by an artificial economic boom propped up by the .com myth we all so willingly bought in to. On the flipside I believe he did the morally correct thing by defying the UN and going into Bosnia. GWB, has had a number of serious issues dumped on him, the fallout from the .com bust, 9/11 etc. but at the same time he's created a number of his own (most recently some serious forth amendment violations).

I tend not to like ideological or theological arguments, thinking or positions. They create rifts like I'm seeing in this post. What I can say is that the media in both of our countries have much explaining to do for the biased level of reporting that they provide in their 8 second sound bites. Most people in this thread seem very well informed on their opinions and I’ve seen enough of you to know that you are NOT “average” America. Most people here are probably in the top percentiles of the IQ range and are generally well read. The issue is, is that MOST Americans (and Canadians) are not.

There are no incorrect opinions only misinformed ones. If a person does their reading and examines both political views and chooses a position then they’re not wrong. They simply have an opinion. Right and wrong are abstracts defined by human kind. To me it’s like looking into a room from two different windows. People may see the exact same thing but their personal perspective provides them a different view and a different perception. For example, some would say that Harry S. Truman needlessly murdered 10s of thousands of Japanese civilians when he dropped the bomb. Others would say that what Truman did was necessary because his responsibility was not to the Japanese citizenry but to American soldiers and the American war effort.

The other issue that we have is that we form our opinions in a myopic context of “today” and do not always consider the situation that existed when certain decisions were made. If I were to look at my own country’s position on Afghanistan and how the media is spinning public opinion away from support on that war because a number of our soldiers have been killed lately, I see that many of the people I know are forgetting why Canada is there. True, we joined the war on terror in Afghanistan to try to route our OBL and to bring down the Taliban, but, what if we were to leave now? What would happen then? Well, we would see the rise of an even more brutal Taliban that would be, unbelievably more oppressive than the first. All of the champions of exiting that war often are the champions of human rights yet they forget the summary executions of women and men in Kabul’s marquis soccer stadium. They forget that women had no rights under the Taliban and were relegated to a status lower than livestock. (I’d suggest that EVERYONE download Under the Veil and have a look at it)

I don’t even want to get in to 9/11 but I will touch on the fact that much of the mainstream media has pointed the finger at the Bush Administration for dropping the ball on this one and ignoring intelligence reports. The fact of the matter is that those media reports are probably right. However, the sad part is, is that it is not widely reported that at least as many if not more balls were dropped prior to that by the previous administration. This is not to say that two wrongs make a right but it is representative of a painfully biased media.

The media is further incriminated in the whole Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky issue. That entire issue was spun in the media as “Clinton’s personal life is his personal life and that should not enter into it. The man should not be impeached because he had a girl give him a hummer.” The unfortunate thing about this type of reporting is that Bill Clinton was not impeached because a girl blew him. Bill Clinton was impeached because he committed felony perjury by denying Paula Jones her right to due course of justice (a right that every American is entitled too) by lying about a pattern of relationships and behavior in sworn depositions.

Now, on to Iraq. The UN is, at best, an inept organization and, at its worst a corrupt body ruled by tin pot dictators and men and women that make too much money and do far too little for this world. The organization is even more handicapped because it really is powerless to do anything material without consent of its true governing body, the Security Council. To add to this problem is the ridiculous anachronism of the veto powers of a select group of members on that council. This veto power is often more used for political gain on foreign policy issues than it is for the betterment of the world at large.

Now, to start things off, I think that the Bush Administration was absolutely correct in going into Iraq with the WMD evidence as presented at the UN. Here you have a dictator who is bent and bound on the destruction of the US. He is SAYIING he doesn’t have WMD but is absolutely representing that he does by thwarting UN inspectors at every turn.

Where the Bush Administration blew it was by fabricating additional evidence. I think that the US had more than enough “moral” authority based on the UN’s inability and unwillingness to enforce their own resolutions that Saddam had repeatedly broken and there is enough creditable evidence that Iraq moved its WMD stockpiles to Syria as late as 2002. Again though, this is an evaluation in hindsight.

I know I’m rambling a bit here but I think that my general point is that for ALL presidents and world leaders. We all have the fortunate benefit of hindsight. There seems to be a fair amount of ideological thinking in this thread and I know I’m a little guilty of it too, but, for the most part I think that most people here on both sides of the issue are quite intelligent and have thought their positions through.

Unfortunately, most people in the world, and especially North America, don’t.

The very office of the view of the presidency has changed since the advent of instant media. Even when Ike was in office the media wasn’t really at the beck and call of the American public. Then came the Kennedy’s and everything changed. The story of the family, the growth of television, the appealing looks of both Jackie and John elevated the office of the presidency to a regal status. However, there was a price to pay for that. In order to preserve the myth of Kennedy’s Camelot certain “measures” of secrecy had to be put in place to hide some of the darker side of the story. Kennedy was no better or no worse than anyone before him. It’s just that he had the tools to put the good of his presidency under a microscope and by doing so had to take evasive measures from the press on some other issues.

Ever since the Kennedy Assassination was brought into our living rooms we’ve seen a sea change in the mass media. When Kennedy was shot, television was just really reaching critical mass in the United States and Canada and North America sat glued to their TVs getting up to the second VISUAL reports. This was a huge difference from the past where people would have to huddle around the family radio or wait till the next days newspaper to seek out current events (yes, people used to HAVE to read to figure stuff out).

The Kennedy Assassination played out in the living rooms of North America better than any soap opera that the networks could have written. We had murder, intrigue, revenge and, then hot on the heals, conspiracy. This coupled with the Camelot Myth made the networks clue in to something. News ceased to be about the information and became about the story. News was no longer a source of current events and knowledge. It became a source of entertainment. Could CBS, ABC or NBC keep the viewers compelled longer? “Let’s try to entertain the masses not inform them.”

Since then we’ve seen a shocking decline in the quality of broadcast news. When Paris Hilton gets more airplay than places like Durfur, when the North American Public stayed glued to their tv sets while Al Cowlings drove down the highway in OJ’s Bronco while people in Somalia were starving we knew three was something wrong yet we continued to watch.

Now our news is filled, not so much with factual information but a series of 8 second editorials that provide the North American Public and our reduced attention spans with little info and lot’s of uninformed opinions.

I know I’ve gone off on a lot of tangents here but in answer to the original question, I think that Leftists hate Bush for the same reasons that others hated Clinton. They hate these people because the POTUS acts as a focal point for a difference in moral, political or ethical ideology. Furthermore, they are poisoned by a media that seeks to entertain rather than inform.

Discussions like this one I think are great because I think most folks here ARE informed. I think that the don’t take things at face value but let’s try to keep it civil. If I like Bush as a president or I don’t, let’s not turn it into the school yard where we look at each other and say “if you don’t like my friend I’m not going to play with you anymore”

Ok, I know I jumped around on this a bit and I’m no longer sure what my point is but, in the spirit of media sound bites “can’t we all just get along?”


ComradeNumeroUno 60M
22 posts
6/4/2006 12:35 pm

TT,why do you hate America?


sillyperv 54M

6/4/2006 1:58 pm

There was so much innuendo about Clinton and sex because the Right couldn't find anything actually illegal to pin on him and they weren't going to make the bombing of a baby food factory and issue.

Ah, the "self loathing" angle - perfected by the protectors of Isreal with the "self hating jew" brand. This argument supposes that any criticism stems from an irrational or insane level of self hatred and is not based on "fact" and is therefore easily dismissed. Criticism = self hatred = insanity = ignored. A great stifler of debate.

The second paragraph is nonsense, which is true of most generalizations. "Progressivism" and the "Perfection of people is a mish mash of notions that I've never read in any Left magazine. Creating a false position to shoot it down is the weapon of sophist.

As for your "2 cents". The is no liberal media. There is no liberal elite. The Media is a conglomerate that shares the interest of the ruling class: bottom line. Profit. You don't shit where you eat. Read Rolling Stone and the issues with the election. The Liberal media didn't peep. And yes, John F. Kennedy did the same thing in 1960. It was wrong then also. The elite own the country and need the media to "stay on message" And this isn't done with pressure you just hire people that think like you do. As for talking down to: Limbaugh, Coulter, and the other leading media lap dogs deserve it. Actually, what would you consider to be the "liberal media"? The Washington Post. The New York Times. It's not from their politics. Criticism of Bush has come very slowly and again in a very narrow parameters. I think these papers get branded liberal because they consider Maplethorpe to be an artist. That Waiting for Godot" is brilliant. That art and literature is more than Rockwell and Grisham (and I apologize to Rockwell fans, while I think of him as a craftsman and not an "artist" he doesn't deserve to be dumped in with Grisham who is a hack) - I digress.

As for the elections - read the Rolling Stone article. It's online.

This is such a terribly written, specious, bowl of spittle. To much of the right's arguements are like the article above. They have to be, because so much of what they are trying to defend is indefensible.

American's have voted "Republican" on a regular basis presents the notion that a win means "mandate". Where as all poles show a country divided in vote, attitude, ideals, economics and hair colour. First past the post doesn't mean the majourity supports you, it just means you got enough votes to win. 51 votes to 49 is not a landside.

Defending us against terrorists - if you want to stop terrorist attacks get the American army out of the holy land. The acts of terror have had nothing to do with hating American values, freedom or democracy. Osama has been consistent since he was working with the CIA fighting the Russians - "Get the infidels out of the holy land" Imagine a foreign army base in Washingtion or on Mount Rushmore.

And now the caveat: Osama is a wack job. He is an ideologue driven by a messanic vanity. Regardless of his position on the militarization of the holy land by foreigners, terrorism and most violence is the weapon of the weak and evil.

And as for hating George Bush. Honestly, he'd probably would be a fun guy to have a beer with as Reagan would have been a great Grandfather - tell us again granpa -giggle- how you and Custer took the Sante Fe Trail and Clinton would take you to the best orgies, but that doesn't make him a leader. He is functionally illiterate due to intelligence or biology (dyslexia) I don't know, but he has no connection to the words he speaks. Listen to him. Watch how he accentuates his points and notice how his timing is off, how he is faking it. Take a few acting classes and this will become very clear. He becomes easy to ridicule.

But the hatred is not for George Bush, it's for the policies of the administration. It is directed at Bush because he is the front man. An illegal war - in violation of the Geneva Convention, based on lies - weapons of mass distruction, Suddam Hussain was behind 911 - a secular Muslim hated by Osama, an economy stretched to the breaking point on the backs of people who get no benefit from massive tax cuts and Dick Cheney, fronted by propoganda machine using the glorious, founding beliefs of the American nation has a tendency to piss people off. No one likes to be lied too. No one likes hypocracy. No one likes to be hated because of a government that doesn't represent it's interests or goals. Hatred. I'm sure there is, but to say it's against George Bush is to obscure the reality and avoid genuine debate.

And that's my 1.87 cents - I'm Candian. You lose on the exchange.


papyrina 50F
21133 posts
6/4/2006 2:04 pm

smiles with a twinkle in my eye


I'm a

and
i'm here to stay


sillyperv 54M

6/4/2006 2:42 pm

Okay, I have to get this in before the shit storm. I said "protectors of Isreal". I have to define this because I'll come off as an anti semite which I would loathe. Isreal has a fundamental, human right to exist as a nation. I extend that right to Palestine and Palestinians. "Protectors of Isreal" refers to those who defend Isreal against any criticism of their foreign policy. I THINK that too much of their policy is dysfundtional and counter productive with regards to Palestine.

I was glib and irresponsible. I wrote this is a blur - I love politics - but at no tune do I wish to offend, or denigrate a state, nation or peoples . Call me an idiot. A doofus. A big noogie. Whatever. I just don't want to be called a racist.

And the first fucker who says "Fruedian Slip" get a wedgie. Frued, while the founder of modern psychologly, was also a nurotic with issues about sex, his parents and borscht.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/4/2006 2:49 pm

    Quoting pretty_blue_eyes:
    Well I believe that there are always going to be someone who doesn't agree with what the President or Congress is doing at some point or another while in office. You can't please everyone 100% of the time. If you voted, good, you have a reason to complain if that is what you wish. If you didn't, then shut up, you have no right to say anything.

    Also, as anyone thought about all the media blitzes and frenzies are going on that is due to propaganda? Some don't like Bush, so they are using everything, every mis-step to trash him some more. Just remember, its not just the President's fault some of these things are going on. *winks*
Thanks for dropping by, PBE! Sheesh, I've started quite a firestorm here! People are passionate about politics! More comments on this one post than anything else I have ever posted! Take care!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/4/2006 2:56 pm

    Quoting rm_MariGrrl:
    I just wanted to stop back in and let you know that I couldn't agree more with this response. It is by far the most concise, purposeful response I've seen you make thus far.

    Although I do consider myself a liberal (I agree with many of the democratic party's views). I, along with many other liberals, do not support a immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Colin Powell is a wise man and I believe your quote of his sums this entire situation up best.

    What got my "ire" and led to my earlier comments was not your stand on the issues. In fact very little in this post has been about specific issues. I am simply tired of the labels and feel that over generalizations and assumptions are the main causes of this giant rift between the parties. I do not feel that it is anyone's place to call into question another's love for their country.

    The main reason I watch this war so closely is because so many lives, including those I hold most dear, hang in the balance. It would tear me apart if my daughter came to only know her father through photographs and memories. When this is all said and done can we weep upon these heros graves and believe it wasn't in vein? I hope with all my heart that we can bring freedom to these people. I didn't want us to go, and I don't like us being there now. But, we are there. Many have died for freedom. I pray that someday that freedom will come.

    I see now that you need to believe in their success. This response allowed your compassion for our brave young men and women to shine through.

    Instead of this perpetual flinging of party lines and misconceptions (on both sides). Wouldn't all our energy be better spent supporting those lives that hang in the balance? I would ask you and everyone who so passionately responded to this post... What have you done for our troops lately?

    There are organizations all across the country designed to show our love to America's best. If you are not aware of an organization please e-mail me and I will help you find one so that you too can do your part.
Let us put aside political differences, liberals, moderates and conservatives, and just resolve to develop a sound plan for extracting ourselves and leaving the Iraqis with a unity government and a strong military to protect it from the mischief that will be done for decades in that country. We have broken it (although we did remove their butcherous dictator). Now, let us resolve to work with the Iraqis and other willing countries to repair the country. I hope we can leave it much better than we found it. I feel we now owe them that.

I will pray for your husband to return safely. He is a true American hero in my eyes!


MouldFeltsCivic 60M
11 posts
6/4/2006 5:53 pm

Is this where the wacko's missing, RUSH or SEAN, reach out to each other on the weekends, or late hours.


mustang1960a2 56M
49 posts
6/4/2006 6:31 pm

Notice how the argument frome the right is sane and reasonable and the argument from the left is insane and insulting ?


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 4:51 am

    Quoting thumbU2:
    My opinion is the republicans and democrats have outlived their usefulness in the leadership in america at all levels of government.Of course there is no viable 3rd party and so we are seriously screwed.I've never heard any mainstream news agency mention bluntly nepotism in the white house and how this was achieved.Both parties have turned americans around the world into targets and those that target us are here and they are not leaving.Sept.11,2001 never should have happened.The dems and rep are to busy playing stupid,finger pointing politics,building monuments to their own incompetent dumbass's,lieing and ignoring the common cause that has sustained us in world war and conflict in past decades.Immigration built america and will destroy america along with incompetent,self serving,corrupt,politicians that lack wisdom and the ability to lead intelligently.We the people are given very poor choises and our collapse is emminent.God help us but don't count on it.
Wow! Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment! We have our modern day problems, agreed. But our grandparents and parents had problems during their generation. We will survive as Americans if we pull together. So, we need to all follow the issues, support good men and women for elected office and then make sure we vote. When we feel most like throwing up our hands in disgust is exactly when we need to dig in and get more involved. The voters of Indiana have good American horse sense and I know the country can depend upon you guys to be involved in solutions to problems!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 5:06 am

    Quoting rm_robotdevil3:
    These insurgents have recognized an opportunity to show us up. It is as I've heard Al Qaeda reps say: GWB is the best recruiting agent they could ask for. We have gone into injun country and we are now surrounded by blood thirsty injuns. Go figure.

    The sane among us tried to tell the GWB administration this would happen at the beginning, but they wouldn't listen. They have made the world a much more terrible place to live thanks to their misguided idealism. See my post on the estimated death toll since the invasion: 100K iraqis.

    If you believe in Jesus, ask yourself this: who would Jesus bomb?

    (The Old Testament god and God as revealed by Mohammed? Now THOSE are some ass kicking, civilization-destroying gods)
Thanks for stopping by to comment! But, why do the leftist hate so much? Is it just their nature? Is it GWB? Is it sour grapes over the 2000 election? Is it loss of power and frustration that people are turning their backs on the leftist ideas?

To your comment about the insurgents - The insurgents and terrorists are now fighting the Iraqis and their new unity government. We are now supporting and training the Iraqi security forces. The insurgents and terrorists want the ideas of unity, freedom and democracy to fail for many reasons I suppose. They want to show the U.S. up, they can't get along and work together between their divided sects, and outsiders have come in to keep the ideals of freedom and democracy from spreading because these ideas and concepts represent a threat to other regimes in the region. I believe we are their to support freedom, democracy and a better life someday for the Iraqis. Strategically, it is also in the world's interest (not just ours) that the mideast region be more stable and less volatile (oil supplies to the world, elimination of terrorist safe-havens and always the issue of Israel's existence in the Arab world). 39 months into the effort, we are seeing the resolve of insurgents and terrorists to stop freedom, democracy and a better life for the Iraqis. Remember that 12 million did come out and vote in December, so we can see from that many more Iraqis want a new and better way!

Again, thanks for commenting. Don't lose faith in America!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 5:15 am

    Quoting LilSquirt_4mfm:
    TTigger .. Hiya

    I fully support what you say here ...... we always figgered that the left feed on and are driven totally by "hate" ... never a constuctive start on anything.

    Also, the press (90.4% left, 4.2% right, and balance claim to ne in middle ..... that's according to left cnn yet) ... these people determine what the public sees ..... and comes to believe .... it's less what they say, and more about the volume of anti stuff they show, or slant vs. the positive or other side of things.

    The "hate" shows through ...we did an experiment to prove a theory ... turned sound off ... watched .... you can "feel" the hate given off ... driving them ...... try it some time.

    Will return to your blog and go over it more soon as have some time. I must do some stuff like this, not just the silly sexy stuff we do mainly here. There are a few "strong" posts at the very begining of blog ... like especially Terror "Smell the Coffee, Folks", Sheriff Joe, Iran, Middle East etc, but have not kept up but you are inspiring me to refocus on that.

    We also find that dor the left, "the end justifies the means" (thus will do or say Anything to achieve objective) ... while righies are sadly naive in practicing the "means matters" .... like a "street fighter, with /no rules against Marquis of Queensbury"
    Thanks for inspiration and for calling "them" exactly for what they are.

    May I copy this post and save it for my reference?? ... will not re post it, it would be just for me.

    Lil♥Jessica♥SQuirt
    ♥§ΩuirT♥er & MFM Tail§
Jessica ... Thanks for dropping by to comment! I appreciate your perspective from Canada and I was interested in CNN's own acknowledgment of the left-leaning bias in just their own organization. At least, they are truthful and that's a good start. Let's face it, our journalism and communications schools are turning out mostly young people who buy the arguments of the left because that is what they are fed in school and being young, they are idealistic as we all were when young. As we grow older, we form different views as to what policies work and what policies don't. You may copy, reprint or do anything you wish with my post. I will drop by and read some of your political posts also.

My compliments to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on their nabbing of the 17 terrorists who were plotting the bombings in Toronto. Good work between them and our FBI to identify a couple more "bad guys" in Georgia! We in America appreciate our neighbors to the north!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 5:52 am

    Quoting ThaRealLiv:
    The Problem doesn't lie in tha decisions made by political leaders, but rather stems from tha nature of politics itself. Once a president has been elected, tha people need to realize that he is where he is due to tha decision of a majority of AMericans. People are so quick to throw labels on people and categorize people's politicqal views, due to where they feel they sit on tha political spectrum. A leader should never be thought of as right or left. While he may belong to a political party, who scholars have categorized along a left to right political spectrum, a politicians policies need not fall along any particular point along that spectrum. That is to say, a politician belonging to a rightwing party, is as capable of adhering to leftwing policies as anyone else.
    What is important, and what all voters need to realize, is that tha leader has been elected by tha majority. ASide from that, no one outside tha political atmosphere can ever see tha depth of what is going on in tha political world, that the people who are sworn in to immerse themselves thoroughly into this world.

    For this reason, your leaders should be respected, no matter who they are, how much you disagree with their policies, or what anybody else says about them. They are people just like anyone else.
    They're job is likely harder than yours.
Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment! Also, my sincere thanks to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for nabbing 17 terrorists recently. The RCMP also coordinated with our FBI so that we could nab two more "bad guys" in Georgia. A win for the "good guys"!

Your comment here is perhaps one of the most reasoned and wise comments about politics I have been privileged to read on this site. I will keep this mind and most likely repeat it when I find myself in heated political arguments and debates. I will remember it when I find myself becoming "over-heated" on political issues. The Democrats were elected by well-meaning Americans too. We need to learn to work together more effectively for the good of the country and the world instead of fighting and hating each other.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 6:07 am

    Quoting iggy38:
    Being British, I cannot really comment on the internal politics of the USA as i do not know much about what is going on over there.

    I would like to make a few comments thou.

    I have a number of acquaintances who are "lefties" and i always try to avoid talking about politics with them, as i am to the right, and we never agree.

    One of the problems with them is they think they are always right, and if you dare to have an opinion that isn't to there liking they will just try to shout you down and belittle you.

    I was chatting in a pub to one of these people a while ago when he just started ranting about Bush and blaming all the worlds problems on him.
    I just tried to ignore him until he said Bush was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. At this point I had to say something to him. I pointed out that the 9/11 attacks had been 2 years in the planning, Bush had only been in office for less than a year, so if he wanted to blame someone he should blame the darling of the left, Bill Clinton(yes the lying cheating former President who also ordered bombings on Serbia, i think it was, and the bombings on Iraq, somethings the lefties always seem to forget.)
    No president in the history of America has had to suffer a terrorist attack that happened on 9/11, so there was no president(excuse the pun)for what he should do.

    One last point about Bush, he is the President of a democratic country, he was voted for my the majority. Yes the majority, please don't come back with all the conspiracy theories and ballot rigging, as we all know the Democrats would not have complained if it had been the other way round. I think the left were just outraged that the majority did not think, or vote, their way.

    As for Iraq, which seems to be the main talking point on here now, i think we have to make the best of a terrible situation now. We got rid of Saddam, a bloodthirsty dictator who committed murder and genocide on a massive scale, and we now have in place a Democratic government there.
    The main problem there now is the insurgents, these are people who murder there own people and of there own religion. They do not care who gets killed, they just want us back living in caves again under a Taliban style rule, who believe there way is the only way and if you disagree then you must be killed.
Thanks for dropping by and adding a comment! As you can see, we are all passionate about politics!

Your comment is even-handed, sensible and rational. I appreciate your comment.

Thanks to you, Brits, for your partnership and friendship. Your Prime Minister Tony Blair and our President George Bush aren't very popular right now. But I respect them both for working together and trying to achieve a good outcome in Afghanistan and Iraq. I think these two leaders understand the stakes. It would have been much easier for both of them to look the other way and not do anything about terrorism or the situation in Iraq. Just pass the problem on to the next generation or let others in the world deal with the problems.

I watched their joint news conference in Washington, D.C. a few weeks ago. I know they hate the continuing killing in Iraq and I am sure both felt that this thing would be nearly over by now. We have been into the Iraqi situation now for 39 months. I did a separate post on how many U.S. military and U.K. military people have been killed and wounded. I hate it as much as any leftist, I will assure you. We have to get the support of the world behind the Iraqi unity government and allow those people the chance to have what you in the U.K. and we in the U.S. have!

Hooray for Prime Minister Tony Blair and you Brits! Thanks for your support and thanks for your friendship. God bless Tony Blair and God bless the Brits!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 6:16 am

    Quoting SleekIcilyVarix:
    Hatred, fear, and paranoia? Those are the only possible reasons for having a negative opinion of Bush? You're kidding, right?

    First, not all liberals resort to useless mudslinging. I'm not a Bush fan but I don't think Hitler, Satan, or evil-genius are appropriate.
    I know a lot of liberals. I am one and choose to associate with them. All of them are entitled to their well-informed opinions, and none of them are prone to reducing their opinions to hate-slinging.
    I just read the list of 40 reasons to hate Bush. Three or four of them were just plain silly. The rest sounded like and ARE legitimate reasons to be unhappy with the Bush administration.
    The thing is, Bush has EARNED his sorry approval ratings.
    To get them as low as they are, it's not just leftists and liberals voicing dissatisfaction...it's moderates, democrats and republicans alike, and even some of the folks in the far right.
    A liberal or leftist hatred-spreading plot for advancing liberal causes? Roughly 65% of Americans agree (based on latest approval ratings) that Bush is doing a lousy job. Call me crazy, but I'm thinking that maybe, just maybe, it's because...he's doing a lousy job.
Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment!

I, of course, agree with you that not ALL liberals are Bush-haters. Many are just critical of his policies and those of his Republican administration. Many, however, do hate the man and choose to demonize him, so don't run away from that reality. I am glad that you have distinguished yourself from those who do practice the politics of hate. To be fair, we have haters on the far right too!

In America, we need to quit hating and start working for effective solutions to our problems. We'll disagree on the best approaches, of course, but we'll always sort it out and move forward. We always have.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 6:23 am

Comrade ... What are you smoking, my Saint Louis Cardinal friend?


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 6:27 am

    Quoting papyrina:
    smiles with a twinkle in my eye
Smiles back to you with a twinkle in my eye, Papy. We both understand quite well where each other stands politically I do believe.


nodrama1958 60M/58F

6/5/2006 6:41 am

This is the first time I saw this site. It takes quite a while to read it from beginning to end. I tried my best to keep an open mind and "middle of the road" attitude while reading each comment. I probably can't add much that has not already been said but TTigerAtty, I stand beside you! (well, at least 90% of the time!) This is what America is all about. We all have an opinion and we are free to voice it. Debate is good - it keeps us thinking. I appreciate everyone that contributed.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 7:52 am

    Quoting papyrina:
    smiles with a twinkle in my eye
Smiles back to you, Papy! I know we are at opposite ends of the political spectrum, but I still think you're a sweetie ... even as often as we have argued! Through this post, I am getting to know more liberals and more conservatives from around the world. Seems like we're all passionate about our politics! Thanks for dropping by and if you wanna weigh in with more commentary, that's OK! I'm getting pretty used to a pounding from the left! Take care, Papy!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 8:00 am

    Quoting mustang1960a2:
    So you try to tell people the truth. No good deed go's unpunished. The corollary of the old "Soviets" believing their own propaganda and today's American left believing theirs is extraordinary.

    Who doesn't know that Saddam had WMD's ? They are in some sort of bizarre denial; All based on a return to power to tell us how to live, as you said.

    Good try, you may educate some with your well thought rhetoric. Thank's again.

    Jeff
Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment, Jeff.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 8:27 am

    Quoting whats4dessert2:
    Wow, this post really polarized a lot of people and seems to have built so rifts between some people that I've thought to have previously gotten along (although they've had differing opinions and political views).

    Now, I'm going to give my perspective as someone who is NOT an American. I was a huge fan of Ronald Reagan in my youth. Ronald Reagan was a leader. I certainly did not understand all of the issues and challenges facing the USA at the time so my like for Reagan was superficial at best. Since Reagan I don't think that the USA has HAD a leader. Bush Sr. Clinton, GWB there isn't a good leader amongst them.

    GHWB was far less than adequate, where Clinton, although charismatic and a master at spinning the press was really, at least in my mind, supported by an artificial economic boom propped up by the .com myth we all so willingly bought in to. On the flipside I believe he did the morally correct thing by defying the UN and going into Bosnia. GWB, has had a number of serious issues dumped on him, the fallout from the .com bust, 9/11 etc. but at the same time he's created a number of his own (most recently some serious forth amendment violations).

    I tend not to like ideological or theological arguments, thinking or positions. They create rifts like I'm seeing in this post. What I can say is that the media in both of our countries have much explaining to do for the biased level of reporting that they provide in their 8 second sound bites. Most people in this thread seem very well informed on their opinions and I’ve seen enough of you to know that you are NOT “average” America. Most people here are probably in the top percentiles of the IQ range and are generally well read. The issue is, is that MOST Americans (and Canadians) are not.

    There are no incorrect opinions only misinformed ones. If a person does their reading and examines both political views and chooses a position then they’re not wrong. They simply have an opinion. Right and wrong are abstracts defined by human kind. To me it’s like looking into a room from two different windows. People may see the exact same thing but their personal perspective provides them a different view and a different perception. For example, some would say that Harry S. Truman needlessly murdered 10s of thousands of Japanese civilians when he dropped the bomb. Others would say that what Truman did was necessary because his responsibility was not to the Japanese citizenry but to American soldiers and the American war effort.

    The other issue that we have is that we form our opinions in a myopic context of “today” and do not always consider the situation that existed when certain decisions were made. If I were to look at my own country’s position on Afghanistan and how the media is spinning public opinion away from support on that war because a number of our soldiers have been killed lately, I see that many of the people I know are forgetting why Canada is there. True, we joined the war on terror in Afghanistan to try to route our OBL and to bring down the Taliban, but, what if we were to leave now? What would happen then? Well, we would see the rise of an even more brutal Taliban that would be, unbelievably more oppressive than the first. All of the champions of exiting that war often are the champions of human rights yet they forget the summary executions of women and men in Kabul’s marquis soccer stadium. They forget that women had no rights under the Taliban and were relegated to a status lower than livestock. (I’d suggest that EVERYONE download Under the Veil and have a look at it)

    I don’t even want to get in to 9/11 but I will touch on the fact that much of the mainstream media has pointed the finger at the Bush Administration for dropping the ball on this one and ignoring intelligence reports. The fact of the matter is that those media reports are probably right. However, the sad part is, is that it is not widely reported that at least as many if not more balls were dropped prior to that by the previous administration. This is not to say that two wrongs make a right but it is representative of a painfully biased media.

    The media is further incriminated in the whole Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky issue. That entire issue was spun in the media as “Clinton’s personal life is his personal life and that should not enter into it. The man should not be impeached because he had a girl give him a hummer.” The unfortunate thing about this type of reporting is that Bill Clinton was not impeached because a girl blew him. Bill Clinton was impeached because he committed felony perjury by denying Paula Jones her right to due course of justice (a right that every American is entitled too) by lying about a pattern of relationships and behavior in sworn depositions.

    Now, on to Iraq. The UN is, at best, an inept organization and, at its worst a corrupt body ruled by tin pot dictators and men and women that make too much money and do far too little for this world. The organization is even more handicapped because it really is powerless to do anything material without consent of its true governing body, the Security Council. To add to this problem is the ridiculous anachronism of the veto powers of a select group of members on that council. This veto power is often more used for political gain on foreign policy issues than it is for the betterment of the world at large.

    Now, to start things off, I think that the Bush Administration was absolutely correct in going into Iraq with the WMD evidence as presented at the UN. Here you have a dictator who is bent and bound on the destruction of the US. He is SAYIING he doesn’t have WMD but is absolutely representing that he does by thwarting UN inspectors at every turn.

    Where the Bush Administration blew it was by fabricating additional evidence. I think that the US had more than enough “moral” authority based on the UN’s inability and unwillingness to enforce their own resolutions that Saddam had repeatedly broken and there is enough creditable evidence that Iraq moved its WMD stockpiles to Syria as late as 2002. Again though, this is an evaluation in hindsight.

    I know I’m rambling a bit here but I think that my general point is that for ALL presidents and world leaders. We all have the fortunate benefit of hindsight. There seems to be a fair amount of ideological thinking in this thread and I know I’m a little guilty of it too, but, for the most part I think that most people here on both sides of the issue are quite intelligent and have thought their positions through.

    Unfortunately, most people in the world, and especially North America, don’t.

    The very office of the view of the presidency has changed since the advent of instant media. Even when Ike was in office the media wasn’t really at the beck and call of the American public. Then came the Kennedy’s and everything changed. The story of the family, the growth of television, the appealing looks of both Jackie and John elevated the office of the presidency to a regal status. However, there was a price to pay for that. In order to preserve the myth of Kennedy’s Camelot certain “measures” of secrecy had to be put in place to hide some of the darker side of the story. Kennedy was no better or no worse than anyone before him. It’s just that he had the tools to put the good of his presidency under a microscope and by doing so had to take evasive measures from the press on some other issues.

    Ever since the Kennedy Assassination was brought into our living rooms we’ve seen a sea change in the mass media. When Kennedy was shot, television was just really reaching critical mass in the United States and Canada and North America sat glued to their TVs getting up to the second VISUAL reports. This was a huge difference from the past where people would have to huddle around the family radio or wait till the next days newspaper to seek out current events (yes, people used to HAVE to read to figure stuff out).

    The Kennedy Assassination played out in the living rooms of North America better than any soap opera that the networks could have written. We had murder, intrigue, revenge and, then hot on the heals, conspiracy. This coupled with the Camelot Myth made the networks clue in to something. News ceased to be about the information and became about the story. News was no longer a source of current events and knowledge. It became a source of entertainment. Could CBS, ABC or NBC keep the viewers compelled longer? “Let’s try to entertain the masses not inform them.”

    Since then we’ve seen a shocking decline in the quality of broadcast news. When Paris Hilton gets more airplay than places like Durfur, when the North American Public stayed glued to their tv sets while Al Cowlings drove down the highway in OJ’s Bronco while people in Somalia were starving we knew three was something wrong yet we continued to watch.

    Now our news is filled, not so much with factual information but a series of 8 second editorials that provide the North American Public and our reduced attention spans with little info and lot’s of uninformed opinions.

    I know I’ve gone off on a lot of tangents here but in answer to the original question, I think that Leftists hate Bush for the same reasons that others hated Clinton. They hate these people because the POTUS acts as a focal point for a difference in moral, political or ethical ideology. Furthermore, they are poisoned by a media that seeks to entertain rather than inform.

    Discussions like this one I think are great because I think most folks here ARE informed. I think that the don’t take things at face value but let’s try to keep it civil. If I like Bush as a president or I don’t, let’s not turn it into the school yard where we look at each other and say “if you don’t like my friend I’m not going to play with you anymore”

    Ok, I know I jumped around on this a bit and I’m no longer sure what my point is but, in the spirit of media sound bites “can’t we all just get along?”
Thanks for dropping by to add your perspective! Thanks for taking the time to write out a very sound and logical analysis of what is going on in modern-day politics! I enjoyed reading what you wrote and I find myself in agreement with 99% of it.

As far as getting along, I am all for more civility in our political discussions, but I do think we still need to passionately and actively debate ideas for approaches on various serious issues and problems. I will respect any point of view and even listen to and consider the merits versus my own, but I do get tired of seeing the constant anti-American rhetoric as I travel through Blogville, and I am not very good an keeping my own mouth shut. If I have offended any person who has offered an honest and well-reasoned but different political view, I am truly sorry. If I have offended someone who has offended me by disparaging the USA, my government, my elected leaders or me, then I feel they deserve to taste a bit of their own medicine. I see from this post that they don't like it anymore than I do.

On another note, my congratulations and heartfelt appeciation to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for thwarting the intended terrorism by the 17 who were plotting bombings in Toronto. The RCMP coordinated efforts with our FBI who were able to nab another two suspected terrorist in Georgia over the weekend. This is the way that sovereign countries can work together to stop this common threat of terrorism.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 8:33 am

    Quoting sillyperv:
    Okay, I have to get this in before the shit storm. I said "protectors of Isreal". I have to define this because I'll come off as an anti semite which I would loathe. Isreal has a fundamental, human right to exist as a nation. I extend that right to Palestine and Palestinians. "Protectors of Isreal" refers to those who defend Isreal against any criticism of their foreign policy. I THINK that too much of their policy is dysfundtional and counter productive with regards to Palestine.

    I was glib and irresponsible. I wrote this is a blur - I love politics - but at no tune do I wish to offend, or denigrate a state, nation or peoples . Call me an idiot. A doofus. A big noogie. Whatever. I just don't want to be called a racist.

    And the first fucker who says "Fruedian Slip" get a wedgie. Frued, while the founder of modern psychologly, was also a nurotic with issues about sex, his parents and borscht.
Your comment is well-received. We need to work with Israel and the Palestinians to find a way for those two people to peacefully coexist. Thanks for dropping by to comment and thanks to your RCMP for thwarting the group of 17 who were planning a terrorist bombing.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 8:42 am

    Quoting MouldFeltsCivic:
    Is this where the wacko's missing, RUSH or SEAN, reach out to each other on the weekends, or late hours.
Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 8:56 am

    Quoting sillyperv:
    There was so much innuendo about Clinton and sex because the Right couldn't find anything actually illegal to pin on him and they weren't going to make the bombing of a baby food factory and issue.

    Ah, the "self loathing" angle - perfected by the protectors of Isreal with the "self hating jew" brand. This argument supposes that any criticism stems from an irrational or insane level of self hatred and is not based on "fact" and is therefore easily dismissed. Criticism = self hatred = insanity = ignored. A great stifler of debate.

    The second paragraph is nonsense, which is true of most generalizations. "Progressivism" and the "Perfection of people is a mish mash of notions that I've never read in any Left magazine. Creating a false position to shoot it down is the weapon of sophist.

    As for your "2 cents". The is no liberal media. There is no liberal elite. The Media is a conglomerate that shares the interest of the ruling class: bottom line. Profit. You don't shit where you eat. Read Rolling Stone and the issues with the election. The Liberal media didn't peep. And yes, John F. Kennedy did the same thing in 1960. It was wrong then also. The elite own the country and need the media to "stay on message" And this isn't done with pressure you just hire people that think like you do. As for talking down to: Limbaugh, Coulter, and the other leading media lap dogs deserve it. Actually, what would you consider to be the "liberal media"? The Washington Post. The New York Times. It's not from their politics. Criticism of Bush has come very slowly and again in a very narrow parameters. I think these papers get branded liberal because they consider Maplethorpe to be an artist. That Waiting for Godot" is brilliant. That art and literature is more than Rockwell and Grisham (and I apologize to Rockwell fans, while I think of him as a craftsman and not an "artist" he doesn't deserve to be dumped in with Grisham who is a hack) - I digress.

    As for the elections - read the Rolling Stone article. It's online.

    This is such a terribly written, specious, bowl of spittle. To much of the right's arguements are like the article above. They have to be, because so much of what they are trying to defend is indefensible.

    American's have voted "Republican" on a regular basis presents the notion that a win means "mandate". Where as all poles show a country divided in vote, attitude, ideals, economics and hair colour. First past the post doesn't mean the majourity supports you, it just means you got enough votes to win. 51 votes to 49 is not a landside.

    Defending us against terrorists - if you want to stop terrorist attacks get the American army out of the holy land. The acts of terror have had nothing to do with hating American values, freedom or democracy. Osama has been consistent since he was working with the CIA fighting the Russians - "Get the infidels out of the holy land" Imagine a foreign army base in Washingtion or on Mount Rushmore.

    And now the caveat: Osama is a wack job. He is an ideologue driven by a messanic vanity. Regardless of his position on the militarization of the holy land by foreigners, terrorism and most violence is the weapon of the weak and evil.

    And as for hating George Bush. Honestly, he'd probably would be a fun guy to have a beer with as Reagan would have been a great Grandfather - tell us again granpa -giggle- how you and Custer took the Sante Fe Trail and Clinton would take you to the best orgies, but that doesn't make him a leader. He is functionally illiterate due to intelligence or biology (dyslexia) I don't know, but he has no connection to the words he speaks. Listen to him. Watch how he accentuates his points and notice how his timing is off, how he is faking it. Take a few acting classes and this will become very clear. He becomes easy to ridicule.

    But the hatred is not for George Bush, it's for the policies of the administration. It is directed at Bush because he is the front man. An illegal war - in violation of the Geneva Convention, based on lies - weapons of mass distruction, Suddam Hussain was behind 911 - a secular Muslim hated by Osama, an economy stretched to the breaking point on the backs of people who get no benefit from massive tax cuts and Dick Cheney, fronted by propoganda machine using the glorious, founding beliefs of the American nation has a tendency to piss people off. No one likes to be lied too. No one likes hypocracy. No one likes to be hated because of a government that doesn't represent it's interests or goals. Hatred. I'm sure there is, but to say it's against George Bush is to obscure the reality and avoid genuine debate.

    And that's my 1.87 cents - I'm Candian. You lose on the exchange.
Thanks for your 1.87 cents! Yes, I know I lose on the exchange! Tell me about it! I sent my daughter to London for a semester of study two years ago! Keep the 1.87 cents and give some of your Canadian beer. Labatt Blue or Moosehead will do quite nicely!

Look, I suspect we disagree more than we agree politically, but I do thank you for your comment.

Again, I appreciate the RCMP and what they did recently to nab 17 would-be terrorist bombers. They coordinated with our FBI and we were able to nab two more in Georgia! Well done, Canadians!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/5/2006 9:04 am

    Quoting nodrama1958:
    This is the first time I saw this site. It takes quite a while to read it from beginning to end. I tried my best to keep an open mind and "middle of the road" attitude while reading each comment. I probably can't add much that has not already been said but TTigerAtty, I stand beside you! (well, at least 90% of the time!) This is what America is all about. We all have an opinion and we are free to voice it. Debate is good - it keeps us thinking. I appreciate everyone that contributed.
Thanks for dropping by and taking time to offer your comment! We, Americans, will always hotly debate our politics. Let's try to return to the days of a bit more civility. The politicians on both ends of the spectrum, the political pundits and the drive-by media tend to get us whipped up and taking fixed political positions. Let's remember that it's really the 290 million Americans who make this country work and who hire our politicians to run the country. If they don't do what the majority want, then they will get fired! Pundits that get too radical to the right or left will not survive long either.


ApeakAmpulPetit 55M
1 post
6/6/2006 2:01 am

I don't hate Bush personally. But I do hate what his administration has done to this country. The questions of legality concerning his war on terrorism, the spiralling debt and tumbling economy, the image of this country in the eyes of the world. A traditional Republican tenant is less government, yet this administration created an entirely new branch, Homeland Security (what have they done for you lately?). Does anyone feel more secure because of that entity? Does anyone understand, care or act depending which color of heightened sucurity we are under? As for Iraq--people in that part of the world just think differently than the US citizenry. If all the car bombers, etc would just cease actions for a few months the US military would pull out, at which time they could mount an attack on the new Iraqi government and try to return their old powers. But logic like that is as foreign to them as trying to change things by strapping a bomb to my chest is to me. We can't understand that mentality, and to belive we can persuade extremists to our way of thinking is foolish. But to return to Bush--shutting down the stock exchange and grounding airlines for months crippled the economy and gave the terrorists exactly the victory they sought. The stronger position would have been to return to business as usual within a few days to demonstrate that even so tragic an attack on our soils would not affect the power and confidence of this country. Instead we demonstrated fear and weakness, thereby inviting further affronts to our nation.
The REAL problem isn't with leftists hating Bush or conservatives bashing Clinton. It's our entire political process. We have a one party system--the Bureaucratic party--with left/Democratic and right/Republican members. The entire party is built on attaining power and lining their pockets. They will all vote for a pork project in one state to win the vote of that Senator for the pork project in their own state--knowing that neither project is beneficial to the bulk of America.
And NOTHING irritates me more than to see a vote on any issue split exactly on party lines. If the issue merits a vote at all, then it should be voted on based on those merits--not on who the voter is aligned with. If that were the case, there would always be members of both parties in favor and opposed to every issue.
Got off on several rants there..sorry. Maybe I should have split that into more than one post.


rm_AnOddGirl 57F
3469 posts
6/6/2006 6:25 am

After the FEMA/Red Cross debacle I've come to the conclusion. It AIN'T the President - It's the people he Hires!!!!

Your only as good as your employees !!



Odds


Chuckk48 60M
1082 posts
6/6/2006 11:41 am

You know I still remember the Republican convention and those purple band aids. Agree or disagree with John Kerry the man earned a silver star and a bronze medal. To discount his military service on thirty year old testimony in favor of a man that didn't even complete his National Guard duty was completely unfair. After the Clinton bashing then the Gore bashing then the Kerry bashing (swift boating) I don't think those of you on the right have any claim to the high road. To believe the left should treat the right wing (leaders?) with kid gloves while the right bashes the hell out of them is completely unrealistic. I believe what your seeing is that time is over, as well it should be. The right seems to have a real bad habit of expecting everyone else to act in a civil manner they have long sense disregarded.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/6/2006 1:12 pm

    Quoting rm_robotdevil3:
    Tiger,

    I have to say that I think I finally understand the reason for the hatred of GWB. It is personal.

    With other conservative leaders, I was always disappointed when they came into office, but I always figured "what's the worst that can happen?" No big deal...I trust they are intelligent enough to make the "right" (pun intended) decisions.

    With GWB its different. He's just an idiot. There is no doubt about it when I hear than man speak...he is dumber than I am. ... and I am NOT smart enough to run this country and if I ever stood up and asked for that privilege, it would be selfish of me.

    But I'm afraid that GWB is too stupid to know his limitations. However, he DOES surround himself with intelligent folks:

    I think Rove is brilliant, and should design a nationwide political science curriculum. I think the average citizen should be FORCED to know the behind-the-scenes stuff, so they won't be fooled by this stuff, no matter who tries to pull it in the future.

    I also have great respect for Cheney, and most of the other smart guys that GWB has on staff, though Rumsfeld not so much (for months denied that what was happening in Iraq was an "insurgency", other wordsmithing stuff)

    By the way, did you know that Rumsfeld's notes show a scribbled comment on 9/11 that indicate he was planning on seeing if he could work in an invasion of Iraq, whether they were part of the attack or not?

    "Go massive. . . Sweep it all up. Things related and not."
    Judge whether hit S.H. (Saddam Hussein) @ same time -- Not only UBL (Osama bin Laden)
    Hard to get a good case
    Need to move swiftly

Thanks for dropping by and commenting. I have seen GWB deliver inspiring speeches when he is talking from the heart on a subject he is passionate about. At other times, I have seen him stumble to deliver a prepared speech. Delivering a speech, however, is not the sole measure of intelligence, wisdom and strong leadership.

We elected GWB because we judged him the better choice vs. what the Democrats offered. Now, let's support the man until we can make the next decision in 2008. I hope that, for the good of this country, we will have two good people, a Republican and a Democrat, to choose from. If we have a strong Independent to add to the debate, all the better.

Again, thanks for dropping by!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/6/2006 1:21 pm

    Quoting ApeakAmpulPetit:
    I don't hate Bush personally. But I do hate what his administration has done to this country. The questions of legality concerning his war on terrorism, the spiralling debt and tumbling economy, the image of this country in the eyes of the world. A traditional Republican tenant is less government, yet this administration created an entirely new branch, Homeland Security (what have they done for you lately?). Does anyone feel more secure because of that entity? Does anyone understand, care or act depending which color of heightened sucurity we are under? As for Iraq--people in that part of the world just think differently than the US citizenry. If all the car bombers, etc would just cease actions for a few months the US military would pull out, at which time they could mount an attack on the new Iraqi government and try to return their old powers. But logic like that is as foreign to them as trying to change things by strapping a bomb to my chest is to me. We can't understand that mentality, and to belive we can persuade extremists to our way of thinking is foolish. But to return to Bush--shutting down the stock exchange and grounding airlines for months crippled the economy and gave the terrorists exactly the victory they sought. The stronger position would have been to return to business as usual within a few days to demonstrate that even so tragic an attack on our soils would not affect the power and confidence of this country. Instead we demonstrated fear and weakness, thereby inviting further affronts to our nation.
    The REAL problem isn't with leftists hating Bush or conservatives bashing Clinton. It's our entire political process. We have a one party system--the Bureaucratic party--with left/Democratic and right/Republican members. The entire party is built on attaining power and lining their pockets. They will all vote for a pork project in one state to win the vote of that Senator for the pork project in their own state--knowing that neither project is beneficial to the bulk of America.
    And NOTHING irritates me more than to see a vote on any issue split exactly on party lines. If the issue merits a vote at all, then it should be voted on based on those merits--not on who the voter is aligned with. If that were the case, there would always be members of both parties in favor and opposed to every issue.
    Got off on several rants there..sorry. Maybe I should have split that into more than one post.
The sky is not falling! Remember that 12 million Iraqis did come out and vote for their unity government candidates, even in the face of threats against their very lives. You could say that those 12 million Iraqis do understand what freedom and self-governance could potentially produce for them. So, it's a mixed bag. We see what the news media wants us to see ... the bombings, the blood and the death. They don't show the peaceful provinces in Iraq where people are going about their lives. They don't show us their parliament meeting in session, admittedly struggling with self-rule.

Thanks for your comments! Please come back again! Don't give up on America, and don't give up on our two-party system. Get involved, vote, write letters to your representatives and make them more responsible to WE THE PEOPLE!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/6/2006 1:28 pm

    Quoting rm_AnOddGirl:
    After the FEMA/Red Cross debacle I've come to the conclusion. It AIN'T the President - It's the people he Hires!!!!

    Your only as good as your employees !!



    Odds
Thanks for dropping by to comment! You make a good point that we need to remember that our Federal bureaucracy with all its departments and agencies is huge. Many people (the highest % of them) remain on as career civil servants from one administration to the next. I suspect it is difficult for any one President to affect a big change in any department during his one or two terms of office. Hopefully some improvement can be made by each new administration both Democratic and Republican.

I see you're from New Orleans. I hope that you are getting your life back in order after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina! All the best to you, your family and our brothers and sisters in New Orleans!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/6/2006 1:35 pm

    Quoting Chuckk48:
    You know I still remember the Republican convention and those purple band aids. Agree or disagree with John Kerry the man earned a silver star and a bronze medal. To discount his military service on thirty year old testimony in favor of a man that didn't even complete his National Guard duty was completely unfair. After the Clinton bashing then the Gore bashing then the Kerry bashing (swift boating) I don't think those of you on the right have any claim to the high road. To believe the left should treat the right wing (leaders?) with kid gloves while the right bashes the hell out of them is completely unrealistic. I believe what your seeing is that time is over, as well it should be. The right seems to have a real bad habit of expecting everyone else to act in a civil manner they have long sense disregarded.
Kerry lost the 2004 election. Get over it and move on. See you at the polls in 2008. If the Democrats run a moderate, I'll consider voting for him, but I will be very apprehensive because I know the Democratic Party is now controlled by the left.

Conservatives are bashed everyday, my friend, in case you haven't noticed. We will continue to point out to the American public the real objectives of the left. If liberal Democrats consider vigorous debate and truth telling to be bashing then so be it.

Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment.


rm_Mr_Gaunt 43M

6/6/2006 6:34 pm

Hi! I’ve not finished reading the debate, but it was getting really rude, although interesting, when I left it...

I am an evil European (English is not my first language, so I apologize for my horrible mistakes), and first of all I have to tell you that, in my country, conservatives and liberals are, mostly, in the same, “Right” party, against the “Left” (Socialism) so this one would be an “internal affair”, and this is my viewpoint also.

The second: You have cited three reasons to explain the special “hate” to GWB, if I have properly understood,
1º/ American anti-Americanism;
2º/ The Left’s complex of superiority
3º/Moral Relativism against Religion.

But, is really “special” the hate promoted against GWB or you feel it “specially” because you like the way he is or he acts?. Because I think the three ways you have quoted are:
1º/ Social revisionism (“I don’t like the way my people is behaving”, a necessary feeling for a critic social thought, and widespread in all kind of environments, specially in religious ones)
2º/”The owner of the Truth” complex of superiority. This is a temptation for everybody, including me and you, isn’t it?. When you hold an opinion you do this because you think it is right, so “the others opinions” are wrong ones. (As the opinions ‒for example- about liberalism as the basis of democracy ‒and not a mental disorder ‒ or about religious “faith” as a form of totalitarian thought ‒And I am not talking about “believing or not”, or about the “true existence” of super natural forces, but about the difference between “to believe” and “have faith”, and the totalitarian “sound” of the latest-.) All the revolutionary forces share the elitist point of view that considers that “some things are too relevant to let people commit their own mistakes”. (My beloveds liberals during the French Revolution; Unionists during your Civil War; Socialists or Nazis in the 20s or 30s of the XX century; etc ... and, of course, most of religious movements ‒ Who can be more zealot in the “ownership of the Truth”, and more elitist, than a guy that thinks that Good has given it to him?)
3º/ Ethics are different from moral. Moral is individual, and is based in the Good/Evil distinction, Ethics is social, and is based on arrangements to live together. Moral Relativism is, then, a nonsense usually linked to atheism, that is a faith itself. If you hold a relativistic point of view ‒I do- you have your moral (perhaps, and for yourself) but your behavior must be ethical. So, your third point is a fight between Faiths.

So, I would resume my “judgement” about your three points in 1ª/Social revisionism, 2º/Excess of self-confidence (Faith), and 3º/ Conflict with other Faiths. And all of them, if you lease yourself, are ways for anybody to fall in hate and rage. But it is only evident for “you” when yours is the attacked “Faith” or “ministry”. Nothing special in the “hatred” GWB, I can assure you that the main political leaders of my country suffers the same treatment for the same reasons from the respective “enemies” and “supporters”. I think the question would be, “Why people hates so much, and listens so few?”

The third would be, indeed, the most (the only ) interesting commentary, but I would have to be sleeping long ago ... well, short, Irak. There were no relationships between Islamic terrorism and the Nazi party (BAAS) that ruled Iraq and keeps ruling Syria. Indeed, due to their programmatic atheism they were the only allies in the area against Islamic terrorism (no more, the wars of Afghanistan and Iraq have promoted worldwide much more fundamentalism than democracy or coca-cola ), and I have behold completely astonished the swift of the US foreign policy in the area.

The only logical reason I can conceive is an economic one. During the famous ten years “embargo”, European Union oil companies, chemicals, etc ... replaced US interests in Iraq. The main looser of the first, unfinished, war of Irak was US industry. The gainers were “the core” of Europe, France, Germany, and Benelux. And that ones were, mimetically, the alliances for and against the second war of Iraq: US and the EU countries that would gain with a “new deal” vs “the core” of the EU.

But this would not explain the support ‒yes, I have said support- given to the Iranian current government and theirs puppets in Iraqs or Afghanistans governments, and the annihilation of the former sunnies US allies, now labeled as “resistance” or “terrorists”. The theories I have imagine to explain this behavior are to freak to be written, specially so late at night.

Well, excuse me for this long dissertation, and good night


Chuckk48 60M
1082 posts
6/6/2006 8:33 pm

Conservatives are bashed everyday, my friend, in case you haven't noticed.

Oh yes I have noticed, frankly I take great delight in it. It's about time you got back some of the crap you've been dishing out the last fourteen years. You all will just have to learn to deal with it! It's one thing to get to the top quite another to stay there. The pendulum is swinging my friend, yes you will see us in 2008, count on it.


micahbiguns 50M

6/6/2006 10:34 pm

Wow what a hornets nest ya have stirred up here. I adnire you for sticking to your guns! While I do not think that the President has done an exemplery job I do believe we need to pulll together and stop all the infighting and name calling which seems to be the arena of policits in this age. just my humble lil opinion


TTigerAtty 62M

6/7/2006 8:33 am

    Quoting rm_LoveSpell11:
    Whoops, my mistake. It seems that even some folks at Fox News are starting to pick up on his lies now! LOL!

    So now you are stuck with the Portland Press Herald (at least one editorial writer from a couple of years ago) and some other favorite hate and fear mongers like your buddy Rush Limbaugh.
A comment from the land of Kooks and Krazies! Sen. Teddy 'Hiccup' Kennedy and Sen. John 'Reporting for Duty' Kerry! Please, give me a break!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/7/2006 8:40 am

    Quoting rm_Mr_Gaunt:
    Hi! I’ve not finished reading the debate, but it was getting really rude, although interesting, when I left it...

    I am an evil European (English is not my first language, so I apologize for my horrible mistakes), and first of all I have to tell you that, in my country, conservatives and liberals are, mostly, in the same, “Right” party, against the “Left” (Socialism) so this one would be an “internal affair”, and this is my viewpoint also.

    The second: You have cited three reasons to explain the special “hate” to GWB, if I have properly understood,
    1º/ American anti-Americanism;
    2º/ The Left’s complex of superiority
    3º/Moral Relativism against Religion.

    But, is really “special” the hate promoted against GWB or you feel it “specially” because you like the way he is or he acts?. Because I think the three ways you have quoted are:
    1º/ Social revisionism (“I don’t like the way my people is behaving”, a necessary feeling for a critic social thought, and widespread in all kind of environments, specially in religious ones)
    2º/”The owner of the Truth” complex of superiority. This is a temptation for everybody, including me and you, isn’t it?. When you hold an opinion you do this because you think it is right, so “the others opinions” are wrong ones. (As the opinions ‒for example- about liberalism as the basis of democracy ‒and not a mental disorder ‒ or about religious “faith” as a form of totalitarian thought ‒And I am not talking about “believing or not”, or about the “true existence” of super natural forces, but about the difference between “to believe” and “have faith”, and the totalitarian “sound” of the latest-.) All the revolutionary forces share the elitist point of view that considers that “some things are too relevant to let people commit their own mistakes”. (My beloveds liberals during the French Revolution; Unionists during your Civil War; Socialists or Nazis in the 20s or 30s of the XX century; etc ... and, of course, most of religious movements ‒ Who can be more zealot in the “ownership of the Truth”, and more elitist, than a guy that thinks that Good has given it to him?)
    3º/ Ethics are different from moral. Moral is individual, and is based in the Good/Evil distinction, Ethics is social, and is based on arrangements to live together. Moral Relativism is, then, a nonsense usually linked to atheism, that is a faith itself. If you hold a relativistic point of view ‒I do- you have your moral (perhaps, and for yourself) but your behavior must be ethical. So, your third point is a fight between Faiths.

    So, I would resume my “judgement” about your three points in 1ª/Social revisionism, 2º/Excess of self-confidence (Faith), and 3º/ Conflict with other Faiths. And all of them, if you lease yourself, are ways for anybody to fall in hate and rage. But it is only evident for “you” when yours is the attacked “Faith” or “ministry”. Nothing special in the “hatred” GWB, I can assure you that the main political leaders of my country suffers the same treatment for the same reasons from the respective “enemies” and “supporters”. I think the question would be, “Why people hates so much, and listens so few?”

    The third would be, indeed, the most (the only ) interesting commentary, but I would have to be sleeping long ago ... well, short, Irak. There were no relationships between Islamic terrorism and the Nazi party (BAAS) that ruled Iraq and keeps ruling Syria. Indeed, due to their programmatic atheism they were the only allies in the area against Islamic terrorism (no more, the wars of Afghanistan and Iraq have promoted worldwide much more fundamentalism than democracy or coca-cola ), and I have behold completely astonished the swift of the US foreign policy in the area.

    The only logical reason I can conceive is an economic one. During the famous ten years “embargo”, European Union oil companies, chemicals, etc ... replaced US interests in Iraq. The main looser of the first, unfinished, war of Irak was US industry. The gainers were “the core” of Europe, France, Germany, and Benelux. And that ones were, mimetically, the alliances for and against the second war of Iraq: US and the EU countries that would gain with a “new deal” vs “the core” of the EU.

    But this would not explain the support ‒yes, I have said support- given to the Iranian current government and theirs puppets in Iraqs or Afghanistans governments, and the annihilation of the former sunnies US allies, now labeled as “resistance” or “terrorists”. The theories I have imagine to explain this behavior are to freak to be written, specially so late at night.

    Well, excuse me for this long dissertation, and good night
Thanks for dropping by to offer your comments. Yes, there is plenty of "hate" in the world. We need less "hate" and more "love".


TTigerAtty 62M

6/7/2006 8:51 am

    Quoting rm_LoveSpell11:
    So if someone disagrees with your conservative, liberal-bashing views they are mentally disordered and anti-American?

    You are entitled to your views, but so are others. And that does not mean we are any less sane, or American, than anyone else.

    I suggest you get over yourself and consider the validity of other viewpoints that might happen to disagree with what you have heard on Fox News.

    You might even learn something. But based on your vitriol towards other posters, I seriously doubt it. Don't base your politics on fear. Bush has done a great job, apparently, of instilling fear in you. Try actually considering the other side, not just marching in lockstep with the status quo.
You libs are the ones who bash us conservatives and Bush constantly. Don't try to change the point of my posting. I do question the sanity and judgment of voters in a state that continues to reelect people like Sen. Ted 'Chappaquiddick' Kennedy and Sen. John 'I was actually for the war before I was against the war' Kerry! Re. vitriol, don't every forget that I as a conservative can give as good as I get from you leftists!

P.S. Fox News for "fair and balanced" reporting of the news! You people just despise Fox News, don't you?!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/7/2006 8:54 am

    Quoting Chuckk48:
    Conservatives are bashed everyday, my friend, in case you haven't noticed.

    Oh yes I have noticed, frankly I take great delight in it. It's about time you got back some of the crap you've been dishing out the last fourteen years. You all will just have to learn to deal with it! It's one thing to get to the top quite another to stay there. The pendulum is swinging my friend, yes you will see us in 2008, count on it.
I will see you at the polls, my Michigan friend. Here in Missouri, I will vote for a conservative/moderate candidate every chance I get! We conservatives have learned how to deal with the Bush-bashing and the lies from the left. We are learning everyday.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/7/2006 8:57 am

    Quoting micahbiguns:
    Wow what a hornets nest ya have stirred up here. I adnire you for sticking to your guns! While I do not think that the President has done an exemplery job I do believe we need to pulll together and stop all the infighting and name calling which seems to be the arena of policits in this age. just my humble lil opinion
I agree with you. I am waiting for the left to stop. Then I will back off. Till then, I will continue to call 'em as I see 'em!


rm_Mr_Gaunt 43M

6/7/2006 10:57 am

Thanks for replying

Well, I do not “believe in love”, I let it for religious people and hippies, I believe in reason, science, logic ... you know, all that stuff that configures the common inheritance of industrialized countries, and to react with “hate” during a discussion, is a way to put an irrational end to this. (if you think rationally you can reproduce “the other” arguments, understand why that person follow them, and argue why you don’t) Strategies to cover an irrational reaction with an appearance of rationality belongs to the toolkit to debate. The article cited identified them, but I think it fails to realize that “both sides” use the toolkit. That’s is the problem when you get involved, you loose your capacity to reason and try ‒with the toolkit- to appear that you are debating when, indeed, you are saying “mines are the good ones”.

(By the way, my country is Spain, I am a member of the conservative/liberal party. Here we would be of the same party and, indeed, you talk like my mother ‒I mean no offence, I do love her-, and the other parties are socialists or communists, and local combinations of this lines with medium size nationalist movements)

And, as I have already finished reading the posts, I can say that, from my point of view, the bitterness of some posts is surprising and sad. A sad testimony to the dangers of taking too seriously the words “left” and “right”. Here you all would be “right” or “far right”. In a Muslim country we all (sozis included) would be “left” or “far left”.

You, obviously, are talking to your country, but realizing that, at the end, “right” and “left” are only “names”, labels, words ... with no solid background helps to discover what you share with "the others", instead of focusing only in the topics that divide you, making you all weaker society.(Unaware of your shared culture, and then unable to promote or defend it)

By


flagg134 36M
1582 posts
6/7/2006 4:41 pm

    Quoting TTigerAtty:
    A comment from the land of Kooks and Krazies! Sen. Teddy 'Hiccup' Kennedy and Sen. John 'Reporting for Duty' Kerry! Please, give me a break!
What kind of bullshit is this? How can you call a whole state a land of cooks. I suppose I live in WeirdoLand because we have a Clinton in office here. You constantly tell people you are asking for a debate with this post. Honestly all I see you doing is raining down insults upon everyone.

~Sigh~ How do you expect people to react to you when you talk down to everyone who posts here. Make general statements and equate liberal thinking with anti-americanism. What you are doing here is not helping your cause. Rather you are inflaming those who disagree with you. Try to understand that the way you are going about this is wrong. You wont change anyones mind on bush by bashing them in fact you will only reinforce their beliefs about how bent and zealous the right side is. I know not all conservatives are like you many are reasonable people. I'm sorry to see that you are just a bigoted close-minded fool.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/8/2006 8:03 am

    Quoting rm_Mr_Gaunt:
    Thanks for replying

    Well, I do not “believe in love”, I let it for religious people and hippies, I believe in reason, science, logic ... you know, all that stuff that configures the common inheritance of industrialized countries, and to react with “hate” during a discussion, is a way to put an irrational end to this. (if you think rationally you can reproduce “the other” arguments, understand why that person follow them, and argue why you don’t) Strategies to cover an irrational reaction with an appearance of rationality belongs to the toolkit to debate. The article cited identified them, but I think it fails to realize that “both sides” use the toolkit. That’s is the problem when you get involved, you loose your capacity to reason and try ‒with the toolkit- to appear that you are debating when, indeed, you are saying “mines are the good ones”.

    (By the way, my country is Spain, I am a member of the conservative/liberal party. Here we would be of the same party and, indeed, you talk like my mother ‒I mean no offence, I do love her-, and the other parties are socialists or communists, and local combinations of this lines with medium size nationalist movements)

    And, as I have already finished reading the posts, I can say that, from my point of view, the bitterness of some posts is surprising and sad. A sad testimony to the dangers of taking too seriously the words “left” and “right”. Here you all would be “right” or “far right”. In a Muslim country we all (sozis included) would be “left” or “far left”.

    You, obviously, are talking to your country, but realizing that, at the end, “right” and “left” are only “names”, labels, words ... with no solid background helps to discover what you share with "the others", instead of focusing only in the topics that divide you, making you all weaker society.(Unaware of your shared culture, and then unable to promote or defend it)

    By
I appreciate your words of caution and understand what you are saying. Some ideas, principles and directions are worth taking a stand on. Many of the values I personally subscribe to are under attack from the extreme left and I will not sit quietly on my hands when they are attacked.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/8/2006 8:18 am

    Quoting flagg134:
    What kind of bullshit is this? How can you call a whole state a land of cooks. I suppose I live in WeirdoLand because we have a Clinton in office here. You constantly tell people you are asking for a debate with this post. Honestly all I see you doing is raining down insults upon everyone.

    ~Sigh~ How do you expect people to react to you when you talk down to everyone who posts here. Make general statements and equate liberal thinking with anti-americanism. What you are doing here is not helping your cause. Rather you are inflaming those who disagree with you. Try to understand that the way you are going about this is wrong. You wont change anyones mind on bush by bashing them in fact you will only reinforce their beliefs about how bent and zealous the right side is. I know not all conservatives are like you many are reasonable people. I'm sorry to see that you are just a bigoted close-minded fool.
This is the same kind of "bullshit", as YOU term it, that we have to put up with from eastern, elitist liberals like your Sen. Kennedy and Sen. Kerry. I rain down no more insults than do the libs and Blame-America-First crowd, a number of whom have commented regarding this post and comments made in the string of commentary on this post and in posts my other bloggers. I really don't think you are especially worried about me helping my cause. You just don't like a conservative disagreeing with your liberal views. Well, I do disagree with modern-day liberalism. I detest everything that Sen. Ted 'Chapaquiddick' Kennedy stands for, and I am not much more fond of your Sen. John 'I actually voted for the war before I voted against the war' Kerry for that matter. I consider it a badge of honor when libs like you call me a "bigoted close-minded fool". 'Tis then that I know I am getting under your and their skin and that is precisely what I hope to do, my friend. I will never change your mind. Your mind is made up. But I can point out the ill-conceived policies and values of the left-wingers, and hope to point out the lies, deceit and real agenda of the left.

Please do come back and visit again!


sillyperv 54M

6/8/2006 9:26 am

This has been such a great posting. I'd have thought there would be more Right wing response, but I guess they're not having as much sex as the left, again explaining the Conservative fixation on Clinton getting some in the White House (sorry, I just can't help myself, heh heh). My question is, cause you've thrown out the terms "left, liberal, left wingers" all over and I have no idea what you mean? What do you mean by "liberal". What is their agenda? And what are the policies of the left that you loathe? And for that matter what do you define as "Conservative".

Some definition might help the debate and open you up to another slew of posts - I'm sure you can take it.

Oh, and how come I didn't get called a "left lib tree hugging wacko" like everyone else? Feeling kind of "LEFT OUT!"

hahahahahahahaheeheheheeehhee!

*

I thought that was funny.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/8/2006 9:52 am

    Quoting sillyperv:
    This has been such a great posting. I'd have thought there would be more Right wing response, but I guess they're not having as much sex as the left, again explaining the Conservative fixation on Clinton getting some in the White House (sorry, I just can't help myself, heh heh). My question is, cause you've thrown out the terms "left, liberal, left wingers" all over and I have no idea what you mean? What do you mean by "liberal". What is their agenda? And what are the policies of the left that you loathe? And for that matter what do you define as "Conservative".

    Some definition might help the debate and open you up to another slew of posts - I'm sure you can take it.

    Oh, and how come I didn't get called a "left lib tree hugging wacko" like everyone else? Feeling kind of "LEFT OUT!"

    hahahahahahahaheeheheheeehhee!

    *

    I thought that was funny.
I don't think there are as many right-wingers on this site as left-wingers. I knew I'd get hammered by the left. Oh, well! I enjoy it! I think right-wingers are more in the closet with their sexual perversions, you know, hiding it more than Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy et al. Rush, my hometown buddy, is so damned pompous, he can't keep a woman very long. He divorced a few years ago. I think he has had two wives now. I've had one wife and not looking for another ... not unless she's a little bit more to the right than conservative book author, Ann Coulter, and has a net-worth of at least $5 million! Thanks for dropping by!

P.S. I haven't hammered you because I suspect you are really a moderate who is leaning toward the right! Besides, I like you Canadians right now for nailing the 17 suspected terrorists and for brewing Canadian Moosehead beer!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/8/2006 10:56 am

Look, [blog MariGrrl], part of my "bluster" is merely for effect. I do wish you and your the husband all the best. Three deployments to the mideast is too much! Good news there in Iraq last night! We got al-Zarqawi, the head Al Qaeda leader in Iraq. He killed indiscriminately trying to stir up the anger between Shiite and Sunni Muslims. It's good to get rid of him, although another will soon arise. I heard that people in his network helped to "finger him". I suppose that is an encouraging sign.

Re. 2008, let's hope we have good solid middle of the road leaders to choose our President from ... a strong credible Democrat and a strong credible Republican. I will keep my mind open, but I won't be fooled by a Democrat who tries to appeal to moderates in order to get elected and then govern from the left.

Thanks for stopping by! Your husband will be in my prayers! I hope that a reduction in troop strength can be announced soon enough for him not to have to return to the mideast. You know there will be planning meetings at Camp David starting next Monday. Let's hope for improving conditions in Iraq!


LilSquirt_4mfm 67M/67F
3394 posts
6/8/2006 10:30 pm

"You are a simple-minded, ignorant, hate-filled fool"
lol ....... TT, it kinda makes your point i think

so, a decent week for the good guys ....brit bust, .... our canada bust (noticing here now how quickly that our many lefties are becoming very anti muslim very fast here ... a bomb or 2 and they'll be showing the kkk how to do it)..... Z is history thus my high respect & congrats to the troops and govt for stick - at - it - ness (another quality we are all hated for .... Isreal plane shootdown plan thwarted tonight ......they got Abu Samhadana (#2 Hamas) in Rafah this morning... etc. .....

funny, the post that started all this ....
"40 "hates" i have ... ... bla bla ....." has pretty much died a slow death .... never even a whimper let alone a cum back to my statement there:
"STILL waiting for some positive alternative ...
waiting .... waiting ........ waiting .... waiting ........waiting .... waiting ........waiting .... waiting ........hmmmmmmmm ... there never will be any offered, will there!

Kennedy? Pelosi? Read? Gore? Kerry? ....Hillary-ous? ... Cum on, it doesn't get more feable or lower ...... all sad excuses for humans, let alone for leaders ..... so, with no one to go to ....you all revert to hate
(i know, i spelled Ried wrong)

that's what libs do ...... dont answer when questioned ..... spout hate ... divert.....namecall ... etc. .... no reply over there in lala land.

Best to You TT ..... keep up the good work
LilJessicaSQuirt
♥§ΩuirT♥er & MFM Tail§

Oh well, getting bored waiting for their alternative ... think i'll go read Ann Coulter for a while.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/9/2006 10:17 am

    Quoting LilSquirt_4mfm:
    "You are a simple-minded, ignorant, hate-filled fool"
    lol ....... TT, it kinda makes your point i think

    so, a decent week for the good guys ....brit bust, .... our canada bust (noticing here now how quickly that our many lefties are becoming very anti muslim very fast here ... a bomb or 2 and they'll be showing the kkk how to do it)..... Z is history thus my high respect & congrats to the troops and govt for stick - at - it - ness (another quality we are all hated for .... Isreal plane shootdown plan thwarted tonight ......they got Abu Samhadana (#2 Hamas) in Rafah this morning... etc. .....

    funny, the post that started all this .... "40 "hates" i have ... ... bla bla ....." has pretty much died a slow death .... never even a whimper let alone a cum back to my statement there:
    "STILL waiting for some positive alternative ...
    waiting .... waiting ........ waiting .... waiting ........waiting .... waiting ........waiting .... waiting ........hmmmmmmmm ... there never will be any offered, will there!

    Kennedy? Pelosi? Read? Gore? Kerry? ....Hillary-ous? ... Cum on, it doesn't get more feable or lower ...... all sad excuses for humans, let alone for leaders ..... so, with no one to go to ....you all revert to hate
    (i know, i spelled Ried wrong)

    that's what libs do ...... dont answer when questioned ..... spout hate ... divert.....namecall ... etc. .... no reply over there in lala land.

    Best to You TT ..... keep up the good work
    Lil♥Jessica♥SQuirt
    ♥§ΩuirT♥er & MFM Tail§
    Oh well, getting bored waiting for their alternative ... think i'll go read Ann Coulter for a while.
Ann Coulter's new book has the libs up in arms! "The Church of Liberalism ... Godless". She even shocks me once in awhile, and then I think about what she has said and how she goes on to explain her point of view. A talented lady and outspoken voice for conservatism. Could you imagine the off-spring of a Rush Limbaugh - Ann Coulter marriage?! Wow!

The good guys are winning, and together, we will win the war against international terrorism. Kudos to you guys, to the Brits, to the Iraqis, to the Israelis and to others in this world who are helping to break up the forces of terror and evil!

We need to win the hearts and minds of young people around the world who would follow the more radical elements of their religion and/or of their society. I don't know how we do this? But, we have to find ways!

The libs say we should not upset the terrorists and opponents of democracy by being in places like Iraq. We should let them be. Liberal, stupid thinking like this will just get us killed. You eventually have to stand up to evil and fight it, NOT EMBRACE IT like the libs seem to want to do? You cannot talk to EVIL. Evil people will twist your mind around until you begin to think like them.

Now, lest some liberal accuses me of equating liberalism with EVIL, let me hasten to explain my thinking. I love the liberals and many of my friends are liberal thinking. But I oppose liberalism. Liberalism naively believes that bad people can be talked to and that we can reach accommodations by talking with bad people. Lord, I wish it were that easy! No one wants war and what it brings, but if you will look down through history, peace has never been won at a bargaining table. Peace was always won after war ... I am so sorry to have to report! Unfortunately, brave people died fighting for important ideals like freedom, liberty and self-governance. Human nature has not changed. There will always be tyrants, despots and evil people in this world. There will always be wonderful, godlike, peaceful and freedom-loving people in this world too. We will have to keep fighting and winning the battle against EVIL.

Conservatives, you could even argue, want war least of all. A true conservative believes in limited government. Preparing for war and preparing strong national defenses, brings big government and large bureaucracies like Defense Departments, military establishments and military service branches. But, conservatives do tend to live in the real world, and they know that the best way to guarantee peace and survival of their way of life is to have a strong military. Now, unfortunately large militaries create resentments, paranoia and fear among other countries. Free people and democracies with strong militaries must always withhold force as the last option, we must never use our militaries for expansion of territories and we must help other freedom-loving people when we can.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/9/2006 10:40 am

    Quoting rm_LoveSpell11:
    This is my last post to your vitriolic blog. You are a simple-minded, ignorant, hate-filled fool and are best ignored. "You people?" Puh-lease. And everyone from Massachusetts are "kooks and crazies?" No, you silly old fool, some of "us people" are just better educated than you. We employ this thing called "thinking." Look into it. Start by opening a "book." They are those things with pages. You may remember them from school, if you weren't too busy bullying the smart kids. lol

    I will repeat one piece of advice: Learn something. Read things that are in contrast to your views once in a while. Accept the possibility that even views that disagree with yours might have merit. But I already know you won't, because you do seem to enjoy poking liberals with your tiny stick.

    You are laughable, a complete joke, who posts other hate monger's extremist articles because you are unable to write or think for yourself.

    You are a court jester in the court of thought. If I ever need a laugh I may stop back.
All I can say is that "I rest my case"! You and others have proven my point about how leftist hate George W. Bush, Republicans, conservatives and basically anyone who happens to disagree with you.

"simple-minded, ignorant, hate-filled fool" - Why thanks for the high compliment! I have been called far worse by libs!

Critical thinking? Hmmm? Have never known a full-fledged liberal to be a critical thinker! Mostly they just hurl out their venomous attacks upon us poor little conservatives and berate us. They tell us we are uneducated, hate-filled, ignorant, unsophisticated, court jesters, laughable, evil, stupid and worse. Libs are ususally very condescending in their attitudes toward conservatives. Hmmmm? Much as you have done! Much as you seem to be!

Liberals think they are the privileged, the elite, the enlightened, humans of superior education and intellect! Poppycock!

Go read Ann Coulter's new book "The Church of Liberalism ... Godless". Oh, and I will not belittle you by questioning your ability to read a book as you have done to me. On the contrary, it is quite evident you have read much. The problem is that you have been reading the wrong things! And you lack the ability to think critically and reject some of these ill-conceived liberal notions!

You may suit yourself as to whether you return again to further enlighten me by posting in my blog. Libs are always welcome. They help me prove my points.


rm_skyeone2 64M/45F
7186 posts
6/9/2006 11:09 am

In response to some of your republican views! I am a Canadian and at one time when I was young, naive, stupid, and patriotic, or so I thought, I believed in many of the same things you do. Then in 1968 I joined the US military to fight what I believed were the evils of communism. That illusion ended within 2 weeks of landing on the Asian Continent. You sir on the other hand, I do not believe have served even one day in active duty or combat. You have never even seen real suffering or the brutality inflicted during a war. So I add the following:

Failure of Democracy: Iraq: What, We Worry?
For the smug, comfortable, well-off Americans, it doesn't seem to matter how long the war in Iraq goes on – as long as the agony is endured by others. If the network coverage gets too grim, viewers can always switch to the E! channel (one hand on the remote, the other burrowing into a bag of chips) to follow the hilarious antics of Paris, Britney, Brangelina et al.
The war is depressing and denial is the antidote. Why should ordinary citizens (good people, religious people, patriots) consider their role in – and responsibility for – the thunderous, unending carnage? Enough with this introspection. Let's go to the ballpark, get drunk and boo Barry Bonds. The nation is in deep denial about Iraq. For years the president and his supporting cast of arrogant, bullying characters have tried to put the best face on this war. They had no idea what they were doing when they ordered the invasion of Iraq, and they still don't. Many of the troops who were assured that the Iraqis would welcome them with open arms are now dead. And there's still no plan.

Here are the facts: The war so recklessly launched by the amateurs in the Bush White House has already taken scores of thousands of lives, and will ultimately cost the United States $1 trillion to $2 trillion. No one has been held accountable for this. While Mr. Bush's approval ratings are low, the public has been largely indifferent to the profound suffering in Iraq. This is primarily for two reasons: Because most Americans have no immediate personal stake in the war, and because the administration and the news media keep the worst of the suffering at a safe distance from the U.S. population.

The killing of American troops is usually kissed off with a paragraph or two in the major papers, and a sentence or two, at best, on national newscasts. (Imagine if someone in your office, sitting at a desk across from you, were suddenly blown to bits, splattering you with his or her blood. You wouldn't get over it for the rest of your life. This is what happens daily in Iraq.) The many thousands of Iraqis who are killed – including babies and children who are shot to death, blown up, or incinerated – remain completely unknown to the American public. So not only is there very little empathy for the suffering of Iraqis, there is virtually no sense among ordinary Americans of a shared responsibility for that suffering.

As was the case with Vietnam, the war in Iraq is a fool's errand. There is no clear mission for American troops in Iraq. No one can really say what the dead have died for. And yet the dying continues. When it all finally comes to an end (according to President Bush, on somebody else's watch) we'll look around at the hideous costs in human treasure and cold hard cash and ask ourselves: What in the world were we thinking?

Sincerely,
Swallow_22us


Blessed Be


LilSquirt_4mfm 67M/67F
3394 posts
6/9/2006 12:03 pm

TT

Absolutely .....many especially those screamers, confuse, "liking war" with "willing to go to war to protect" ... yes, true conservatives fight to stop war, now or future, BECAUSE they hate war so much ...... Miltary people KNOW war, and hate it a lot more than the theoretical lefties ever could ..... but they also know, sadly, sometimes fighting ends wars ... .not fighting often prolongs wars .. .and killing ...

The inaccurate ramblings on iraq etc of Swallow, above, are typical of them ........ that type get their "facts", ya right, from Air(Head)America, (aka (Hot)AirAmerica)...an unseemly dem party affilition with the Soros types ... who would lay down and give up for us.

Iraq... is most likely candidate for democracy of all muslim nations, for many reasons ... if Anyone of them is up to it ? ... i dont know if any moslems can do or want democracy ... jury is out ... we'll see ......if they dont, then we have a huge problem worldwide on our hands ... there will never be a solution ... only militant cells trying to kill us ...here in canada especially, a real mess, many of us WILL die i know, and starting SOON.... Count on it....... and NOT because of what WE did ........

because we are NOT Muslim ... that is our only sin. (you are so right that they cannot be reasoned with like libs think is possible ... only the missplaced & warped egos of libs could think they could pull that off.)

And, dont you libs be questioning us re war experiences / knowledge ... my dady died in war ...... with a letter left to me when i came of age warning me about how you libs would get us all killed if we ever let you do so. ... how intuitive and wise he has been proven to be!!

back to reading "hotbutton" Ann, lol ......

LilJessicaSQuirt
♥§ΩuirT♥er & MFM Tail§


LilSquirt_4mfm 67M/67F
3394 posts
6/9/2006 12:18 pm

if any of u libs want to see copy of the letter, ill be glad to give web address where it is displayed ...... if, u can handle the included horrors of actual war.

Libs are always welcome. They help me prove my points..... .... Sooooooooooo true ... and they think they are showing you up, ....and keep coming back for more, ...lmao!!!

as they go for ammo, ... Air(head(America >>>> TTiger >> Air(head(America >>>> TTiger >> Air(head(America >>>> TTiger >>

too funny!!!!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/9/2006 12:36 pm

    Quoting rm_skyeone2:
    In response to some of your republican views! I am a Canadian and at one time when I was young, naive, stupid, and patriotic, or so I thought, I believed in many of the same things you do. Then in 1968 I joined the US military to fight what I believed were the evils of communism. That illusion ended within 2 weeks of landing on the Asian Continent. You sir on the other hand, I do not believe have served even one day in active duty or combat. You have never even seen real suffering or the brutality inflicted during a war. So I add the following:

    Failure of Democracy: Iraq: What, We Worry?
    For the smug, comfortable, well-off Americans, it doesn't seem to matter how long the war in Iraq goes on – as long as the agony is endured by others. If the network coverage gets too grim, viewers can always switch to the E! channel (one hand on the remote, the other burrowing into a bag of chips) to follow the hilarious antics of Paris, Britney, Brangelina et al.
    The war is depressing and denial is the antidote. Why should ordinary citizens (good people, religious people, patriots) consider their role in – and responsibility for – the thunderous, unending carnage? Enough with this introspection. Let's go to the ballpark, get drunk and boo Barry Bonds. The nation is in deep denial about Iraq. For years the president and his supporting cast of arrogant, bullying characters have tried to put the best face on this war. They had no idea what they were doing when they ordered the invasion of Iraq, and they still don't. Many of the troops who were assured that the Iraqis would welcome them with open arms are now dead. And there's still no plan.

    Here are the facts: The war so recklessly launched by the amateurs in the Bush White House has already taken scores of thousands of lives, and will ultimately cost the United States $1 trillion to $2 trillion. No one has been held accountable for this. While Mr. Bush's approval ratings are low, the public has been largely indifferent to the profound suffering in Iraq. This is primarily for two reasons: Because most Americans have no immediate personal stake in the war, and because the administration and the news media keep the worst of the suffering at a safe distance from the U.S. population.

    The killing of American troops is usually kissed off with a paragraph or two in the major papers, and a sentence or two, at best, on national newscasts. (Imagine if someone in your office, sitting at a desk across from you, were suddenly blown to bits, splattering you with his or her blood. You wouldn't get over it for the rest of your life. This is what happens daily in Iraq.) The many thousands of Iraqis who are killed – including babies and children who are shot to death, blown up, or incinerated – remain completely unknown to the American public. So not only is there very little empathy for the suffering of Iraqis, there is virtually no sense among ordinary Americans of a shared responsibility for that suffering.

    As was the case with Vietnam, the war in Iraq is a fool's errand. There is no clear mission for American troops in Iraq. No one can really say what the dead have died for. And yet the dying continues. When it all finally comes to an end (according to President Bush, on somebody else's watch) we'll look around at the hideous costs in human treasure and cold hard cash and ask ourselves: What in the world were we thinking?

    Sincerely,
    Swallow_22us
Another Bush-hater has joined the discussion! Welcome to the discussion, Swallow!

This is a nice liberal piece you have copied and pasted, my dear. It's very inflammatory and emotional. But, let me ask you a few questions, if I may. Let's do a little critical thinking here for ourselves, shall we?

1. Who is doing the killing in Iraq? And who is being killed? Are you so naive to believe that, were coaltion forces to leave that area of the world, the killing would suddenly stop? I agree that temporarily, the killing and wounding of coalition forces would subside and then what? At what point later after the region had deteriorated into a regional conflict would we and other countries be drawn back into the conflict.

2. Do you really believe that Americans are so callous about this war that we ignore the war news that is constantly brought into our homes and into our offices by all sorts of media, TV, radio, newspapers and magazines? I challenge the underlying premise of the article you have copied and pasted. Americans, as well as all other people from countries who are participating as part of the coalition forces in support of Iraqi security forces, agonize everyday over the progress being made in Iraq. Everyone knows full well that we take two steps forward one day only to lose a step backward the following day. This week, we have seen a couple positive steps forward. Now, we will see a reaction to the killing of Al Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and a reaction to the naming of the Minister of the Interior (who controls the Iraqi police) and the Minister of Defense (who controls the Iraqi security forces). One minister is Sunni Muslim while the other is Shiite Muslim. Precisely because Americans are not callous about this war is the reason we argue and debate what needs to be done. We do this in close consultation with the Iraqis, the members of the coalition forces and others. U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair was in Washington, D.C. only weeks ago for talks with President George Bush and his administration. They are both taking their political hits on the Iraq war and they are both courageously leading vs. shrinking in the face of political opposition and armed opposition to bringing about democracy in Iraq.

3. Are you suggesting that we "cut and run" in Iraq? Were we to withdraw coalition forces from Iraq at this point, what would happen? Would the new unity government of freely elected Iraqis be ready and able to preserve, protect and defend their own new democracy from all the forces of tyranny and terrorism that would seek to destroy what has been built thus far? I really doubt it. And I think most thoughtful people doubt it as well. Is there NO point at which you liberals would stand up to EVIL? You live in Canada, and you have just seen 17 young radical terrorists thwarted in their plans to do major damage in your own country. (By the way, kudos to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and thanks to them for coordinating with our FBI so we could nab two suspected terrorists in Georgia!) Wake up and smell the coffee! Sticking our heads in the sand will not make this problem go away ... as much as you and I both wish it would go away!

4. What exactly do you and the author of that piece mean when you refer to us "smug, comfortable, well-off Americans"? When you speak of "smug", are you referring to the dictionary definition
... "Exhibiting or feeling great or offensive satisfaction with oneself or with one's situation; self-righteously complacent?" Surely not, for I know of no American who is satisfied or complacent with the loss of so many lives in Iraq. I know of no American who is satisfied that we have now been there 39 months already. I know of no American who is happy that our national debt has climbed to $7 trillion dollars or about $24,000 for each and every man, woman and child of our entire 290 million population. And that cost is, of course, even higher if expressed "per taxpayer". And the word "comfortable"? We Americans are not comfortable with war. Our sons and daughters are dying in Iraq to support their mission. Our country is very divided over this war. So, give me a break when you say we are "comfortable". And then you use the word "well-off". Yes, we are well-off by comparison to many people in this world. We are well-off by comparison to the Iraqi people who are dying because of sectarian violence, insurgents who want to thwart democracy and terrorists who just want to destabilize western civilization and any country which aligns itself with ideals of freedom, liberty, democracy, capitalism and a better economic life. We are trying to share this with a new democracy in the middle east. We are "well-off" in many ways and we believe the Iraqis deserve to be "well-off" as well! I am so proud to be an American. I am proud that we are helping them. I am proud of our young men and women who are bravely serving this worthy objective.

Well, that's enough! You probably don't understand anyway. You probably just choose to feel good about yourself, because you are "anti-war". Unfortunately, you fail to recognize the evil in the world that from time to time has to be faced down in various places of the world! U.S. military men and women understand this concept! God bless those young men and women!


sillyperv 54M

6/10/2006 8:38 am

MODERATE? ME? Sorry T, but I'm pro union - generally, not always specifically, prowelfare - which I think is cheaper than building prisons - universal medicare and education and that pot should be decriminalized, though I don't smoke it. I believe in an active government that represents the interests of the people and not just a corporate elite. I don't believe in "the bottom line" as a means of defining a society and how it behaves. I also think that defining yourself with a "left" or "right" label warps a person's judgement, which is true of any ideology.

I don't believe in God, but think that the only valid definition of the self is a moral one, the rest, sexuality, politics, ethnicity, skin colour is just window dressing that reflects the moral self.

I don't believe the right to "bare arms", especially fat people.

Oh, and Ann Coulter is a LUNATIC! Nothing I have ever read, heard or listened too has changed that opinion.

And, and, of most importance, The TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS is the greatest sports team in the world and ITALY should always win the World Cup.

How do you view the world?


TTigerAtty 62M

6/11/2006 1:07 pm

    Quoting LilSquirt_4mfm:
    TT

    Absolutely .....many especially those screamers, confuse, "liking war" with "willing to go to war to protect" ... yes, true conservatives fight to stop war, now or future, BECAUSE they hate war so much ...... Miltary people KNOW war, and hate it a lot more than the theoretical lefties ever could ..... but they also know, sadly, sometimes fighting ends wars ... .not fighting often prolongs wars .. .and killing ...

    The inaccurate ramblings on iraq etc of Swallow, above, are typical of them ........ that type get their "facts", ya right, from Air(Head)America, (aka (Hot)AirAmerica)...an unseemly dem party affilition with the Soros types ... who would lay down and give up for us.

    Iraq... is most likely candidate for democracy of all muslim nations, for many reasons ... if Anyone of them is up to it ? ... i dont know if any moslems can do or want democracy ... jury is out ... we'll see ......if they dont, then we have a huge problem worldwide on our hands ... there will never be a solution ... only militant cells trying to kill us ...here in canada especially, a real mess, many of us WILL die i know, and starting SOON.... Count on it....... and NOT because of what WE did ........

    because we are NOT Muslim ... that is our only sin. (you are so right that they cannot be reasoned with like libs think is possible ... only the missplaced & warped egos of libs could think they could pull that off.)

    And, dont you libs be questioning us re war experiences / knowledge ... my dady died in war ...... with a letter left to me when i came of age warning me about how you libs would get us all killed if we ever let you do so. ... how intuitive and wise he has been proven to be!!

    back to reading "hotbutton" Ann, lol ......

    Lil♥Jessica♥SQuirt
    ♥§ΩuirT♥er & MFM Tail§
Your father was a wise man who was thinking ahead. I'm sorry you lost him at a young age!


TTigerAtty 62M

6/11/2006 1:12 pm

    Quoting sillyperv:
    MODERATE? ME? Sorry T, but I'm pro union - generally, not always specifically, prowelfare - which I think is cheaper than building prisons - universal medicare and education and that pot should be decriminalized, though I don't smoke it. I believe in an active government that represents the interests of the people and not just a corporate elite. I don't believe in "the bottom line" as a means of defining a society and how it behaves. I also think that defining yourself with a "left" or "right" label warps a person's judgement, which is true of any ideology.

    I don't believe in God, but think that the only valid definition of the self is a moral one, the rest, sexuality, politics, ethnicity, skin colour is just window dressing that reflects the moral self.

    I don't believe the right to "bare arms", especially fat people.

    Oh, and Ann Coulter is a LUNATIC! Nothing I have ever read, heard or listened too has changed that opinion.

    And, and, of most importance, The TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS is the greatest sports team in the world and ITALY should always win the World Cup.

    How do you view the world?
Hockey and soccer? Are those real sports? I'm into baseball, football and basketball!

How do I view the world? I'd love to have Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter over for dinner to discuss my thoughts.


LilSquirt_4mfm 67M/67F
3394 posts
6/11/2006 4:46 pm

TT .....

Guess what? .... i just had a visit from the "hater" ... ? Guess he maybe didnt appreciate a comment i made there??

he left a comment as follows .......

"I will not comment here." .... huh???? lmao

Thought you give you a smile @ least.

lil


LilSquirt_4mfm 67M/67F
3394 posts
6/11/2006 4:53 pm

TT .....(left wing logic @ it's best!!!)

Guess what? .... i just had a visit from the "hater x 40" ... Guess he maybe didnt appreciate a comment i made there??

he left a comment on my blog as follows .......

"I will not comment here." .... huh????
Thought it might you give you a smile @ least.

lil


TTigerAtty 62M

6/12/2006 9:46 am

    Quoting LilSquirt_4mfm:
    TT .....(left wing logic @ it's best!!!)

    Guess what? .... i just had a visit from the "hater x 40" ... Guess he maybe didnt appreciate a comment i made there??

    he left a comment on my blog as follows .......

    "I will not comment here." .... huh????
    Thought it might you give you a smile @ least.

    lil
Is it time to make our peace with the liberals? They are nice people too! And maybe they will allow us to be spokespeople for them! "Conservative dolts finally see the light and convert to liberalism!"


LilSquirt_4mfm 67M/67F
3394 posts
6/15/2006 5:00 pm

TT

looking closely at the face i see in the pic .........hmmmm,......i'm not buying fear or defeat at all ..... You're so used to tricking "them", but they are easy ...... you can't trick me ....uh uh ......

however, we could trick them, ......make them THINK we are defeated and want to convert ..... get inside ........ say all the right things, like "Ann is gay! ..or "Zarqy is killed, so bring the troops home now or the other guys might win there, causing us to loose the next election" ... scowl when there's any good news on terror ....etc etc ... they'll believe us ...........then, we get em .....by the left nut, lol.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/15/2006 6:21 pm

    Quoting LilSquirt_4mfm:
    TT

    looking closely at the face i see in the pic .........hmmmm,......i'm not buying fear or defeat at all ..... You're so used to tricking "them", but they are easy ...... you can't trick me ....uh uh ......

    however, we could trick them, ......make them THINK we are defeated and want to convert ..... get inside ........ say all the right things, like "Ann is gay! ..or "Zarqy is killed, so bring the troops home now or the other guys might win there, causing us to loose the next election" ... scowl when there's any good news on terror ....etc etc ... they'll believe us ...........then, we get em .....by the left nut, lol.
LilSquirt ... I so love your sense of humor! I've decided to be nicer to them, to be more sensitive, more compassionate. I will try to share their pain and unhappiness in this week that saw the Republicans get Karl Rove off the hook, fly Bush to Baghdad, take out the Zarq-man and his lieutenants, execute another 100 arrests, develop a plan for success with the Iraqi Prime Minister, get Ann Coulter on the 6/25 New York Times Best Seller list debuting at #1 in the book's first week, get George's approval rating back up to 40%, get a drop in crude oil prices, get a jump in the stock market, and get Joe Lieberman to consider jumping ship! All in all, it's been a very good week for America but a sad week for our loveable liberal friends! I am offering to go tip a few beers with any of them who wish to do so!


LilSquirt_4mfm 67M/67F
3394 posts
6/15/2006 7:52 pm


well, you've been very generous and gentle to them when we were loosing ...... seems you are absolutely magnanimous in winning times ...... yes, we been trying to keep up with current win streak

seriously, i'd like to be friendly with them ... but they usually make it very difficult to do so, we have found, after some genuine attempts. However, we do keep trying ...... seems socially, they dont get my jokes, lol.... always have confused look on their face .... like they are certain i've lost it .. lol.

Maybe we could keep the subject on sex?? .. .think that night help keep it nice? .. .or talk about "soulmates" and stuff like that? and have a good evening ....so long as that wierd bearded little professor doesnt follow me into the ladies washroom ...............again.


TTigerAtty 62M

6/16/2006 4:12 am

    Quoting LilSquirt_4mfm:

    well, you've been very generous and gentle to them when we were loosing ...... seems you are absolutely magnanimous in winning times ...... yes, we been trying to keep up with current win streak

    seriously, i'd like to be friendly with them ... but they usually make it very difficult to do so, we have found, after some genuine attempts. However, we do keep trying ...... seems socially, they dont get my jokes, lol.... always have confused look on their face .... like they are certain i've lost it .. lol.

    Maybe we could keep the subject on sex?? .. .think that night help keep it nice? .. .or talk about "soulmates" and stuff like that? and have a good evening ....so long as that wierd bearded little professor doesnt follow me into the ladies washroom ...............again.
Sorry you're being stalked by a wierd bearded little professor!

Yes, I was more liked on this site when I just told jokes, wrote about sports, wrote poems (like a good metrosexual, girly man) and made idle polite conversation. But, then I dared to enter the world of politics and discuss things that truly matter in this world. I didn't follow the liberal script (apparently more accepted on this site) and now I am an ignorant, intolerant, hillbilly, Missouri, racist, homophobe, neo-con, neo-nazi, kool-aid drinking, Bush supporter. And those are just my better attributes!

I can no longer sleep at night because I mourn the loss of their superficial friendship (meaning a friend as long as I appeared to be exactly like them). What, oh what will I now do? Shall I beg their forgiveness and try to get back into their good graces? Shall I take out a membership with the ACLU, moveon.org, perhaps send a contribution to AirAmerica, throw a party for local baby-killing abortionists?

Help me, my dear friend? What do you suggest? I would like to be friendly with these loveable liberals!


Become a member to create a blog