Democrats & Liberals Archives

Combating Terrorists, Unifying Americans

The Republicans talk a lot about combating terrorists, but they spend most of their time combating opponents of their ideas or actions. Similarly, Republicans tell beautiful tales about a united America, but act every day to divide us. Remember when Bush vowed to be a uniter? He is the biggest divider in our history. Instead of combating opponents, Democrats believe our real task is to combat terrorists. Instead of unifying the “base” and thereby polarizing the country, we should do our best to unify Americans.

Republicans live on conflict. Take, for instance what Tom DeLay said on his last day in the House:

"It is not the principled partisan, however obnoxious he may seem to his opponents, who degrades our public debate, but the preening, self-styled statesman who elevates compromise to a first principle."

He has said worse. He has made all Republicans in the House feel like they are Brahmins, and all Democrats feel like they are Untouchables. Regularly, Democrats have been left off conference committees and disregarded in other discussions of bills. He has converted the K-Street lobbyists to a bunch of boosters of the Republican party. His aggressive approach remains with the Republican House.

Other famous Republicans question the patriotism of Democrats and liberals. Some, such as the infamous Ann Coulter, call all liberals traitors. She has even found fault with those who have lost loved ones in the 9/11 catastrophe. Republicans are happiest when they attack and smear those who disagree with them.

In addition to combating Democrats, liberals, the so-called "liberal media" and all those who disagree with them, they have torn the country apart with reference to religion. What else is the purpose of the federal marriage amendment? It's there to divide the religious right from the religious left and from the secular groups.

Republicans believe in "divide and conquer."

The only unity Republicans are concerned with is unity with the "base." Thus, House Majority Leader Dennis Hastert has a rule that no bill will be debated in the House unless a majority of Republicans favor it. He wants to make sure that Democrats do not get credit for anything, and that all passed legislation serves Republican interests.

The Republican "base" includes Big Business, to which Republicans have presented tax cuts, special subsidies, deregulation and tax loopholes. They did not pass the estate tax repeal, though they tried hard.

The Republican "base" also includes the Religious Right. They got this group excited with the viciously divisive federal marriage amendment. It did not pass in the Senate. So what? They stirred up enough division that they hope may help them in the coming elections.

Democrats are different from Republicans. Democrats don't want to combat all the different groups in the country that may not agree with them. Democrats believe that when Bush transferred troops from Afghanistan to Iraq he dropped the ball. Instead of combating terrorists in Afghanistan we are now fighting and getting killed in Iraq. As though this is not enough, Bush seems eager to fight Iran too. Democrats want to get back to the all-important fight with Al Qaeda.

Democrats want to unify Americans. We want to do this by restoring the rights they lost with passage of the Patriot Act. They want a halt to snooping on Americans without a warrant. They want to reduce secrecy that alienated good citizens from government. They want to fight for legislation that is good for all Americans, not merely for what's good for Big Business.

Should Democrats achieve power, they would try to make the country whole again. Democrats believe that "in unity there is strength."

The Republican and Democratic mottos are in sharp contrast with each other:

  • REPUBLICAN - "Combating Opponents, Unifying the Base"

  • DEMOCRATIC - "Combating Terrorism, Unifying Americans"

Posted by Paul Siegel at June 9, 2006 5:51 PM
Comments
Comment #156155

lol

Posted by: Cliff at June 9, 2006 7:36 PM
Comment #156157

why do i read this?

I am a republican so i am a divider??? Hyperbolic opinion with a healty dash of divisive generalizations…

Posted by: b0mbay at June 9, 2006 7:40 PM
Comment #156161

You’re a divider because you call all against you traitors, unamerican, OBL Lovers, blah blah blah.

Posted by: Aldous at June 9, 2006 7:52 PM
Comment #156168

Yeah yer’ a divider!!! Nyaaa so there..

Democrats motto: “Eh maybe, well um yeah okay we’ll go along just to see where it goes if polls say it’s popular.” (nod nod)

Republicans motto: “Oh I’d kill ‘em all if I were over there, yeah that’s what we need to do nuke ‘em all and pave the place over, pass the pretzels would ya? Honeee where’s my beer holder at?!!”

Posted by: Novenge at June 9, 2006 8:25 PM
Comment #156169

i never have - nor ever will. i think traitors are heathens. lowest of the low. sell the security of their country for profit/fame…etc. probably the only traitor in our history that i can muster any amount of symphony for is benedict arnold. lets all agree that liberals hate to be called traitors just as much as conservatives hate to be called war mongerers.

Posted by: b0mbay at June 9, 2006 8:26 PM
Comment #156170

novenga.

now that’s funny. hehe!

Posted by: b0mbay at June 9, 2006 8:28 PM
Comment #156173

The truly tragic thing is that you lefties actually believe your fantasies.

Posted by: traveller at June 9, 2006 8:36 PM
Comment #156186

Many people have beat me to it. Do you really believe this stuff or is it just a long running joke?

Posted by: Jack at June 9, 2006 10:19 PM
Comment #156191
Republicans believe in “divide and conquer.”


Except when it comes to foreign policy, then they divide our allies and unite our enemies.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 9, 2006 10:41 PM
Comment #156193

Paul,

Good post, as far as it goes. I don’t quite agree that the republicans have cornered the market on division. It seems to me that both the left and the right have more than an adequate share of divisive characters.
Yesterday on another thread I lamented about this. When the Coulters and the Frankens of this nation are given more than a passing thought, or cited in more than humor listings, the status of discouse in this country suffers even worse than before.
In our current climate we have pundits who will lable you as treasonous for speaking out against this administration, and others who will call into question both your motives and parentage for agreement with them.
When the most scathing attacks get the most response we do a great dis-service to anyone who will argue both cogently and respectfully. I personally believe that this all is due to a “Sound Bite Mentality”, make it short, acrid, and memorable so it will get the 30 seconds on the evening news. Perhaps this will only get worse as time goes by, it appears that they all want to push the envelope so to speak.
Anyway thats my two bit opinion on the whole mess.

Posted by: Ted at June 9, 2006 10:47 PM
Comment #156194

Jack

Why cant’ you admit the truth. Bush ran as the “Uniter” but instead turned out to be the Great Divider(I know, now he’s the decider).

Posted by: mark at June 9, 2006 10:50 PM
Comment #156202

—-Has any one notices how chaney slapped down Arlan Specter there by closing down any investigations of the wire taping and telling Specter he could not interview the cable and phone companies. I have bad vibes about our very near future.

Posted by: DAVID at June 9, 2006 11:38 PM
Comment #156204

Nice quote from Delay. It will be fun to watch as he and the rest of his scum buddies start begging for compromise after Nov. I hope the Dems throw it back in his face.

Posted by: BillS at June 9, 2006 11:49 PM
Comment #156207

—-Ted well spoken,the problem is what you are saying is just the top of a very ugly ice- burg. The stage is full of people who are telling jokes and no one is listening because they are all trying too think up a better joke than everyone else, So sad.

Posted by: DAVID at June 10, 2006 12:02 AM
Comment #156212

—-Paul —A fine post,This Document of yours should be e-mailed to every Senator and Congressman remind them what and who they are it may even nudge them toward becoming true Statesmen and Stateswomen! In the scheam of things lately.?

Posted by: DAVID at June 10, 2006 12:23 AM
Comment #156214

BillS … so if at face value the Republicans have been “throwing it back in the face of liberals” the liberal position is to reciprocate?

Or should they take the high road in November and not lower their level to that of the Republicans?

I’m so tired of the Democratic Party talking about reciprocation rather than progression.

Posted by: Edge at June 10, 2006 12:38 AM
Comment #156229

Gee, Paul, they don’t get more one-sided than you, do they? Of course, it’s all the Republican’s fault! Good ole Harry Reid calls the Republican party a “culture of corruption” and makes daily attacks at the Right, but he’s doing it in a spirit of unity, right?

Let’s see what the mood is like over at the D.U. Still looks like a bunch of Conservative/Bush/Republican-bashing going on there as well.

Want to define ‘unity’ for me again?

Posted by: SeanS at June 10, 2006 4:05 AM
Comment #156255

I don’t really care about the politics - I am more concerned about good management of our country’s resources. That’s it.

Posted by: Carl at June 10, 2006 10:36 AM
Comment #156265

Talk about dividing the country. You quote the “Rich” as getting tax cuts, when “all” tax paying Americans got a tax cut. Republican don’t divide based on race or income.

Posted by: Brian B at June 10, 2006 12:04 PM
Comment #156295

The jig is up. I can’t in good conscience continue the charade now that Paul has uncovered the real truth.

“Divide and conquer,” is in fact the official motto of the Republican International Committee for Global Profits and Brutal Hegemony. I have in my possession copies of secret official documents detailing the vast wrong wing conspiracy’s plans to create poverty and sickness in order to further enrich corporate profits the world over.

It’s untenable I know. That’s why I am now breaking my silence.

Paul, you are a hero for speaking out.

Posted by: esimonson at June 10, 2006 3:38 PM
Comment #156304

“why do i read this?”

We ask why you’re here too.

“I am a republican so i am a divider??? Hyperbolic opinion with a healty dash of divisive generalizations…”

Ok, so outline the actions taken by bush and the Rep controlled government that have in any way tried to unite americans or cooperate with the opposition party. Be specific. You should be able to since you so vociferously deny the allegations.


“Or should they take the high road in November and not lower their level to that of the Republicans?”

When we do, we lose. You guys even brag about it. Rove’s your hero. Thus, your guilty.


“Talk about dividing the country. You quote the “Rich” as getting tax cuts, when “all” tax paying Americans got a tax cut.”

The last tax cut, if you make a million a year, you got around 46k in tax reduction. That’s 5% of your total income.
If your more average, say 40k income, you got around 150 bucks. That’s around .3%.
You were saying??

“Republican don’t divide based on race or income.”

The tax cuts demonstrate your above statement false.
And pretending racial prejudice doesn’t exist, thus opposing any efforts to level the playing feild is NOT the same as treating everyone equal. YOUR president got into college on a legacy, no different that affirmative action.

Posted by: norby at June 10, 2006 4:39 PM
Comment #156307

SO - what I see is basically the DEMs saying that the REPs have divided the country and the REPs saying “oh yea? WHat do you think you’re doing right now?!”

I have yet to see a single REP dispute what this post states… so, if you guys can attack the messenger, then you can some how avoid being guilty? Og course, DEMs love to push whatever buttons are needed to make the REPs look bad…

So - who comes out of top?

(Hint: a bunch of smug little bastards in DC.)

As long as we see the country as so much of a soccer match, then the teams on the field get rich and all we other people get is stale over-priced beer… and cheap seats.

yea

go team

Posted by: tony at June 10, 2006 4:48 PM
Comment #156324

Paul

As the Nazarene carpenter said, “The tree is known by its fruit.”

And your fruit, my friend, is bitter indeed!

Posted by: ulysses at June 10, 2006 5:51 PM
Comment #156339

From my perspective, when Clinton said he was middle of the road, he meant it. He adopted some conservative policies into the Democratic party. He made it stronger.

Bush on the other hand completely lied about his intentions to unite the country, never was interested in “compassionate conservatism”, and continues to politic by appealing to the lowest common denominator of his base’s(t) desires. He says he will make deals with educators, gets what he wants and renegs. Says we are addicted to oil, and comes out with an energy policy that sets efficiency standards below what they were in 83’. In other words, he’s a liar. He’s more interested in politics than doing what’s best for this country, and Republicans should refrain from rolling their eyes, because its obvious to everyone.

The big irony here, or I guess the saddest part of all, is that a Republican president was the worst kind to have during 9/11. Liberals stand for seperation of church and state, respect for different religious points of view, respect for different ethnicities and cultures, and a healthy seperation of science and faith. In other words, all the stuff the terrorists really hate America for. Bush is so much like them he doesn’t even get what we are fighting for. He reduced this war to “we’re Christian and you’re Muslim - let’s get it on”. What a blown opportunity to unite the world in a global fight against terrorism by instead making it about provincialism and religion - exactly what they wanted.

He has turned world opinion against us, and you come to this thread and say he’s not any more a divider than any other politician? PUH-LEASE. If I really believed none of America’s leaders were better than Bush I would leave.

Posted by: Max at June 10, 2006 7:04 PM
Comment #156354

I understand the Democrat position, they are the party in minority and attack of this administration is the only reasonable tactic…I think the republican party did this too, funding and investigation of multi millions at taxpayer expense resulting in no charges. Seems like most of the charges they make have legitimacy to me.


The Republicans on the other hand can’t really defend some of their party’s failures, so they attack their attackers, the media, world opinion, etc. to divert attention from the problems they’ve successfully created with their majority. I believe there has been a shift of focus in the party of Nixon, towards appearance and message management rather than substance. Perhaps one can understand this in light of Reagan being the master of this technique. I think it is their achilles heel, now.

Posted by: gergle at June 10, 2006 8:26 PM
Comment #156356

Oh, and come on, if Gore had been president there would have been a world of difference. Don’t make it out like Democrats and Republicans are equivalent. Again, this war could have been about civilization versus a racist, nihilistic, death squad. Instead Bush recruited the rest of the world against us. Al Queda probably thanks Allah every day he is the American president and not Gore.

Posted by: Max at June 10, 2006 8:29 PM
Comment #156362

I remain unsuprised at the emotionally fuelled arguments coming predominantly from those who seem to be in binary opposition to ‘the liberal’. There seems to be a lack of logic, reason and facts and your arguments rely primarily on ad hominem attacks or appealing to some socially constructed (and very subjectively interpreted -even politically distorted-)assumptions on groups, individuals, organisations and world events.

It seems clear that when you look at the facts surrounding many of the conflicts going on within america and outside america that you see a pattern. That pattern is not a conspiracy (a word coined by the elite to discredit any ‘theory’ or interpretation of events that contradicts theirs)it is merely sets of complex issues usually led, unsuprisingly, by those who have power - whether it be politicians, political leaders or businesmen - in order to gain a benefit (such as profit - as our elite is primarily funded by big business - or the maintance of power - after all, you wouldnt want to lose your power once you’ve got it).

Take the invasion of iraq. We are led to believe, predominantly from the media, that it was to find WMD’s, free the Iraqi people by toppling the rule of Saddam (who was, by the way, supported by past american governments, aided into power by the CIA - information they have released not a ‘conspiracy theory’ - and even funded and provided with arms by the american government)and bring ‘freedom’ in the form of democracy to them. Oh yes, how can i forgot, it was also intended to find and kill thos evil evil TERRORISTS!! Did I mention they were EVIL, phew good, because we wouldn’t want to overcomplicate the issue by recognising them as oppressed human beings with different (and im not saying morally right or acceptable) points of view.

Now, i wont bore you with what you probably already know, but the WMD’s didnt excist, their is very little freedom for the Iraqi citezen, those citezens that don’t agree with occupation and do not agree with the enforced idea of ‘democracy’ are labelled insurgents (against the occupying americans :S) and are then ‘justifiably killed’ (ERGH DAMN EVIL TERRORISTS). They did topple Saddam Hussein however, something that even I think was a good thing - in a way - for most iraqi citezens (yes you rightys im not completely evil, let your blood pressure lower, ungrit those teeth, thats right).

So what? They screwed up alot of things, did some things they said they would. Suppose most of us our happy then. Now heres the part that will send those rightys blood pressure shooting through the roof again…after some research there seems to be more issues resulting in the invasion of Iraq. These include the obvious. A desire to enforce a military prescence in one of the most oil rich parts of the world, destabilise the region - after all divide and conquer is really one of those classics of war (and control in general)- and of course make some profit. Most oil in the world is exchanged using Dollars, they call them petro-dollars. Very briefly, Iraq exchanged to euros, made some money for itself and removed the economic grip the U.S had on its oil. America wasn’t happy. Why? It loses profit, and some control over a state that produces around 15% of americas oil consumption. So of course a government run by elites whos prime inention is to make profit will do whatever they can to regain profit and ensure a control of the ability to make that profit. And so led the invasion. Of course such a reason would not please the majority of people in a ‘democratic’ and ‘free’ nation such as america, so various reasons, mentioned above, where given. BEFORE YOU START STEEMING, this IS true, IS one of the reasons that america went to war with Iraq and those who attack me as a reason to discredit this argument or claim I live in a fantasy are the ones who must truly wake up.

Posted by: Ignoranceisbliss at June 10, 2006 8:50 PM
Comment #156367

I would like it if people would remain open-minded, do some research and use basic common sense to see through arguments. Are they neutral? Do they have any vested interest (either the medium or the person saying/writing the argument)? Is there any generalisations, or flaws, such as tu quoque, ad hominem, circular reasoning etc? So far when i research issues and look at the traditionally ‘right’ viewpoint i most frequently get hate filled rants, ad hominem arguments or just pure nonesence. I also sense a huge bias, and in some cases a vested interest (in the case of corporations to make profit and maintain their grip on a particular market share). Not to say those ‘liberals’ dont have similar flaws, but in general their arguments are far better presented, reasonable and far less anger filled. When I add academic research to this then i come to a conclusion that usually lends itself more to the left then the right. It is not my blindness that led me that way…its not fantasy, its reason, something that is severely lacking in todays politics and something which those right’s seem to fear more then god himself, and even those pure EVIL terrorists.

Posted by: Damien at June 10, 2006 9:04 PM
Comment #156368

So Delay demeans compromise. Does that mean he won’t accept a plea bargin?

Posted by: BillS at June 10, 2006 9:04 PM
Comment #156373

“Talk about dividing the country. You quote the “Rich” as getting tax cuts, when “all” tax paying Americans got a tax cut. Republican don’t divide based on race or income.

Posted by: Brian B at June 10, 2006 12:04 PM”

Cough, cough, choke, choke! You are joking right?
Check this out:
http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_snapshots_20060531

“As shown, the gains of the top one percent are well above even the rest of the top 20% of the population, let alone the other 80%.”

I’ve had all the “red kool-aid” I can handle here thanks!

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 10, 2006 9:24 PM
Comment #156386

Paul,

I apologize for heading this far off-topic but this news article grabbed me big time:

Surgeries using cadaver tissue pose risks
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060611/ap_on_he_me/flesh_and_bone_i_abridged;_ylt=AnVdUXSy50bX.5e6rS4zrUis0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-

So, you might ask, what the hell does that have to do with politics?

“many gaps in oversight have nothing to do with resources, and stem instead from an FDA and Bush administration philosophy of not wanting to burden industry.”

That’s what!

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 10, 2006 10:52 PM
Comment #156388

KansasDem,

Thanks for the laugh! That link is funny. I knew I was going to enjoy it when I saw the “Research and Ideas for Working People”. I’m impressed that the bottom quintile even got a tax cut since they probably don’t even pay taxes. You have to know how misleading that graph is right? What percentage of the total fed income does that 1% supply.

Keep the faith. Power to the people and all that. Maybe we will help those “working people” some day with a good old fashioned 5 year government plan to put them all to work on the collective.

Posted by: JimmyRay at June 10, 2006 10:59 PM
Comment #156391

JimmyRay,

Perhaps you might try disputing my facts with “facts” of your own rather than hollow rhetoric.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 10, 2006 11:13 PM
Comment #156405

“In addition to combating Democrats, liberals, the so-called “liberal media” and all those who disagree with them, they have torn the country apart with reference to religion. What else is the purpose of the federal marriage amendment? It’s there to divide the religious right from the religious left and from the secular groups.”

*Cough* All republicans do not support that amendment. Myself (I am GOP) consider it an attack on the bill of rights itself.

“Democrats are different from Republicans. Democrats don’t want to combat all the different groups in the country that may not agree with them. Democrats believe that when Bush transferred troops from Afghanistan to Iraq he dropped the ball. Instead of combating terrorists in Afghanistan we are now fighting and getting killed in Iraq. As though this is not enough, Bush seems eager to fight Iran too. Democrats want to get back to the all-important fight with Al Qaeda.”

Once again I must point out not all republicans support the war with iraq… however this time I dont fit in this group… Prehaps you hvaent heard of a document, I like to call it “the declaration of independance(spelling?).” It says something along the lines of “Unalienable rights” of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” You just try and tell me that the Kurds in iraq had even 2 of those 3 rights… Second, clinton signed to orders to have sadam removed from iraq. Google it.

“Democrats want to unify Americans.”

Yes thats why you do things like: blame republicans for everything, institute racism and sexism, and give orders then lie to america about the orders you gave. Atleast bush can stand up to his.

“Talk about dividing the country. You quote the �€œRich�€ as getting tax cuts, when �€œall�€ tax paying Americans got a tax cut.”

The last tax cut, if you make a million a year, you got around 46k in tax reduction. That’s 5% of your total income.
If your more average, say 40k income, you got around 150 bucks. That’s around .3%.
You were saying??”

Last time I checked those people also payed a higher tax rate… and you call that fair?

“The big irony here, or I guess the saddest part of all, is that a Republican president was the worst kind to have during 9/11. Liberals stand for seperation of church and state, respect for different religious points of view, respect for different ethnicities and cultures, and a healthy seperation of science and faith. In other words, all the stuff the terrorists really hate America for. Bush is so much like them he doesn’t even get what we are fighting for. He reduced this war to “we’re Christian and you’re Muslim - let’s get it on”. What a blown opportunity to unite the world in a global fight against terrorism by instead making it about provincialism and religion - exactly what they wanted.”

What does any of that have to do with 911?


Oh, and In the future do try and site your sources and be more civil and educated with your bush bashing, thank you.

Posted by: shawn h at June 11, 2006 12:16 AM
Comment #156420

There’s a reason most loudmouth pundits claim to be conservative and the Republicans are in need of Fox News…..for a clue, just observe their self constructed brillance in their postings in response to this essay.

Posted by: expatUSA_Indonesia at June 11, 2006 2:20 AM
Comment #156424

—-Shawn I just spent fifteen min. trying to find something nice I could say about your post,and finding none I won’t waste other peoples time expressing my disgust with what I did find their-in

Posted by: DAVID at June 11, 2006 2:57 AM
Comment #156440

Well, I’ve learned a lot.

Benedict Arnold deserves a symphony and the Kurds are covered by our Declaration of Independence.

What more could a guy ask for on a Sunday morning?

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 11, 2006 7:32 AM
Comment #156446

an interesting glimpse into the respective mindsets of the right and the left can be gleaned from watching or listening to either. One sees the spittle and hate flecked rhetoric emanating in a tortuous torrent from ann coulter or rush limbaugh. When their beliefs are questioned, they unload on the unlucky miscreant who dared to challenge their ideas. On the other hand, tune in to air America or most of the other left leaning shows. No rants, a calm reasoned tone. Callers who disagree, even vehemently, are talked to with respect. And then offered thanks for their time. Whoever made the comparison earlier, it was poor.

Try doing it if you think I’m wrong. Tune in to ann coulter or rush. Then give Al Franken a listen. If you are at all honest, you will admit that there is an astonishing difference; in the tone in general, and especially in the respect accorded those with differing views.

I’m not saying that there are no left wingers who rant and rave, just that there is a substantial difference between ann & rush, and franken.

Posted by: Steve Miller at June 11, 2006 8:41 AM
Comment #156447

Steve Miller

Excellent comment Steve, I couldn’t aggree with you more. I often listen to rush or sean(for as long as I can take it) and the venom they spew is sickening.

Posted by: mark at June 11, 2006 8:48 AM
Comment #156448

>Prehaps you hvaent heard of a document, I like to call it “the declaration of independance(spelling?).” It says something along the lines of “Unalienable rights” of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” You just try and tell me that the Kurds in iraq had even 2 of those 3 rights…
yes and we fought for those rights — did we fight for the right to inpose our ways on others?
Question— if saddam had invaded the USA, he had tanks, and air power. all we had to fight back with was small arms and inprovised explosives— would you call your self a insurgent or a freedom fighter?

Posted by: The Savage at June 11, 2006 8:54 AM
Comment #156470

One mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorist, its a matter of what side of the conflict you believe in. The US government and its tool the media tends to simplify what are enormously complex situations in order to allow them to precede with their agenda. Religion was once the opium of the people, now, increasingly, it seems to be the media. We are given simplified good and evil conflicts, without ever really addressing the underlying issues. We should be asking why this is. But the media, in particular, and certain indivduals attempts to discredit and effectively destroy the livelyhoods of those that do question the status quo (frankly a militaristic and imperialistic government whos prime intention is to benefit the elite and not the common people). Once upon a time politicians gave promises for the future, better schools, better health care, peace, the abolishment of slavery, the rights of indivduals. It is dreams that has, afterall, been the force that built the american constitution. Now politics relys on creating fear. Whether its terrorists, illegal immigrants or communists, we are told they are evil and rarely told why they do what they do. Its these questions we should be asking so we can then start to resolve problems, at home and overseas, by being awake too and at least acknowledging the complex reasons behind current events (whether you agree or not is really irrelevant).

I suppose it is the inevitable issue of having large organised governemnts based on the foundation of capitalism, a system that promotes competition, rivalry, exploitation and deceit in order to gain a benefit. It is not therefore, very suprising when our governments based on such a system follow those very same rules to gain for themselves and their elite financial supporters. The government is not of the people, by the people and for the people, it is of the elite, by the elite and for the elite and we, the people, are their tools. This culture of fear only gives them more power and ultiamtely a greater opportunity for profit whilst we pay with the gradual erosion of our civil liberties and freedoms. History will remember this period as an epidemic of ignorance, apathy and exploitation. This is something we should fear more, afterall it poses a much greater threat to the people then terrorism and communism combined. We must divert our eyes from ‘them’ back to ‘us’.

Posted by: The Fly at June 11, 2006 10:40 AM
Comment #156518

to the fly
Sadly I could not agree more.And on some issues I lean to the right.

Posted by: The Savage at June 11, 2006 1:03 PM
Comment #156533

—As a young Radical as we were call at the time we and I mean thousands of us(keeping this short)had a belief that DISCRMINATION-THE VIEATNAM WAR-BIG SIGNS along the road ways-SAVING THE FORESTS-BETTER SCHOOLS-NEUCLEAR POWER PLANTS needed help . Clean drinking water was a must(you could not swim in the Great Lakes With out seeing human excrement floating past you. I believe we made a change and now I think this generation needs to preserve our Constitution and protect and guide the vast majority from themselves for they now not what they do.

Posted by: DAVID at June 11, 2006 1:43 PM
Comment #156576

Republicans have been the leading party in the fight against terrorism, and Democrats have been the leading party in obstructing that fight. It was under a Republican president that radical Islam was finally challenged, despite the constant attacks on our country through the 90s, 80s and 70s. Bill Clinton did nothing as Americans died here at home and abroad.

It was under a Republican congress that the establishment of the Department of Homeland security was authorized, as well as dozens of other anti-Terrorism initiatives that have played a major part in preventing and thwarting terrorist attacks on the homeland.

On the other side of things, we have the Democrats who have played politics with our security by supporting Bill Clinton’s empty tough talk when it came to Iraq in the 90s, but today, when that tough talk - echoed by Madeline Albright – was followed through, the Democrats immediately retract. A majority of Democrats have opposed the establishment of anti-terrorism organizations including the Terrorist Screening Center, the National Security Agency’s wiretapping program, and many more.

Posted by: Tetracide at June 11, 2006 4:21 PM
Comment #156580

—-TETDACIDE- The same old gas asses they sprayed on us from the past.

Posted by: DAVID at June 11, 2006 4:30 PM
Comment #156587

—By the way matricide, Show me where the REPUBLICAN ANTI-TERRORISM INITIAIATIVES WORKED AND I WILL SHOW YOU ANTHRAX MAIL. Show me 9/11 and I will show you Bill Clinton’s successful Prosecutions of the terrorist who bombed the TW trade Center, the first time. By the way there is enough evidence shown proving that 9/11 was sure to come.

Posted by: DAVID at June 11, 2006 5:08 PM
Comment #156692

WORKING WITH THE DEMOCRATS IS LIKE TRYING TO POTTY TRAIN A GOLD FISH.Its impossible.

Posted by: lookingout at June 12, 2006 11:20 AM
Comment #156704

LOOKINGOUT’S POSTS ARE LIKE A BOWL FULL OF GOLD FISH THAT COULD NOT BE POTTY TRAINED. FULL OF SHIT.

Posted by: outlooking at June 12, 2006 12:17 PM
Comment #156797

I believe democrats, as far as my experience through blogs has shown, are far more easy to work with as neocon republicans because they actually debate issues rather then just attack the opposition.

Posted by: The Fly at June 12, 2006 3:29 PM
Comment #158194

I lost all respect for “looking out” when he condemned Kerry, Murta, and Clark COWARDS while saying that Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rhummy are heros. What a crock.
And then he later had the nerve to say “Tim did you see any action in your 8 years in the service?How was the education benifits?I was drafted in 73 never seen any action i am not a hero because i never got to fight.Hero’s join to fight and then there is education.

Posted by: lookingout at June 2, 2006 01:11 PM”
Kerry, Clark and Murtha SAW ACTION. Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rhummy did NOT so even by looking out’s lax standards, that make Kerry, Murtha and Clark HEROS while Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rhummy are found lacking!
I love using trolls arguments to bite them in the ass! But then, those points were already brought to light by others and the troll rolls on, and on, and on……………

Posted by: qat at June 15, 2006 7:13 PM
Post a comment