Will You Watch the Debate?

You think you have it bad DontTread, Im always the only pro-lifer at the tree hugging events.

I am so far right that I cant even imagine what the center looks like, yet, with my stand on the environment, Im so far left that I make GreenPeace look like a chapter of the young republicans.

0 Replies

wow! you do have it ruff!!!
that's what we get for being inconsistant Laughing

that might make an interesting new thread.

0 Replies

Rex,
Not that I have to justify and or defend my feelings about the US to you, but I don't hate America. I am not anti-American. I believe it's pretty darn good. That said, I believe there's a whole lot of room for improvement, and I'd prefer to deal with those areas first and foremost. I'd rather address the beam in my own eye than to point out the splinter in someone else's.

I'll let you in on a little something, Rex: Just because someone doesn't hold your political views doesn't make them anti-American. Hurling accusations is no way to treat the issues at hand; it just serves to obfuscate them.

Democracy is generally a good thing, but it is not a panacea for every political or societal ill in the world. There are countries in the world that are democracies who's political and societal realities are left wanting, and the US has proven itself that it is not above supporting corrupt "democratic" governments and even outright authoritarian ones in pursuit of its own self-interests. Ever heard of "President" Ferdinand Marcos? Uzbekistan? Cries of "FREEDOM!!!" "DEMOCRACY!!!" wrench the heart, but tend to ring hollow judged against our propensity to ignore these ideals when pursuing our own interests in the world.

About the rest of your diatribe, I was going to respond but nimh beat me to it. It's like I had taken a deep breath and opened my mouth wide, but then nimh responded and took the words right out of my mouth. He and de Kere have an uncanny way of doing that sometimes.

I have to hand it to nimh though, I'm far more cynical of the situation in Afghanistan than he is.

0 Replies

BCP1 wrote:

You think you have it bad DontTread, Im always the only pro-lifer at the tree hugging events.

I am so far right that I cant even imagine what the center looks like, yet, with my stand on the environment, Im so far left that I make GreenPeace look like a chapter of the young republicans.

Sounds like a fascinating stand ;-)

Not one I'd agree with, obviously ... but obviously very independent-minded!

Welcome to A2K by the way.

0 Replies

Yes, I remain an incurable optimist at heart, InfraBlue ...

0 Replies

I just don't see things the same way some of you do... I don't see the US as occupiers but liberators.

"and i just don't see us getting the right results with the Kerry team."

So we are in complete juxtaposition..

I have faith in the US and the job they are trying to accomplish in Iraq and I think some of the pessimistic comments are hurting the spirits of our fighters who are putting their lives on the line every day to insure our security at home... They are reading your comments now and feeling hurt like I feel when I read them. This is not the truth that hurts... this is hate. I choose to give encouragement and not pull a John Kerry and defame them behind their backs. You may think that I am insulting Kerry but that is the way I feel about his actions. I do not and cannot trust him. And yes that opinion of mine is not up for debate. He has said too much, the damage is done, the die is cast and nothing could being him back into my graces. I still honor your rights to an opinion but let it be known I wholeheartedly disagree.

0 Replies

Thanks to all that have welcomed me to this site. It has been a pleasure so far to converse with people that realize the clear opportunity that we have in exchanging ideas that differ as much as ours do.

I just returned from the John Kerry website where I spent time going over his thoughts once again.

I must say that even though I still prefer president Bush to John Kerry, Kerry would not be the end of the world that most of his opponents claim.

I agree with many of his ideas, yet I fear the consequence financially if they were implimented just as he wants.

I have to agree with him 100% when it comes to Energy, and the evironment since both are hand in hand.

at the same time, I fear any candidate that openly claims that there are serious problems with civil rights, then goes on to mention every combination of American except the white male. do not take this to mean that I would enjoy any society that was openly able to discriminate.

John Kerry has many good ideas, but he fails to bring to light where this money is coming from to fund these programs. We have seen in the past that once a program is started, it can never end, it can never become cheaper, and in many cases it can never be afforded.

I look at both candidates stands and I give a point for each item I agree with to the candidate in question.
At this time, I must vote for George Bush, again. And still, should Kerry win, It will not be the end of America.

Thanks for letting me ramble

0 Replies

I am way far right (more than Bush) on the war on terror, far left on the environment and center on pro life. I do not advocate the killing of the innocent but when it comes to the system of terror it is either them or us.

My mom's father fought in two world wars landed on the shores of Normandy... My father was a sea captain and brought supertankers full of oil and chemicals through the entire second world war. I know and love this country and am a true patriot. I weep when I hear the national anthem and love my old glory stars and stripes.

I see the Kerry supporters waving communist banners and palestinian flags and I cringe... They are like spitting on the sacrifice that was made by what has been termed as "the greatest generation". Kerry does not denounce these types of supporters and flip flops to keep them in his fold. You can see why I do not like the man.

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

They are reading your comments now and feeling hurt like I feel when I read them. This is not the truth that hurts... this is hate.

I think we have at least one American soldier who was out there in the Middle East posting here actually ...

And you'd be hard fetched to find people here who "hate" the American troops. Bush perhaps, yeah, not the individual troops.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

RexRed wrote:
They are reading your comments now and feeling hurt like I feel when I read them. This is not the truth that hurts... this is hate.

I think we have at least one American soldier who was out there in the Middle East posting here actually ...

And you'd be hard fetched to find people here who "hate" the American troops. Bush perhaps, yeah, not the individual troops.

The terrorists sure hate the American troops. The French/Spanish must hate them too if they can sit back and watch them die and not lift a finger to help.

0 Replies

The terrorists are killing more iraqis than americans, I believe.

0 Replies

Interesting post, BCP1.

BCP1 wrote:

John Kerry has many good ideas, but he fails to bring to light where this money is coming from to fund these programs. We have seen in the past that once a program is started, it can never end, it can never become cheaper, and in many cases it can never be afforded.

My understanding is that the money stuff works out -- he has a plan for where the money will come from, not one source but lots of ways. Paul Krugman approves, and he's someone I tend to trust on financial matters. One OF the major sources would be rolling back tax credit on the top 2%. Just the top 2%. It would be a lot of money, but wouldn't impact people beyond not being able to afford that third yacht.

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

The terrorists sure hate the American troops. The French/Spanish must hate them too if they can sit back and watch them die and not lift a finger to help.

The terrorists, yes. The French, no. They didn't want the Americans to go into Iraq. They told Bush that they thought it was a disastrous idea to go into Iraq. He had them go in anyway. And now they're supposed to bail him out, and die themselves in a war they opposed from the start? That doesn't make any sense.

Did you hate, let's say, the Angolese or Zimbabweans? I assume not. But would you have sent American soldiers in to help them out (and probably die) when they decided to send their troops into Congo? I assume, again, not. If other countries start wars and invasions you think are wrong - that you told them were wrong - can you reasonably be expected to then send in your own men to die alongside them, even if you're allies?

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

RexRed wrote:
The terrorists sure hate the American troops. The French/Spanish must hate them too if they can sit back and watch them die and not lift a finger to help.

The terrorists, yes. The French, no. They didn't want the Americans to go into Iraq. They told Bush that they thought it was a disastrous idea to go into Iraq. He had them go in anyway. And now they're supposed to bail him out, and die themselves in a war they opposed from the start? That doesn't make any sense.

Did you hate, let's say, the Angolese or Zimbabweans? I assume not. But would you have sent American soldiers in to help them out (and probably die) when they decided to send their troops into Congo? I assume, again, not. If other countries start wars and invasions you think are wrong - that you told them were wrong - can you reasonably be expected to then send in your own men to die alongside them, even if you're allies?

Why would the French not oppose the war when they were making so much money off of the lucrative under the UN table "arms" deals with Saddam. When they were bleeding the oil for food program dry and making Americans look like fools anyway? Then the French sit back and pretend like they are pacifists and so anti war... Yes the French.

0 Replies

Do you think the US has gone into Iraq without any designs for lucre, Rex?

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

Why would the French not oppose the war when they were making so much money off of the lucrative under the UN table "arms" deals with Saddam. When they were bleeding the oil for food program dry and making Americans look like fools anyway? Then the French sit back and pretend like they are pacifists and so anti war... Yes the French.

Hmm .. one thing that argument ignores - but we've been around this one a couple of times already on this board - is that it wasn't just the French government that opposed the war, but also some 80% or 90% of the French people. Who had little to do with the Oil-for-Food fraud and in fact didn't at the time even know about it.

Furthermore, it wasn't just the French either - opponents also included the Germans, the Austrians, the Greeks, the Swiss, the Belgians, the Swedish, the Norwegians and/or whatall. Most of whom - neither governments nor peoples - had anything whatsoever to do with the Oil-for-Food fraud.

0 Replies

Don't forget the Spanish and British public.

0 Replies

InfraBlue wrote:

Do you think the US has gone into Iraq without any designs for lucre, Rex?

If that was the case we would be charging the Iraqi people for the war.

nimh wrote:

RexRed wrote:
Why would the French not oppose the war when they were making so much money off of the lucrative under the UN table "arms" deals with Saddam. When they were bleeding the oil for food program dry and making Americans look like fools anyway? Then the French sit back and pretend like they are pacifists and so anti war... Yes the French.

Hmm .. one thing that argument ignores - but we've been around this one a couple of times already on this board - is that it wasn't just the French government that opposed the war, but also some 80% or 90% of the French people. Who had little to do with the Oil-for-Food fraud and in fact didn't at the time even know about it.

Furthermore, it wasn't just the French either - opponents also included the Germans, the Austrians, the Greeks, the Swiss, the Belgians, the Swedish, the Norwegians and/or whatall. Most of whom - neither governments nor peoples - had anything whatsoever to do with the Oil-for-Food fraud.

The US tracked the French at the time making calls to all of these countries pleading their pacifistic case without telling the allies the reason it would be such a disaster... because the world would be fighting French made weapons.

0 Replies

Thee European people were against it because the were forced fed the same left wing politics that is posted here from time to time. i.e. the BBC and others... Kind of like CBS (which stands for "Cock and Bull Story") and Ted Kopel.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Interesting post, BCP1.

BCP1 wrote:

John Kerry has many good ideas, but he fails to bring to light where this money is coming from to fund these programs. We have seen in the past that once a program is started, it can never end, it can never become cheaper, and in many cases it can never be afforded.

My understanding is that the money stuff works out -- he has a plan for where the money will come from, not one source but lots of ways. Paul Krugman approves, and he's someone I tend to trust on financial matters. One OF the major sources would be rolling back tax credit on the top 2%. Just the top 2%. It would be a lot of money, but wouldn't impact people beyond not being able to afford that third yacht.

From the Cato Institute:

Low taxes allow for investment and innovation, which lead to greater productivity and prosperity. Moreover, low taxes help expand human freedom. As Edmund Burke observed more than two centuries ago, questions of human freedom and taxation are often interconnected. "Liberty," he wrote, "inheres in some sensible object; and every nation has... some favorite point, which by way of eminence becomes the criterion of their happiness. It happened... that the great contests for freedom in this country [United Kingdom] were from earliest times chiefly upon the question of taxing."

In the United Kingdom, the King lost his head because of his rapacious appetite for other people's hard-earned money. And, lest we forget, the American Revolution against the British started out as a tax rebellion. The question of low taxes, then, was at the birth of the American Republic and American freedom. Howard Dean, however, claims that low taxes are bad for America. If so, when did things change?

Source

0 Replies

Will You Watch the Debate?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know