liberals....

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

He has not captured OBL.

By the way... I think that says it all, for those who feel that Bush has done something wonderful for our country since 9/11.

The man who orchestrated the attacks that killed nearly three thousand people on American soil, is STILL free, while the president you support has been focusing his attentions elsewhere.

[sparky]

Originally Posted by Sugar

I found these two paragraphs to be the most interesting. These are fears everyone has, and if people oppose Bush it's not because they don't think our lives are in danger from terrorists.

Hmmm...other than for about 2 days after 9/11, I have NEVER had a shred of fear about terrorism. I don't think there will be another attack on our soil any time soon. For crying out loud, it's been almost three years, and nothing has happened over here. It isn't like anyone needed a PhD to carry out the earlier attacks. A trained monkey could put anthrax in our water supply. Hasn't happened.

I refuse to live my life ruled by fear. I don't we should be governed by it either. Other than seat belts, health insurance and condoms, few of my decisions are fear based. Even those aren't fear based. Common sense is more my rule. Sense, yeah. Fear ? Nope.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

You said:
______________________________________________________________
If someone wants an extreme conservative in the White House, I can't stop them from voting for him, and I most likely can't change their minds.
All I can hope is that someday they'll wake up and see that life isn't all about who's going to raise or lower your taxes.

Johnny "Proud To Be A Bleeding Heart Liberal" Stew
______________________________________________________________

I took that to mean the R's are the ones who want to lower taxes because they are the ones the far left labels extreme conservative like i submit W is. I did not know you included D's in the category of "extreme conservative" --- but what do I know In any even and whatever you meant, they both voted for it so they both fit in the definition

No, no, no, Jason... the point I'm trying to make, is that I don't care which of the parties raises or lowers taxes.
I'm trying to say that there are more important issues than taxes.

The "extreme conservative" comment was meant completely in regards to social issues... and it's the social issues that I think are the most important and pressing.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

By the way... I think that says it all, for those who feel that Bush has done something wonderful for our country since 9/11.

The man who orchestrated the attacks that killed nearly three thousand people on American soil, is STILL free, while the president you support has been focusing his attentions elsewhere.

But the point is could Kerry or anyone for that matter have done better. I mean if you want to get right down to it, Clinton had more than one opportunity but did not get him and he had attacked America more than once by then. If people think Kerry can do it better, then he deserves to win on that basis. But, nothing he has espoused suggests he could have I guess Kerry could say we should not have gone to Iraq and removed SH and instead concentrated on finding OBL, but that would be a little hard for him to argue since he voted to bomb SH in 1998, expressed continuous rhetoric about the need to remove the grave danger imposed by SH, and voted to give W a free hand in removing him. Plus, the D platform agrees that SH was a threat. I think Kerry will have trouble arguing his way out of this one. But, he really only has to sell the wiggle to a relatively few number of people in about four states So who knows. I think the better argument is W has done what he thought was right but it has not worked and here is what Kerry can do that is better. We have yet to hear it like that.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by Wild Heart

As for those of you who think my opinions are fear based, that very well maybe true. I do fear for the safety of my friends and family and you should too. Whether you believe this administration or not, you cannot deny that there are people out there who want to kill you, me and our families and will stop at nothing to achieve their goals. I do fear that there will be another attack on US soil before November to help sway the election just like in Spain.

WHERE IS BIN LADEN AND WHY DOES OUR PRESIDENT SAY HE "DOESN'T CARE" WHERE HE IS?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

No, no, no, Jason... the point I'm trying to make, is that I don't care which of the parties raises or lowers taxes.
I'm trying to say that there are more important issues than taxes.

The "extreme conservative" comment was meant completely in regards to social issues... and it's the social issues that I think are the most important and pressing.

Touche' Touche'

[Sugar]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I agree. I think W's actions have been to placate Americans. He has not captured OBL, the guy who did 9/11. His stragegy to make Iraq beacon of American aptitude nad Democracy in the Middle East may work, but the odds are heavily stacked against it srring its fruition. I for one hope it works. I think it would be great if it did. But, I am scared it canot overcome the odds against it. In any event, i have not agreed with W's polices and theories. But, I will give him A for effort. At least he did something even if I disagree with it

Oh, I think he wanted to get into Iraq for his own reasons, and I remember thinking that right after the election, before 9/11. But yes, I think Afganistan was botched and he thought Iraq would be a nice little noch in his belt that he could show off to the American people.

You're very kind to give Dubya an A for effort. I don't. This is the foreign policy of the President of the United States, not a video game. Hell, I could have forgiven the "personal stake" if he had done things well, but by all accounts the invasion of Iraq (or more concisely, the occupation) was poorly planned, the resistance underestimated, and the challenges not taken seriously. I remember being infuriated by his glib, "Wanted dead or alive" and "Smoke 'em out" comments, and that goes for Rumsfeld too. Moore nailed that; they all acted like characters in a western! Can you imagine FDR saying things like that during WWII? It's not just the decision that bothers me, it's the execution.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

In any event, and I am sure Dissention will chime in with the sky is falling logic Dissention loves - a significant number of economist inlcuding Alan Greenspan, the tax cuts have helped the economy on the road to recovery. Now, if we could jest temper W's Democratesq spending and avoid the already mounting deficit from getting larger, we may be alright But, W spends with no end in sight and we will watch our economy decline

You're really something to behold.

As I've said hundreds of tiems beofre, tax cuts are band-aids, not solutions, and they are very temporary.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

WHERE IS BIN LADEN AND WHY DOES OUR PRESIDENT SAY HE "DOESN'T CARE" WHERE HE IS?

Because there are many more terrorist organization on the planet. And - OBL was made somethat irrelevant when Al-Q lost its protected base of operations in Afganistan. I know no self-respecting far left winger will ever admit it, but the busting up of the Taliban and the capture or killing of many Al-Q top officials significantly weakened Al-Q. How could it not But and in the end, capturing OBL should have been a goal - I think it was, but it was not met.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Sugar

Oh come on! This is a political debate thread! Started with a very deliberate and inflammatory piece called "Why I Hate Liberals"! If you enter into it, people involved in it are going to assume you're entering the debate. If you want to state your opinions without the bother of defending them, start the "This is my opinion, don't anyone challange me" thread.

I think this is a case of just what side of the coin you're on. I remember some very viscious rhetoric going around by the conservatives (not on this board) when Clinton was in office. Godie, Carne, and dissention, as well as Strand are all very passionate as well as very well informed. They also have an established rapport, something they have all taken the time to inform everyone of.

Does some of it get a little heated for me? Sure. Do I think things get a little ridiculous sometimes? Sure. Do I feel a little outmatched? Definitely!
But I rarely see any of them get outright mean. I mean, I think it's a little much to compare Bush to Hitler, but they can if they want. Why? Not because I can defend my position, but because I'm comfortable with my position.

Again, if you don't want to debate, then don't enter the debate!

Amen, Sugar.

It's just like with Howard Stern, Bubba the Love Sponge, or even Sean Hannity, if you don't like what you're hearing on the radio, shut the goddamn thing off.

If you don't like what the political threads contain, don't open them. Chances are they're going to contain the very things you dislike.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

But the point is could Kerry or anyone for that matter have done better.

I don't have a crystal ball to answer that question, though my belief is that anyone could have handled the situation as well as Bush did... and I'd be willing to bet that there are quite a number of people who would have handled it far better than Bush did.

Bush isn't the only president who can protect this country... though the propaganda-machine would sure like us to think that he is.

I love this country, and this country deserves far better than George W. Bush as its leader.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I agree. I think W's actions have been to placate Americans. He has not captured OBL, the guy who did 9/11. His stragegy to make Iraq beacon of American aptitude nad Democracy in the Middle East may work, but the odds are heavily stacked against it srring its fruition. I for one hope it works. I think it would be great if it did. But, I am scared it canot overcome the odds against it. In any event, i have not agreed with W's polices and theories. But, I will give him A for effort. At least he did something even if I disagree with it

It definitely won't happen when the Shiite's shack up with the Iranian's. Stay tuned.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Because there are many more terrorist organization on the planet. And - OBL was made somethat irrelevant when Al-Q lost its protected base of operations in Afganistan. I know no self-respecting far left winger will ever admit it, but the busting up of the Taliban and the capture or killing of many Al-Q top officials significantly weakened Al-Q. How could it not But and in the end, capturing OBL should have been a goal - I think it was, but it was not met.

Jason, for the love of God, could you please, for once let the person to whom the question was asked respond instead of making their case for them? I'm interested in their response as you and I have gone round and round on this merry go round for a long time now.
Thank you.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by dissention

It definitely won't happen when the Shiite's shack up with the Iranian's. Stay tuned.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the trial of Saddam either.

[CarneVaca]

Originally Posted by Wild Heart

I do fear that there will be another attack on US soil before November to help sway the election just like in Spain.

With all due respect, saying the March 11 attacks in Madrid swayed the election in Spain tends to ignore the political reality of that fine nation. Ninety percent of the voters in Spain opposed that country's participation in the Iraq invasion and subsequent occupation. The prime minister ignored the voters' wishes and glued his lips to Dubya's butt regardless.

By the time the attacks took place on March 11, even though the party that was in power had been in a neck and neck race with the Socialists, the Socialists had just pulled ahead in the polls by a few points. When the attacks happened, the party in power, headed by Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar was in real trouble. Not because the good people of Spain were caving in to the terrorists. And here is the nuance that the Limbaughs, Hannitys and Dubyas of the world -- who probably couldn't find Spain on a map even if it were labeled in bold red letters -- missed:

Aznar and his cronies immediately started blaming the attacks on the Basque separatist movement, the ETA. Yet, the evidence was pointing elsewhere. The ETA always took care to blow things up where it would have minimal impact on human lives. IN fact, when the ETA made a mistake and blew up a few people a few years back, they apologized for it. Now, I'm not even in Spain, but as soon as I read about the bombings I thought: This was not the work of the ETA. This has al Qaida written all over it.

By the time the election took place in Spain, only a few days after the attacks, it had become quite evident that Aznar and his cronies had been lying to the Spanish public and that, indeed, ETA had nothing to do with the attacks. That's why his party was booted. And by the way, Aznar, who had aspirations for a top position in the EU, is now a has-been.

Here's the difference between Spain and the US: When the leaders of Spain lie to the public, they get booted out. Here, they get reelected. Witness Clinton in 1996. And, I fear, the same will happen this year.

So before you go around spewing about Spain, you might want to take a moment to try to understand the political situation over there.