Screw it!

[MJZiggy]

Tell it to the people who got shot there. It's not a strawman in talks of government spending if we still have to pay for it. Just like social security, roads, bridges, WIC, EPA, offshore drilling or any other program that spends money is part of the discussion.

[wist43]

Media in Wisconsin? How 'bout media ABOUT Wisconsin. You're gonna love this...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...dia1&hpv=local

Pretty tame piece MJ... Wisconsin is a very backward state, and while ignorance rules the day throughout our country, Wisconsin's residents tend to be naively ignorant.

My step-father is a good example. Personally, a great guy; but also a self proclaimed socialist/marxist/communist/democrat. Only votes for democrats. He's honest insomuch as he wants to help people, but he can't understand how his taking my money, or anybody elses money to do so is dishonest - never minding the gross violations of principle with regard to proper governance - and here in the U.S. the obvious unConstitutionality of it all. He can never bring himself to make the distinction between theory and reality - which of course, any left winger suffers from.

He simply cannot bring himself to understand that government cannot be trusted to be a positive force. It is principle - the principle being that governments unrestrained, will inevitably move to control the population.

A country or kingdom may function through periods in which a benevolent king or dictator allows freedom and justice to prevail for brief periods of time, but the citizenry is still ultimately subject to the repressive whims of the next ruler.

Our founding fathers clearly understood the principles of freedom, and that is why they gave us Republic - a Republic in which the rule of law restricts government, not the people.

Once the lion is loosed from the cage - a process which really began with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, and really picked up steam with "The New Deal" in the 1930's - it was inevitable that more and more people would simply begin to clamour for more largesse - and government would predictably become the playground of the corrupt - hence, he who promises the most, wins.

Our founding fathers predicted all of this... go the way of democracy, and your enslavement draweth nigh. "... and to the Republic for which it stands"... long ago forgotten. It's truly sad to watch our country die like this.

I don't dabble in politcs or debate much these days... what's the point, I'm so far in the minority, and our demise is so obviously inevitable. Just hoping to live out my days w/o ending up in a gulag.

[HowardRoark]

Tell it to the people who got shot there. It's not a strawman in talks of government spending if we still have to pay for it. Just like social security, roads, bridges, WIC, EPA, offshore drilling or any other program that spends money is part of the discussion.

I'm talking about how guys like Obama get up and sanctimoniously talk about how Afghanistan is really where we need to be; not in Iraq! B.S. He doesn’t give a shit about Afghanistan. It just helps move the herd his way.

And why does the Federal Government have to be financially involved in off shore drilling? Last I heard; evil companies such as Exxon can take care of things like that.

[mraynrand]

Once the lion is loosed from the cage - a process which really began with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, and really picked up steam with "The New Deal" in the 1930's - it was inevitable that more and more people would simply begin to clamour for more largesse - and government would predictably become the playground of the corrupt - hence, he who promises the most, wins.

Where have I heard that before?

[packinpatland]

Tell it to the people who got shot there. It's not a strawman in talks of government spending if we still have to pay for it. Just like social security, roads, bridges, WIC, EPA, offshore drilling or any other program that spends money is part of the discussion.

I'm talking about how guys like Obama get up and sanctimoniously talk about how Afghanistan is really where we need to be; not in Iraq! B.S. He doesn’t give a shit about Afghanistan. It just helps move the herd his way.

And why does the Federal Government have to be financially involved in off shore drilling? Last I heard; evil companies such as Exxon can take care of things like that.

The key word here should have been 'needed'

[HowardRoark]

Tell it to the people who got shot there. It's not a strawman in talks of government spending if we still have to pay for it. Just like social security, roads, bridges, WIC, EPA, offshore drilling or any other program that spends money is part of the discussion.

I'm talking about how guys like Obama get up and sanctimoniously talk about how Afghanistan is really where we need to be; not in Iraq! B.S. He doesn’t give a shit about Afghanistan. It just helps move the herd his way.

And why does the Federal Government have to be financially involved in off shore drilling? Last I heard; evil companies such as Exxon can take care of things like that.

The key word here should have been 'needed'

My point exactly. That sounds great, but is meaningless.

[packinpatland]

Not what I meant.....but you go ahead and spin it however you need to....

[LL2]

Not what I meant.....but you go ahead and spin it however you need to....

But it is what you said. Typical of Liberals...they do not want to be taken for what they say.

[HowardRoark]

Not what I meant.....but you go ahead and spin it however you need to....

I’m not spinning anything. If you can honestly say that you were advocating an escalation of the war in Afghanistan 5 years ago, more power to you. But that’s not what is happening here. Obama and his flock are running around saying Iraq is bad, and we need to be focused on Afghanistan….or should have been focused there.

I stand by my statement. It’s Bullshit. I see it clear as day. Show me some speeches where Obama was advocating ramping up the war effort in Afghanistan 5 or 6 years ago. I will gladly change my position.

The fact of the matter is that Obama said that his position on Iraq was basically the same as Bush’s position back then. His big epiphany came when he found it to be a wedge issue in the primaries. He knew that he could get all the dailykos and moveon.org crowd by saying he was always against the war and that we should immediately get out. He knew he could back Hillary into a corner. It worked. Even when all the evidence has shown that the Surge has worked, he has dug in his heels and sticks by his plan (not a very good characteristic of a leader by the way….digging in one’s heals in the face of changing data).

Now he has found a new little wrinkle that seems to be resonating with the masses…..”We needed to be focused on Afghanistan, not in Iraq!”

I’m happy for you Barack….that and a nickel will get you, um, I guess the Presidency of the United States of America.

[wist43]

Once the lion is loosed from the cage - a process which really began with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, and really picked up steam with "The New Deal" in the 1930's - it was inevitable that more and more people would simply begin to clamour for more largesse - and government would predictably become the playground of the corrupt - hence, he who promises the most, wins.

Where have I heard that before?

Certainly not in a public school

[HowardRoark]

Once the lion is loosed from the cage - a process which really began with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, and really picked up steam with "The New Deal" in the 1930's - it was inevitable that more and more people would simply begin to clamour for more largesse - and government would predictably become the playground of the corrupt - hence, he who promises the most, wins.

Where have I heard that before?

Certainly not in a public school

Coming soon!!! $10,000,000,000.00 for Early Childhood Education. Bahh, bahhh.

[mraynrand]

Not what I meant.....but you go ahead and spin it however you need to....

I’m not spinning anything. If you can honestly say that you were advocating an escalation of the war in Afghanistan 5 years ago, more power to you. But that’s not what is happening here. Obama and his flock are running around saying Iraq is bad, and we need to be focused on Afghanistan….or should have been focused there.

I stand by my statement. It’s Bullshit. I see it clear as day. Show me some speeches where Obama was advocating ramping up the war effort in Afghanistan 5 or 6 years ago. I will gladly change my position.

The fact of the matter is that Obama said that his position on Iraq was basically the same as Bush’s position back then. His big epiphany came when he found it to be a wedge issue in the primaries. He knew that he could get all the dailykos and moveon.org crowd by saying he was always against the war and that we should immediately get out. He knew he could back Hillary into a corner. It worked. Even when all the evidence has shown that the Surge has worked, he has dug in his heels and sticks by his plan (not a very good characteristic of a leader by the way….digging in one’s heals in the face of changing data).

Now he has found a new little wrinkle that seems to be resonating with the masses…..”We needed to be focused on Afghanistan, not in Iraq!”

I’m happy for you Barack….that and a nickel will get you, um, I guess the Presidency of the United States of America.

I think your anger towards Barack derives from a fundamental absence of empathy.

[retailguy]

I think your anger towards Barack derives from a fundamental absence of empathy.

Nah. He doesn't have "selective hearing disorder", and he can see the Emperor's teflon suit that he borrowed from Bill Clinton.

[mraynrand]

"The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity."

"It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty…"

[texaspackerbacker]

Re: Screw it!

If you like living like thumb sucking little girls who wet their panties every time someone says boo, keep thinking like this. If you want to live like Americans should, grow a set, or better yet grow a brain and get some perspective.
The last month has proved that a handful of greedy unregulated bankers can do far far far more economic damage than Bin Laden ever could hope to do, and the number he murdered was on par with the two months worth of domestic murders. Simply put, terrorists can't destroy America. The real damage to America from terrorism is from the overraeaction of people like you, and an administration willing to push fear to trash the constitution, and without the constitution, America is nothing.

The real way to stop the terrorists is through competent police/intellegence work and international cooperation. Can there be any doubt whatsoever that Barack Obama will be far better at gettign international cooperation than Bush / McCain?

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself!

That's just laughable, MS.

The courageous thing to do is just let terrorism in America happen? You sound just like piece-of-shit Obama.

The WORST thing that can happen from terrorism is having one or several of our cities taken out by nukes--or barring that, areas of them made uninhabitable by dirty bombs. Even just a series of conventional terrorist bombs at malls and sporting events would have a horrendous effect on our way of life and enjoyment of life. And you--and the sick fucks your side puts up as candidates--would just LET IT HAPPEN!

And you actually have the GALL to spout John Kerry's "police approach" to terrorism? Sheesh!

The way to prevent terrorism is exactly the way we have prevented terrorism since 9/11--all the things that left wing America-hating extremists like Obama are against. And if that means depriving terrorists from foreign countries of OUR Constitutional protections that they are NOT entitled to anyway, and which they seek to destroy, then so be it!

There must be something in the Texas water that creates right-wingers who can't comprehend above things beyond "The Pet Goat" level. Al Queda just loves people like you, easily frightened and really stupid. I'll just call you Bin Laden's bitch from now on.

If you want to prevent these pissants from nuking us, secure the goddamn nukes. Fully fund Nunn-Lugar (and it's follow-up Lugar-Obama) instead of cutting it like shit for brains Bush did.

Of course you'd obviously rather tie up intelligence resources listening in to our troops' phone-sex calls home, and pretend it makes us safer.

I'll give you points for passion and effort--not being a pathetic loser like most of our forum leftists--who lack either the brains or genitalia to even try and defend their indefensible positions.

Unfortunately for you, though (and FORTUNATELY for America), you're playing a LOSING hand.

The simple INDISPUTABLE fact is that what we have been doing has been 100% successful in preventing repeats of 9/11 or worse. You want to play the "fear" card? It's the sick God damned America-haters of the left that are afraid (I'll leave it up to you whether that includes you or not). The leftists are SO AFRAID that the policies of the good guys will continue to be successful that they diverted (very successfully) the whole political discussion to this contrived pseudo-crisis of the economy. And our illustrious candidate was dumb enough to play right into their hands by NOT hammering away at the extreme likelihood of Obama letting the terrorists hit us--and based on everything your piece-of-shit Dem/lib candidate has eveer said and voted for, he indeed would forsake everything that has been so successful in favor of the idiotic Kerry Police Approach--which you were so kind as to trot out. You're a regular Joe Biden, MS. With friends like you and Biden, Obama doesn't need enemies.

Unfortunately, though, for our side--and indeed, for all of America, Obama has some much more effective friends--the leftist mainstream media--that have clearly outplayed our side this time around at the game of politics.

It's looking pretty damn bad for the good guys at this point, and that means trouble and a high probability of disaster for all of America.

And as for "fear" of the terrorists taking out some of our cities or otherwise successfully carrying out acts of terror on Obama's watch, only a damned fool would NOT be fearful about thousands, possibly millions of Americans getting killed, about damage to our economy done by terrorism that makes the current pseudo-crisis look like nothing, and about the prospect of our freedom passing away in the aftermath of grievous terrorist hits.

That's what Bush has prevented; That's what McCain's continuation of those policies would continue to prevent; And THAT'S what Obama would put at EXTREME RISK by what? By that dirty word, CHANGE, of course..