Bush LIED!!! He LIED!!!

[Preechr]

Originally Posted by KevinTheHerbivore

(although much like Anarchism, most people seem to pick and choose qualities they prefer, rather than adopting the entire ideology).

I've worked hard to come to terms with the entire ideology, though I think guys like Brown go to far saying that we should ignore the fact that America spent the Cold War projecting power all over the world and have integrated America into every mud-hut on the planet. There are international issues to be addressed, but I'm interested in a return to minding our own damn business.

I was born a Libertarian, and then learned a little about them. I've actually looked at the web page twice, though I link it in my Newsfilter sig (or used to...) I can defend any of it successfully, I believe.

Originally Posted by Kev

Can I have a few examples of these sweet nothings???

You've cited examples yourself. I'm being terribly general here, and I haven't read everything you've ever posted, so please keep it in mind that I'm not personally addressing your actions or arguments unless I say so... I'm talking about the predictions of "another Vietnam" and "millions of casualties" and crap like that. Those that said we'd have that marginalized themselves, and continue to do so crying "Wolf!" over every little turn in the road...

Originally Posted by Kev

I think you're misrepresenting the views of "the Left" on this war. I know there were anarchists and commies out there who wanted to see America lose, and some communist groups even chastized "the Left" for condemning Saddam Hussein (something folks like ABCDxxxx claims never happened).

You Sir give "the Left" far too much credit. It's far too divisive and elitist to actually agree on one slogan or thought pattern, and personally, I think most of thwe anti-war folks I know sincerely wanted our men and women to sit this one out.

I also have a problem with your claim that the war didn't go as expected. Do you think people on the Left deny the military capabilities of America?? I personally, when realizing the inevitability of the war, wanted it to be swift and painless as possible. I HOPED al of our gadgets and toys payed off.

But next you're going to tell me that it was a careful and humane war, which is true, but why? In February (?), Rummy was throwing the word "nuclear" around in the same sentence as Baghdad. Don't ya think record breaking protests around the world had just a tiny bit to do with our military's caution...?

I'll say (on that last bit) that I'd never actually considered that. I'll tell you why, though: Bush has yet to address any dissent to his way of doing things. It took far too long for him to talk about the "He Lied!!" accusation, which could possibly be excused by his absense... but as I said, he just never explains his actions.

I personally would have LOVED for him to have a little fireside chat on TV, discarding the endless repetition and rhetoric that seemed designed to hypnotize his viewers, and addressing the many valid points made by those truly opposed to THIS war as well as those opposed to ALL wars. I would like to hear that this war was a step toward ending war altogether, as I believe it can be, but I want to hear our president SAY THAT. I guess he's just not that guy.

The sad part is, none of the guys lining up to oppose him are either.

My main problem is with the anti-Bush (only) opposition to the war. They've made major asses out of themselves and embarrassed, if not outright harmed, America. Politics needs to be put back in its proper place in this country.

Originally Posted by Kev

I think many of the opinion polls would disagree with you (now of course you can dismiss those, but please first admit that you probably cited Bush's high approval polls at one point or another).

Nope, I never have. I think polls are nearly always biased, actually. I treat them all that way, anyways... Polls are important to a Democracy, which we are not and never should we be, and they feed a desire for mob-rule, which is seldom and then only coincidentally based on logic and morality.

Originally Posted by Kev

Granted, those same polls tend to show that most Americans DON'T care about the WMD, and are just proud that we have liberated Iraq (these same citizens will of course dismiss the possibility of sending troops into Liberia on humanitarian grounds. One puritanical crusade is enough for them).

SOMETHING should be done with Liberia, preferably by Liberians or Africans... same thinking applies to N Korea. I find it difficult to believe in the latter case that s Korea is STILL incapable of dealing with their northern neighbor. Doesn't speak too highly of our victory in that costly war, IMO...

Originally Posted by me

DNC rhetoric is more than ever preaching to the choir when it needs more than ever to be reaching out to the masses.

Originally Posted by Kev

Like Al From's latest slap in the face to the protest movement, calling them an aberration...? DLC and DNC are practically one in the same in their thought process, and they certainly aren't preaching to any choir, they are instead preaching to a mythical American constructed by the Republican Party.

Joe says he doesn't even know who Al From is. The difference between the DLC and the DNC is also not ringing any bells, either. Joe says he votes for the guys that cut his taxes (even though he doesn't pay any) and win wars. He doesn't like the Welfare party (even though his common law wife is on assistance) ESPECIALLY since that whole Dixie Chicks crap that happened in France. Joe might even be bothered to go pull a lever on that day he takes off every year this time around if the Democrats don't let W get the job done over there in E-Rack.

Originally Posted by Kev

Whatever "1996" means...

Pre-9/11. Things have changed, and what Republicans were fit what America needed after 9/11. There's still room for criticism, though... but you have to do it right if you don't want to come off as an intemperate bitch.

I'm just re-phrasing what you said after the above quote really. I think we're on the same page here...

Originally Posted by Kev

A sales tax debate may be a complete tangent, but I think the proverbial chickens will come home to roost if Republicans seriously propose a national sales tax over an income tax. A sales tax on items, a presumably high one, will seem like an income tax to Americans, one that hits them every time they purchase something. This would also effect people of lower incomes more, because they'd be paying the same tax on a lesser quality of goods (on average) compared to the evil rich man.

www.fairtax.org

VERY fair taxation, with tons of built ins to guarantee the poor are still sheltered... sheltered BETTER, actually. The main advantage over a flat tax is that a sales tax is optional in times of dire need.

That site is extremely comprehensive and, as far as I can see, bullet-proof. </tangent>

Originally Posted by Kev

Forgive me, I wasn't trying to be picky. I was being honest when I said economics is a weakness of mine, so your point conflicted with the little bit that I do in fact know.

...and you just HAD to point it out, didn't you? haha...

Originally Posted by Kev

I believe 1/3 of our government programs functioned on money they didn't actually have this past fiscal year. That's not a cooked number, that's a problem, IMO.

Think of it as running those programs on credit. Both parties are equally big spenders now, so a deficit is just a hedge against future tax cuts... keeping big government strong and healthy! The party in power just doesn't "have the money" to spend on the weaker party's programs "because we have a deficit to worry about."

This isn't economics. Pure Politics...

Mike Savage couldn't have said it better himself.

Never watched or heard him... but I'll take that, in my ignorance, as a compliment... just because I like being complimented... :D