Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

Jack:

Good article. Interesting, considering that Bush was supposed to be a uniter. What happened?

Worse, many partisans don’t accept the legitimacy of their opponents.

I think this is much of what happened, JMHO of course. But when Republicans controlled so much, they decided to push thier agenda. They had the power, there was no compromise. And this attitude, and the feeling of powerlessness of the other side, has spread to the populace in general.

Because we are a nation of such varying opinions and values, there needs to be compromise and working together, something we are trying so hard to accomplish in Iraq. Perhaps we could be a better role model?

Jack good topic, good article. I have thought for some years now this kind of name calling and disrespect for the opinions of others was due to talk radio in general and Rush Limbaugh in particular. Shows what I know.

Jack,

All the right has to do is to stop going to the movies.
Hollywood is a capitalistic system like the rest of corporate America.

Vote with your wallet.

This is kind of funny when you think about it.

Leftists compain that Republicans control every branch of government. Rightists dislike that the left dominates the movie business and the universities.

Is there even an adequate comparison there?

womanmarine,

I think what Jack is trying to say is he thinks that while the left controls the hearts and minds of America, the right only controls the government.

Jack talks as if the entire US population is slaved to Liberal Hollywood. Watched “Passion of the Christ” recently? Hollywood is a business and profit is along liberal ideas. When the day comes that “The Birth of a Nation” becomes popular then Hollywood becomes Conservative.

Jack,
Every American under the age of 50 has an unalienable Right to be outraged at the childish behavior of the Democratic and Republican Political Leadership. Additionally, Every American over the Age of 50 that is Logical and Reasonable should be Totally Outraged over how their generation is being a Steward to America’s Founding Principles.

Yes, the whole world believes and thinks that all Americans have it so good, but can any Inividual, Nation, and/or Society of The Law state that “We the People” are really enjoying Freedom? No, My Peers of about 10 years did not start this War on Theology (ie Terror); however, they have proved that they Lack the Imagination to see the Forest for the Tree.

Nevertheless, the Political landscape of America has been changed from the American Citizen asking what is Politically Correct by the Law of the Land in a Loud and Proud Vioce of what can be done by Congress and the White House to build an Unlimited Susutainable Politically Unalienable Correct World. Not the same old BS that the Democrats and Republicans used to draw their lines in the sand, but what is Unalienable Right Regardless for “We the People.”

No, people can use ideas like VOID.org to send a loud and clear message to Washington and the Rapitalists that want to play The Game. Because given the current politically areana, Americans are showing that they will not settle for Anything Less than that which is Found-to-Be Politically Unalienable Correct.

And as I have said before, until the Market and Republican Leadership wake up and realize that it is “We the Consumers” who is the 800 Pound Thug who Rules the World and thus has the unalienable Right to leave A Legacy in America’s and Humanity’s Civilization of Law which can/should/will prove that America’s Founding Fathers really was right about Humans having the ability to Self-Govern. Now, is the Democrats and Republicans ready to debate the issues on the basis ideology or by The Law of Man & Nature?

Given the Collective History of All Americans Living today, my money is that some how some why the Political Power is coming back into the hands of “We the People.” The only real question is what natural course of Human Events must take place so that those holding “The Cash” and those needing “The Cash” can come to terms with making Every Citizen in America and Humanity’s Nations of Law economically viable and financially independent so that Governments can truely shrink in size/cost and Corporations/Shareholders can reap their True reward without consuming.

“The current king of outrage is Bill O’Reilly, the host of a Fox television show who only has to look at the camera to convey a sense that some monstrosity has been committed. But there are plenty of others. Sean Hannity (also at Fox) and Joe Scarborough (at MSNBC) are furious about whatever the Democrats have done that day.”

I think it says something that the writers could so easily produce professional haters like O’Reilly and Hannity for the Right while serving only Lou Dobbs for the Left.

Poor Economist must have scoured the airwaves for days searching for a hatefull Liberal but could only find Dobbs.

Sad.

“I think we should all hold onto our opinions and fight for them, with the caveat that we are probably wrong in many particulars. We should all try to think of how all this will sound next year or ten years from now and avoid saying or doing anything that will embarrass us later. The passion will pass and we will have to live and work with each other again and again.”

This is one of the few reasonable statements I’ve read by you. Congratulations!

It’s funny that the only complaint cited that Republicans have of Democrats is that they are “unAmerican” without mentioning anything more complete.

I have often thought that if a Democrat president came to power who was as radical as Bush, for instance, who wanted to completely get rid of Defenses of any kind, etc. that I would be against them. The only sure fire way we have of judging a president are the results. For a long time I kept thinking Republicans would start decrying Bush just on results. After a point, I would have thought no excuse would suffice. Shows how little I knew.

But Bush’s reign has mostly taught me there is no equivalence between the parties. His neo-conservative, ultra-right wing ideas failed so spectacularly because they were deeply flawed to begin with.

btw the 1915 film the birth of a nation was presidents wilsons (democrat) favorate film . he was quoted to say (it is like writing history with lightning).no doubt about it wilson was a old school southern racist. also the film brought back a resurgence of the dreaded KKK. his cabinet brought back jim crow to wasington dc. btw dc had been intergrated for almost fifty years a abe lincoln republican thing. after the quote he received thousands of letters from the naacp and other civic groups throughout the country then he did the backflip he denied it. but he could not deny what his cabinet did by putting back jim crow to washington dc.also the film critics of the day wrote it as racist and ole dw made the movie called intolerance the next year.more info on wilson and the film birth of a nation is at reason.com/links/links020805.shtml

RODNEY BROWN:

We all know the Republicans became the Official Racist Party when the Dixie Democrats went to the GOP in the 60’s. Before that time, both parties were roughly the same. After that time, all the bigoted racists became GOPers.

We all know the Republicans became the Official Racist Party when the Dixie Democrats went to the GOP in the 60’s. Before that time, both parties were roughly the same. After that time, all the bigoted racists became GOPers.

Posted by: Aldous at April 3, 2006 03:44 AM

Did you have to get a permit to haul that load of shit here?

Professional Haters (Democrat):

>Howard Dean, DNC Chairman/Demagogue (“I hate Republicans”, “Yeeeeaaaahh!!”)

>Al Franken, Character Assasin/Talk Show Host

>Louis Farrakhan, Race Hustler/Space Traveler
(“America must be burned!”)

>Ward Churchill, College Professor/Holocaust Denier(“9-11 victims had it coming”)

>Jesse Jackson, Poverty Pimp/Anti-Semite

>Keith Olbermann, News Analyst/Bill O’Reilly wannabe

>Helen Thomas, …Helen Thomas

>Harry Belefonte, Singer/Socialist

>Ted Kennedy, Senator/Murderer

>John Kerry, Senator/War Criminal(“Our soldiers terrorize women and children in Iraq”)

I’ll be back when I think of more.

Aldous,

Why is the only Klansman in the Senate a Democrat? (Robert Byrd)

aldous so the hell with the truth about wilson and the film and the fact he put jim crow back in dc. so i should just shut up and not speak about it.and forget it ever happened. sorry pal i wont and go ahead call the gop anything you want free country.

“Maybe it was Mr. Falwell’s TV appearance with Mr. Robertson on Sept. 13, 2001, during which the two religious leaders agreed that the terrorist attack two days earlier was divine punishment for American immorality. “God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve,” said Mr. Falwell, who also declared, “I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the A.C.L.U., People for the American Way — all of them who have tried to secularize America — I point the finger in their face and say, ‘You helped this happen.’ “

“Well, I’ll be damned. At least, that’s what the Rev. Jerry Falwell says. Last month Mr. Falwell issued a statement explaining that, in his view, Jews can’t go to heaven unless they convert to Christianity. And what Mr. Falwell says matters — maybe not in heaven, but here on earth. After all, he’s a kingmaker in today’s Republican Party.”

“Or maybe it was Mr. Falwell’s appearance on “60 Minutes” in October 2002, when he declared, “I think Muhammad was a terrorist.” Muhammad, he said, was “a violent man” — unlike Mr. Falwell, I guess, who said of terrorists that we should “blow them all away in the name of the Lord.”“

Aldous,

Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson? Is that the best you’ve got?

Is that a challenge? I still have the “Terry Schiavo is alive” speech Frist gave!!!

aldous. jerry falwell does not speak to me or for me just like ward churchill does not speak for you i think?

Duano, half those guys in your list aren’t even Democrats. And you left out Michael Moore — who isn’t a Democrat either.

Good post Jack, and I totally agree. Judging by the tone of your most recent posts compared to those from a couple weeks ago, you’ve done a lot of soul searching on this.

Who the hell is Ward Churchill? Was he ever invited into the White House? Was he ever a guest speaker for the DNC? Did any major Democratic Candidate ever have his picture taken with him? Has Ward Churchill ever donated or organized the donations of MILLIONS into the DNC?

Answer: NO!!!

Oh, yeah

>Michael Moore, Film Maker/Competitive Eater

Couldn’t resist. And BTW, Bill O’Reilly isn’t a Republican. I should have put the list as (left) instead of (Dems).

who the hell was sein fein were they ever invited to the rnc or to the bush white house?

One has to wonder about Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi when she called the recent McKinney incident a mistake, an unfortunate lack of recognition of a member of Congress.

She asserts no carelessness on McKinney?? Only that the police officer unfortunately did not recognize her??

WOW!! My first thought was, what if someone had disguised themselves as a member of Congress only to gain entry by walking around the metal detectors and blowing up the room full of congressional members?

Would Pelosi still say it was unfortunate of the police officer? NO, she would lambaste Bush for not having a proper security force protecting our lawmakers.

Just goes to show how two-faced this Pelosi is.

I hope the media can stay on top of this story about Democrat McKinney and being above the law.

Everett, Good point about Pelosi and McKinney; you were right on with that.

“This is kind of funny when you think about it. Leftists compain that Republicans control every branch of government. Rightists dislike that the left dominates the movie business and the universities.
Is there even an adequate comparison there?

Posted by: womanmarine at April 3, 2006 12:33 AM”

Unfortunately, you’re missing the big picture here. Controlling all branches of gov’t is a testament of “Democracy”; they were brought into power by “we the people”. Hollywood doesn’t get voted in or out (unfortunately); they just force issues and spout off at the mouth whenever they damn, well please. The same is true for universities.

You see, when you’re democratically elected to a certain position, you will be held accountable (at some point) for your actions. Hollywood and the Universities don’t get held accountable and that’s why they hide behind the first amendment every chance they get.

Jack, outrage is too strong a term. Outrage should result in action. Bitching and moaning don’t act, they just complain.

Outrage is what our colonialists felt toward the British. Outrage is what the South felt toward the North in 1860. Outrage is what all Americans felt when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. Outrage is what Americans felt after 9/11.

Outrage, leads to action. What we see today amounts to little more than bitching and moaning. When it becomes outrage, voters will show up and vote incumbents out of office by voting for challengers, any challengers. Outrage acts. Bitching and moaning wile away the hours in a perverted pastime of masquerading as outrage.

Hollywood and the Universities don’t get held accountable and that’s why they hide behind the first amendment every chance they get.

Hollywood and the universities are accountable to their customers. The first amendment is scarcely relevant because if they released truly offensive products the public would reject them.

Duano,

Louis Farrakhan is a Democrat? You must be kidding! Wouldn’t it be a little odd for someone who thinks that white people were created by an evil wizard to be a member of a predominantly white political party?

Likewise with Ward Churchill. He sees the (white) US government as genocidal, regardless of which party is in power.

.. and to anticipate your next comment, I don’t think Farrakhan and Churchill are leftists either. Like the Al Qaeda and the Taliban, they are arch-conservatives who believes that their own cultures are morally superior to white, Judeo-Christian culture.

I think there is one major factor at play here and the issue is not neccesarily just between the Democrats or Republicans. I think we in this country today are witnessing the aged 60’s generation’s lack of trust in each other and the American people. Both sides (conservative and liberal/progressive) are unwilling to admit a that the mantra they’ve been living with since they were the baby boomers of the 1980’s is absolutely wrong. “You can have it all”. This entire country, has been in hot pursuit of ‘it all’ since the late 1980’s, at a devestating price to our country. Having it all, being right all the time, never compromising, who gets the credit, ‘greed is good’,’destroy your enemies’ mentality has permenated every fiber of our culture. No one bothers to compromise or negotiate with anyone anymore. That would mean surrendering your ideals, believes and desires to the CONTROL of someone else.
This is why Liebermann and McCain are attacked by their own parties for being traitors, soft or weak when they make efforts to compromise or at least hear the opposing side. Americans know, if nothing else, life is compromise. Our ‘leaders’ are caught up in a popularity contest instead of taking care of the business of the country. It’s not about whose right (or left), but who wins. I do believe George Bush did come into office in an attempt to be a uniter…however, how can you unite people who don’t want to work with anyone but themselves?
Bottom line is the republicans have some wonderful ideas as do the democrats, on how to fix a lot of the issues we’re facing. However, the democrats are throwing a tantrum because the republicans won’t let them play with the ball, and republicans don’t know what to do with the ball, they just know Democrats can’t have it…and American is the ball.

Woody, nice try with the Farrakan/conservatives are white supremists angle. However, it just doesn’t fly. Farrakan is a joke; and so is modern liberalism for that matter. They don’t get it and they can not keep this country safe.

And, hollywood and the universities don’t get held accountable like the politicians do; that’s (another) fact. Everytime they are “called out” they run and hide behind the 1rst amendment. Everytime they have low ratings at the oscars or have hollywood stars protest for “clemency” for a convicted murderer; they always blame conservatives or blame the president, instead of standing up to their claims and beliefs.

Avis, nicely stated. I would like to borrow that last part: “the democrats are throwing a tantrum because the republicans won’t let them play with the ball, and republicans don’t know what to do with the ball, they just know Democrats can’t have it…”

Pretty neatly sums up why America’s problems get worse by the year, and Congress’ solutions create more problems than they solve.

Got an al-Queda problem: invade some other country and triple our enemies.

Got an entitlement problem: bury the nation under mountains of debt, it will go away eventually.

Got a border security problem: Tell your enemies you are surveilling them while leaving the front gate and door wide open. (That’s real smart!)

Their partisanship and lack of vision just keep making existing problems worse, more costly, and unsustainable. Can anyone say Medicare Rx drug plan? Now 300% more costly than originally voted on.

These politicians need to be kicked where it hurts worst, at the polls in November 7’ths elections, and be sure to kick them in the direction of back home, never to return to D.C. to harm our nation again. Vote Out Incumbents for Democracy. That means vote for challengers to the incumbents. Enough incumbents lose, all politicians will get the message, voters RULE, and results that solve problems will get the votes.

Digly, you miss the point.

Hollywood and universities are subject to market pressures. See, for example, the notorious Hollywood flop “Gigli.” It was, by all accounts, complete and utter shite, so nobody saw it.

Remember the free market? If a product isn’t to your liking, you can choose freely not to see it. Nobody makes you go to the movies, watch TV, or anything else.

Ditto universities. You certainly don’t have to enroll at any particular university, or extend your education past age 16 at all! If you are conservative and wish an ideological education, there are certainly institutions that will happily serve your needs. Ditto on the liberal end. And, at any particular institution, curricula offer more than enough choice to allow those students WHO CHOOSE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR EDUCATIONS ample opportunity to boraden or narrow their intellectual horizons as they see fit.

Remember, the free market is your friend, and the free market allows you, heaven forbid, to choose NOT to consume.

Farrakan is a joke; and so is modern liberalism for that matter. They don’t get it and they can not keep this country safe.

First of all, we’re not asking Farrakhan to keep this country safe…we’re not asking him to do anything…he just keeps popping up like the proverbial bad penney.

But I’ve repeatedly heard that liberals can’t keep this country safe…hogwash…9/11 occurred on Bush’s watch…he was warned.

Why is it that the very party who ignored terrorist warnings feels the “other” party can’t keep the U.S. safe? I’m tired of hearting that liberals (Democrats, left) can’t keep the U.S. secure…well, Republicans haven’t done well, either (although they’ve seemed to ignore changing those colored alerts…guess it’s not close enough to election time to scare the populace yet).

What actual fact(s) demonstrate that the liberals (Dems, left) are not adequate in the security area???

Incoming!!!

Lynne, the Bush-fans have that myth down pat. No doubt you’ll hear that everything from 9/11 to the insurgency in Iraq is Clinton’s fault.

“I’m tired of hearting that liberals (Democrats, left) can’t keep the U.S. secure…well, Republicans haven’t done well, either”

Not doing “well” and “underminning” this countries’ ability to fight a war and see to it that the country is safe are two (entirely) different things. Until the Dems can prove that they can do better, than the Repubs, not to mention anything at all, they will always be labeled (rightfully so) as soft on National Security. Period.

Rahdigly-
We don’t hold people accountable for their opinions in that way. The accountability is one that falls to all who communicate: somebody takes what you say to mean something, and if they don’t like it, one has to fear that it reflects poorly on you.

Every now and then somebody complains about the sex and violence and other objectionable things in the media. Then they complain about the universities, and how liberal they’re getting. Many of these same people, though, turn around and sing hosannas to the Free Market.

This is the point in an anime where the characters mouth drops open, and the eyes go blank. Those culture warriors hardly realize it, but the free market means choice, just as Democracy means choice. If they want more conservative education, perhaps they should dump the pretentious hatred of academics, or else seek out the freely available conservative institutions, which no law has denied them. If they want more conservative filmmaking and television, they should either change the channel, or drop their loathing of artistic fields, and grow a nice crop of their own Spielbergs and Coppolas.

This is a nation of persuasion, where people are free to use honeyed words as they are to exhaust themselves trying to browbeat their fellow citizens into their orthodoxy of culture.

A culture like this is always going to be difficult, and culture warriors will always find something to tear their hair out about. With religion, morality, and opinions about matters left up to people they have no control over, it’s spectacularly easy for folks to predict doom and forecast the end of the country.

The truth is, America’s more robust than that. Part of what makes it robust is the diversity of opinion and choice. The market reflects this as the moon reflects the sunlight. Without the ability to decide one’s opinion and morality for oneself, things like the market and academic melieu of our time would be fairly useless. It is only in the freedom that our society enjoys that we see this benefit in these systems. Without it, we would not have so many different options available as to how we choose to live our lives, run our businesses, etc.

As system like ours, if it runs properly, is bound to have its share of ongoing outrage and indignation, some of it just personal egotism, some of it important, substantial dissent against a true evil going on. It’s both useless and dangerous to try and supress this, to make it go away. In fact, that just tends to aggravate things. When a real problem is at the center of such outrage, the more one tries to shut others up, the more the fury builds.

The best way to rid oneself of such outrage is to either show its invalidity in a difficult-to-refute way, or acknowledge its validity and do something about it. The wisdom of either approach depends on ones clarity about the situation. If the Republicans want to dampen the anger in this country, they have three options, generally speaking: 1)They can succeed despite the doomsaying; 2)They can explain and lay out the situation to where people can see how the Republicans couldn’t really help the situation; and 3) They could admit things got screwed up and start taking care of them and working with the rest of the country. This last option might be easier than they think, since they vastly overestimate the distance between their interests and those of the left and center.

Avis,

“I think we in this country today are witnessing the aged 60’s generation’s lack of trust in each other and the American people.”

As a member of that “aged” ’60s generation that folks like you disparage, I have to say that you couldn’t be more wrong.
The expression was “don’t trust anyone over 30”, and as we grew up we realized that everyone becomes 30 eventually.
We were, and still are a generation that sought to unite the people on this planet in the cause of peace.
Don’t make the mistake of thinking I am a pacifist. I do belive in defending myself.

I also belive that trust, like respect, is something that you earn, and I still haven’t seen anything of my government that earns either.

Stephen you had me strung along with you every word of the way until the last 2 sentences:

They could admit things got screwed up and start taking care of them and working with the rest of the country. This last option might be easier than they think, since they vastly overestimate the distance between their interests and those of the left and center.

They do not vastly overestimate the distance between themselves and the left. That distance is majority power in government, and the chasm is hard to overestimate. Anyone who thinks the differeneces are about anything other than majority power in government will continue to be sorely disppointed that our government is so inept and inefficient.

Let me give you an example. Congress has a bill which has full bi-partisan support in committee. When it comes out to the floor, the most miniscule of differences become filibuster threatening differences, not because of the content of the bill, but, for who gets credit for the final package on passage, their amended version our ours.

It is all about power and perception of power, and while D’s and R’s waste years fighting over these political differences even when there are no policy differences, our nation’s debts, border insecurity, educational decline, and holes in our safety nets continue to worsen.

Stephen, ahh, what would this blog be without a long, epic retort from you? I agree with your take on democracy and choice. And, I certainly agree with the fact that America is diverse and robust.

“If they want more conservative education, perhaps they should dump the pretentious hatred of academics, or else seek out the freely available conservative institutions, which no law has denied them.”

How could you possibly spin this in favor of the libs?! It’s not the conservatives fault that the schools have been “invaded” by the liberals. And, the conservatives are going elsewhere to get their education and some are even staying and fighting these systems. And, they’re doing that b/c that’s part of the “Choice” and “freedoms” they have in this country; just as the libs have the freedom to dominate the schools, judges and (of course) the media. Mark these words, they will pay (dearly) for that; in the long run, though.

George Washington warned about the dangers of the party system. One of his fears was that the factions would subjugate what was in the best interest of the country to what was in their own best interest. (Sound familiar?)

“A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume,” Washington said of the party system in his farewell address.

History may yet prove him right.

Rahdigly, schools invaded by the liberals? Get an education on the history of our education, man. American schools have been liberal for centuries. They don’t call it a Liberal Arts degree for nothing. If there is an invasion, it is the conservatives invading the schools. Georgia has a bill to include the Christian Bible as a text book. Now that’s what I call an invasion.

Aldous
You can add Al Franken and Jeanine Garafalo and add to list from there. Those two in no way are Rep-right-conservative or anything close to that.

the perfect wedge issue for the republicans in 2008 is hillery clinton.if you doubt me check out the dems. blog cites today.

Max
If the president is ultra-right wing as you say. then those that you favor must me ultra-left wing. I think that is fair statement.

Woody Mena
Please define your use of the word conservative. It does not fit the way you used it.

Living abroad for anumber of years lends your perspective a second look that many of us simply never get. This becomes apparent when you look at American politics through the lens of a foreign nation’s media and you realise that the differences that tear us apart are in effect, inconsequential.

Gay marriage for instance, it is comical to many in the rest of the world to know that many voted for Bush on this issue alone. The candidates did not disagree on important issues such as whether to pull out of Iraq. Their policy disagreements were one of quantity, such as tax cuts. Bush wanted tax cuts for everyone. Kerry wanted tax cuts for middle and lower-income folks while increasing taxes for the wealthiest among us. Churches went out of their way to get the vote out against against Kerry over his support for abortion!

The problem with us in America lies in our ability to discad perfectly good ideas simply because they come from across the aisle. Unchecked, This self-righteous rage that we feel will only increase and it will divide us in a way that is not good for America.

Try to reply to this ad without invoking rage as your logic. It might be the beggining of a good thing.

lynne
Cong. McKinney

Voters should be outraged.
Slumbering voters should be much more outraged than they are.

If none of this makes them mad, then nothing will.

Unfortunately, the pain and misery has to reach very high levels before voters start paying attention. Then, it is too late. Voters have themselves to thank for it, because they keep ignoring government, which keeps allowing it to grow more and more corrupt.

It’s just a matter of time.
Pain drives change.
When the pain grows bad enough, voters will do something about it.
Too bad, they always have to learn the hard way.

Roman,

“Living abroad for anumber of years lends your perspective a second look that many of us simply never get.”

What most Americans that haven’t traveled abroad don’t seem to realize is that folks in other countries are just the same as we are. They have the same wants and needs as we do.

The parochial attitude that is American, sees America as perfect, and all others as, while maybe not bad, certainly not so perfect.
Governments asside, my experience has been that all people are pretty much the same everywhere.

If you talk to just plain folks in foriegn contries, they see America, the idea, because they can’t see America, the reality. They don’t understand that Americans are just like they are.
They don’t understand that Americans have to strugle to make ends meet, just like they do, and the streets here, aren’t paved with gold.

“Get an education on the history of our education, man. American schools have been liberal for centuries. They don’t call it a Liberal Arts degree for nothing. If there is an invasion, it is the conservatives invading the schools.”

That’s absurd! First off, what’s your source to back that up on the GA bill? B/c I live in that state and I know the state legislatures were looking into that bill; not definite yet, though. And, what’s wrong with another point of view, anyway?

Also, Georgia is the first state to pass the toughest laws for illegal immigrants; that’s a big thing considering the wussies in D.C. won’t do anything about enforcing our laws. So back up off the “G” to the “A”. :o)

Jack, good points.

I’ve been very concerned about the path both our political parties have taken. There was a very interesting article in The Atlantic last month (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200603/sharon), unfortunately it’s a subscription piece. While it is clear that the classical use of our political party system has become detrimental to our nation, the thesis of the article is a bold and innovative politician can simply declare himself free of the constraints of establishment politicians - witness Ariel Sharon, who was a pioneer in Palestinian repression and establishment of Israeali communities on the West Bank. When he believed it no longer advantageous for his country, he simply declared the policy at an end. When Likud was no longer hospitable, he established a new party. It appears our country needs that kind of thinking and leadership if we are ever to mature on the international stage. Dave

David R. Remer-
Politics, given free rein can create apparent differences where in reality only miniscule disagreements exist. I’m fully aware, and often much frustrated with the former, but have much faith in the latter as well.

I hate to say this, but I think you’ve fallen into the trap of partisanship as well. Your only difference is that rather than picking either D or R, you pick both. I’d say the distance between us and you is no different between that which separates D and R.

I think we can do better than that. And we should. The problem isn’t having the wrong party in power. That’s incidental to the issue. If the Democrats gain power like I hope, yet don’t get around to dealing with the problems at hand, I will call that little improvement, and will in fact consider it a blunder on my party’s part.

The competition of ideas that our nation’s greatness is founded upon guarantees that some relationships will turn to rivalry and even outright hatred. Like anything, though, these rivalries can become overvalued, the struggle against one perceived evil or another oversold.

Rahdigly
This blog would certainly be much shorter without my contribution.

Define Liberal. Perhaps for those on the Far Right, most everybody is Liberal. In that case, it would be difficult for the media and academia to not be liberal in their eyes. A dwarf thinks everybody tall, a giant believes everybody else is short. In their context, are they not correct? Given the radical bent of the Republican party, maybe the media and the academic fields ARE more liberal- only from their relative perspective.

Or perhaps these things come of natural inhibitions among conservatives towards certain careers. A higher concentration of liberals, in this case, is nobody else’s fault than they’re own. You can’t blame the other team for fielding more batters, when fewer of your people are willing to step up to the plate.

We also must consider how liberal these people truly are. Again the relative political distance is important. Someone from the Republican leadership may call liberal what many people call consensus, even among those who vote Republican. Democrats and liberals can freely entertain different combinations of positions, though certain configurations are naturally discouraged.

Point is, this notion of dominance speaks more to the prejudices of the critics of the media and the academic sector than it does to any conspiratorial invasion.

Rocky

Many people in other countries base their opinion of America, and Americans, on what they see on their movie screens or what they hear on their CD players.

That’s scary!

Stephen, I define liberals as the political viewpoint that is based on “good intentions”, rather than what’s good for the country; “emotionalism” instead of “rationalism”. Now, of course, some Republicans and even some conservatives fall under that category at times (particularly w/ the illegal aliens situation); however, when I’m referring to liberals, that’s exactly whom I’m referring to.

To me, modern liberalism is anti-military, anti-police, anti-family, anti-religion, etc. Basically they are on the wrong side on (just about) every issue. Howard Dean, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Dick Durbin, Hillary, Gore, Pelosi, just to name a few. They are (mostly) on the wrong of important issues this country faces. So, now you know what I mean by liberal.

By the way, I am by no means a far right (or ultra) conservative; there are some issues I’m conservative about, some I’m liberal and some libertarian. It’s just that modern liberalism (as a whole) is weak and ineffective and will never (ever) keep this country safe.

Does anyone notice how defensive these blogs become after a while? Everyone is on their high horse declaring what they believe (which is fine) but at the top of their voices, people start explaining and asserting themselves like a bad dissertation. Again this is all fine, it IS a blog, but this, is my point entirely. Why are these blogs so popular now? Apparently people don’t feel they’re being heard and/or understood. I mean really, why get defensive if you know you’re among friends…or are you? Yes, I’m blaming the aged 60’s generation, because this entire situation is what they believed back then. The ‘personal is political’ now, and it no longer matters how you treat each other, it’s all about you, it’s about what you believe, what party you belong to, are you on the correct side of the argument, and are you a vegetarian or a bible-thumper. Hence our politicians. How many times has Rush Limbaugh gone off about liberals and the assumptions about them? OR the mainstream media, being ‘wary’ of the religious right? When everything is political, this, in turn, allows for assumptions and stereotyping of each other, which of course leads to fear and complete misunderstandings. Like conservatives are racists (which I find hysterical because I’m a black performing arts teacher…a liberals dream, but I can’t take the liberal/progressive ideology anymore). And liberals are soft, (which I also find hysterical because I have seen some of the most hateful, caluculated, arrogant behaviour from the left for a long time). Blanket knee jerk statements made from years of assumptions and NO actual investigation other than to prove your own point, but not to get to the actual truth.
But be that as it may, the fact that both parties hate and distrust each other so much means we as a country are not going to come together and resolve anything because neither side has any trust or respect for the other. Which again, I find ironic since the progressive are the ones who forced everyone to be “tolerant” back in the 90’s. And honestly, I’m not really for buttering up to the liberals but American sees through the crap, and it’s not about the details of gay, or immigration, or Dubai, or even the war in Iraq. We need as a people to pull back and really see, who is saying what, where are we really going and what are the real threats. We can’t do that if we’re constantly “swatting bees”. (Even if they don’t sting you this time, they might, and that buzzing noise is too annoying to get anything done!) We’ve become like children arguing just to hear our own voices….it’s a tantrum! If we want to be taken seriously on the global stage we need to come together as a country or we’ve had it. And no one wants to rule ruins….

rahdigly, apparently you also need to brush up on your what is going on in your own state.

Though students in many states enroll in classes related to the Bible, Georgia would become the first to require its Department of Education to put in place a curriculum to teach the history and literature of the Bible. Schools would use the book itself as the classroom textbook. Specifically the bill would establish electives on both the New and Old Testaments.

It has overwhelmingly passed both chambers, but needs a final vote on a minor House change. The vote is expected as early as Monday. If it passes, the state’s Department of Education has a year to establish Bible elective courses in the curriculum.

Christian Science Monitor

If the president is ultra-right wing as you say. then those that you favor must me ultra-left wing. I think that is fair statement.

I can’t remember when a Democrat wanted to rewrite the constitution, give money to certain religions, or claimed they were above the law, so I don’t think it’s the same. Those proposals are radical no matter what side of the fence they are coming from.

teddy kennendy. a bridge over trobeled water. bill clinton .i never had sexual relations . al gore in a buddihist temple. bill clinton wait till my term is over .

Max
D’s and R’s both try to rewrite the Constitution. They try in the Congress and are less successful than doing it in the courts; having the courts legislate; totally out of bounds, unconstitutional, un-American, and harmful to the Republic.

Rahdigly-
I’ll put this bluntly: your idea of modern liberalism is a travesty of the real thing. It’s the convenient set of secret beliefs that your people talk about Democrats having, so you don’t have to speak about the views we actually promote and advocate as a party.

It’s difficult to reach consensus with those who don’t trust your word at face value, and those who treat any compromise with you as the first step on the slippery slope to Hell.

But you know what, because of your inability to compromise, your party’s mistrust of those who don’t hold the party orthodoxy above all rival views, your party is slowly losing the power it once had over the American people. People are beginning to realize that Democrats are no less passionate, and perhaps a great deal more flexible in their ideology and practice, than the Republicans are.

Americans are at the point now where both parties seem insufficient for the job. That said, the parties that can prove most useful, most passionate, and most clearheaded about things in the next few years, may be able to determine the destiny of the nation for the next few decades. The Republicans can do this, but they have to realize that the path to good policy does not begin with a checklist of ideological talking points, and that their excessive closeness to corporate America is compromising their ability to act as true conservatives do. They will also have to learn the charms of moderation. No narrow segment of America can long keep the other Americans under their thumbs without inspiring resentment and rebellion.

Stephen Daugherty said: “I hate to say this, but I think you’ve fallen into the trap of partisanship as well. Your only difference is that rather than picking either D or R, you pick both.”

Clever, but not even remotely true, Stephen. You know my stand, and it has nothing to do with the ideology of Republicans and Democrats. It has everything to do with results by our partisan political process and governance. I will champion any party or all parties who solve America’s problems instead of compounding them. That is my position and it has nothing to do my being partisan. I, and many more like me, are non-partisan and vote for results and progress, and against ineffective politicians and parties and a lack of progress.

You are a Democrat, and no matter how bad things get, you will likely want to remain a Democrat. You have faith in your party, that makes you partisan. For those of us who have lost faith in the results and progress of governance by Democrats and Republicans, we are, if any are, non-partisan, wishing only for governance that improves our nation and our children’s prospects over our own. So far, neither Republocrat Party has a very good track record in that regard over the last decade or so.

I will vote for any party in coming elections and any candidate which is not incumbent. That is about as non-partisan as a voter can get, when that is the only avenue left to bring government back to being responsible to the nation and her people and their children’s futures.

How many liberals out there agree with rah’s definition of liberal? It’s no wonder you find it easy to rag on us, you don’t even know who we are.

Do you have to vote for every pork barrel military project to be pro-military?

Is supporting execution for abortion doctors your definition for pro-family?

There are too many social liberals among the clergy to say that liberals are anti-religion.

Howard Dean, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Dick Durbin, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi are or have been well supported by their constituents. So by definition of support, they are not on the wrong side. They are all doing something right. Obviously I can say the same thing for those on the right. IMO let the truth be known, and let the voters decide for themselves.

“I’ll put this bluntly: your idea of modern liberalism is a travesty of the real thing. It’s the convenient set of secret beliefs that your people talk about Democrats having, so you don’t have to speak about the views we actually promote and advocate as a party.”

Sorry you disagree with how I view liberalism; however, I’ve seen no evidence of where modern liberalism is the opposite of what I’ve said. And, “your people”?! Excuse me. That looks as though you’re going into labeling me b/c you don’t agree with my point of view. I’ve always found your blogs to be that of rational, so I’m a little shocked right now.

“But you know what, because of your inability to compromise, your party’s mistrust of those who don’t hold the party orthodoxy above all rival views, your party is slowly losing the power it once had over the American people.”

You should re-read my previous post b/c you clearly missed the part where I said that there were things I’m conservative about, some things I’m liberal about and some things I’m libertarian about. Instead of inquiring about which particular issue I was liberal/conservative/libertarian about, you went and labeled me in the right-wing category. What happened to inquiries and good-old debates?! Instead you got “emotional” and threw labels at me.

“People are beginning to realize that Democrats are no less passionate, and perhaps a great deal more flexible in their ideology and practice, than the Republicans are.”

I disagree there. I believe that people are starting to see that Republicans can spend just as much (if not more) than the democrats; however, with the dems having no ideas or solutions leaving the repubs as the only ones that will keep us safe, that’s leaving little room to elect democrats to do a better job. Think about, even though they both spend outrageously, the repubs are tougher on National Security (which they clearly are), so why would we elect a democrat? It just doesn’t make sense…

rahdigly, apparently you also need to brush up on your what is going on in your own state.

That’s not surprising. I spent a lot of time in Georgia and they only know what they hear on Rush and FOX. Don’t worry, though. I a lot of Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Georgia. Next thing you know, those “carpetbaggers” are gonna turn Ga into a model Blue state. :)

however, with the dems having no ideas or solutions leaving the repubs as the only ones that will keep us safe,

BS, rah. The blue side of this site is full of Democratic ideas and solutions that are far more effective than whatever it is the Republicans think they’re doing. In fact, you guys had to stael our ideas for energy independence and dealing with Iran and North Korea. If you guys had listened to us about Iraq, we’d be a whole lot better off and more secure there, too.

Oh yeah, don’t forget that the Homeland Security Department and intelligence reforms were Democratic ideas, too. And the 9/11 commission as well. BTW, when are you guys going to fully implement the 9/11 commission recommendations and secure America? It’s been years now. Tick. Tick. Tick.

“don’t forget that the Homeland Security Department and intelligence reforms were Democratic ideas, too.”

Oh yeah, and how did that “Homeland Security” do with Hurricane Katrina?! How much did it help?!

“I spent a lot of time in Georgia…I a lot of Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Georgia. Next thing you know, those “carpetbaggers” are gonna turn Ga into a model Blue state. :)”

You must not of spent alot of time here in Ga, b/c carpetbaggers don’t come down here and change the south; it’s the other way around. Look at Florida. All those New York carpetbaggers and it’s a red state. And, I know from experience b/c I am a carpetbagger and I like this state and the rednecks in the state legislature; they’re tough on crime, lax on guns, tough on immigration and show a spine when it comes to complex issues.

>>Oh yeah, and how did that “Homeland Security†do with Hurricane Katrina?! How much did it help?!

rah,

Homeland Security…good idea.

Cheney/Bush in charge of it…bad idea.

Okay, marysdude, American Pundit and any other liberal here…what exactly do you want? How do you see this country if you and your ilk were in charge? How would you fix everything you say is wrong? What exactly is your solution to Iraq, leave and then what? To Homeland Security, kick out the conservatives, and appoint who to do what? What should have been done with Katrina relief, if that’s all George Bush’s fault then who can come in and make it better? Specifically who in the Democratic party, or not even in the party, just who do you believe has an idea that I’ve not heard of, who would do everything that you want done, the way you want it done? This is the outrage of the American people. Seriously, if you’re going to complain about those doing the job, or trying to do the job under constant attacks and obstructions by your side, then offer something better. Not theories or attacks on conservative ideology, I want names, policies and track records.

Rahdigly:

Until the Dems can prove that they can do better, than the Repubs, not to mention anything at all, they will always be labeled (rightfully so) as soft on National Security. Period.

I asked WHY the Dems are seen as “soft” on national security…you merely restated the original comment…

Rahdigly:

“People are beginning to realize that Democrats are no less passionate, and perhaps a great deal more flexible in their ideology and practice, than the Republicans are.â€

I disagree there. I believe that people are starting to see that Republicans can spend just as much (if not more) than the democrats; however, with the dems having no ideas or solutions leaving the repubs as the only ones that will keep us safe, that’s leaving little room to elect democrats to do a better job. Think about, even though they both spend outrageously, the repubs are tougher on National Security (which they clearly are)

1) Why would Democrats bring up anything in the current Congressional atmosphere…Hastert won’t bring anything to the floor that doesn’t have a majority of Republicans to pass it…he isn’t even counting any Democratic votes, disenfranchising a good part of the country whose elected representatives are Democrat.

2) You again restated that the Dems are “soft” on security (and even said “which they clearly are”), yet you give zero facts to back your statement up….how are the Dems “soft on security” and how are the Repubs “hard” on security???

I’ve asked twice now…how about a real answer??

Bravo Avis! But I’m sure everyone out there is too busy listening to themselves to hear anyone else. They also like to lump everyone into two groups, forgetting that people are more complex than that and have overlapping ideologies. I doubt that they (or me for that matter) can be fit into one confining mold. I’ve never heard so much blatter to no purpose before. Sounds like politicians but without the worry about a backlash of opinion. Politicians are what we the people make them. They must say nothing of substance unless they provoke us. I don’t blame them, how could they ever be elected if they told us the truth about their real ideas and feelings. Being candid hurts.

Sorry: ” blather “

Lynne, besides having no ideas and solutions, the democrats always seem to be on the wrong side of the issues, particularly when it comes to National Security.

For one, I see them “criminalizing” this war on terror, rather than as a “Military” issue. There’s just too much “sympathizing” and making sure the terrorists receive “due process”, instead of doing what it takes to get rid of them. And, the enemy, in this case, would be the terrorists (the fascist pigs that cut people’s heads off while hiding behind their religion); not GWB and the conservatives!!! Most of the dems don’t know the difference; at least none that I’ve seen. That (alone) makes them dangerous and ineffective with National Security.

Another example would be accusing our soldiers of war crimes and carelessness of duty. And, I’m not talking about Abu Gharib, b/c those idiots are paying for what they did, so don’t even go there.

They also took the wrong side of the NSA program. The majority of Americans understood and were for that program, yet the dems tried to politicize the issue; using the MSM to spin the story that it was spying on Americans, all to no avail though.

These are just few examples of why most see that the dems can’t be trusted with National Security.

rahdigly
The dems are not soft on security. Reid, Schumer, Kennedy, Pelosi, Waxman, Feingold, Leahey, McKinney ad nauseum are all for their own security. And they mean business providing for their own security. Like McKinney defending herself from Capitol security personnel doing the job they are paid to do. Now the the cat is out of the bag maybe there will be a clone of McKinney try to get in. How do we handle that? Oh, well rationale is not the forte of the Dems.

rahdigly,

“There’s just too much “sympathizing†and making sure the terrorists receive “due processâ€, instead of doing what it takes to get rid of them.”

Do you understand that “due process” is one of the concepts that this country was founded upon?
That “due process” is part of the bedrock that makes “us” different from “them”?

Any tin horn dictator can just disappear a terrorist, or dissident. It takes the better country, that takes the higher path, to show the rest of the world that “due process”, is part and parcel of being, and remaining, the good guys.

“They also took the wrong side of the NSA program. The majority of Americans understood and were for that program, yet the dems tried to politicize the issue; using the MSM to spin the story that it was spying on Americans, all to no avail though.”

The “Dems”?

From where I sit this appeared to be a non-partisan issue, that had very little to do with “National Security”, and had everything to do with the “POSSIBILITY” of spying on all Americans.

You need to stop lumping all Democrats with the Liberal left and you and your buddies out there on the far right fringe need to start listening with better ears, and start realizing that your opinions aren’t fact.
There are a lot of ideas being floated out there on how to better prepare this country for the future. Some of these ideas are good, some are not so good, but I am certain that all of the good ideas aren’t coming from the right.

“Do you understand that “due process” is one of the concepts that this country was founded upon?
That “due process” is part of the bedrock that makes “us” different from “them”?

Yes, I do. However, that doesn’t mean I’m for the “terrorists” receiveing any of them. In fact, you just proved the point that “criminalizing” is the way to go b/c even the terrorists have rights. Wrong. And the American people are not buying it either.

“Any tin horn dictator can just disappear a terrorist, or dissident. It takes the better country, that takes the higher path, to show the rest of the world that “due process”, is part and parcel of being, and remaining, the good guys.”

How did FDR and Truman handle the National Security issue?! That’s right, today’s dems are way off on this issue. Way off!!

“You need to stop lumping all Democrats with the Liberal left and you and your buddies out there on the far right fringe need to start listening with better ears, and start realizing that your opinions aren’t fact.”

Just calling it how I see it. And, when I say dems and libs, I’m referring to the majority. I’ve explained this in an earlier post (April 3, 2006 02:11 PM), as well as my political viewpoint.

rahdigly,

“Yes, I do. However, that doesn’t mean I’m for the “terrorists†receiveing any of them. In fact, you just proved the point that “criminalizing†is the way to go b/c even the terrorists have rights. Wrong. And the American people are not buying it either.”

Dispite you and the far right’s attempt to de-humanize the “terrorists”, they are still human beings, and ALL human beings have rights. That is one of the ideals that this country was founded upon, and if you don’t belive that, you need to go back and re-read the Declaration of Independence.

“How did FDR and Truman handle the National Security issue?! That’s right, today’s dems are way off on this issue. Way off!!”

And again you continue to stuff everybody that may be to the left of what you belive into one tiny pigeon hole.
Even those at Nuremberg were given a trial.
The people that were caught compromising National Security were still given “due process” under the law.

“Just calling it how I see it. And, when I say dems and libs, I’m referring to the majority. I’ve explained this in an earlier post (April 3, 2006 02:11 PM), as well as my political viewpoint.”

Just because we are entitled to our opinions still doesn’t make it “fact”.

“To me, modern liberalism is anti-military, anti-police, anti-family, anti-religion, etc. Basically they are on the wrong side on (just about) every issue. Howard Dean, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Dick Durbin, Hillary, Gore, Pelosi, just to name a few. They are (mostly) on the wrong of important issues this country faces. So, now you know what I mean by liberal.”

And in MY opinion this is a load of crap!

Just because the folks you mention are Democrats, and have been elected doesn’t mean that they speak for all Democrats, just as Bush and Cheney don’t speak for all Republicans.
Most Americans be they Democrat or Republican, are in the middle, and you don’t seem to be able to get your head around that fact when you bring out your broad brush to paint everybody on the left.

“Dispite you and the far right’s attempt to de-humanize the “terrorists”, they are still human beings, and ALL human beings have rights.”

That’s exactly what I’m talking about; you want to treat everyone like humans, regardless of the fact that they don’t even come close to treating people like human beings. And so, that kind of ideology will only grant rights and liberties from our constitution to terrorists; the same terrorists that want to destroy our constitution and way of life. This isn’t how wars are won. This isn’t how terrorists change their ways or are defeated. America can see which ideology constantly repeats your viewpoint (terrorists are people too) and that is why the libs and dems are lumped together as they are. America will win this global war on terror and it will be inspite of some people (I’ll let you fill in the blanks there).

Remember, the apologists, for the terrorists, and the emotionally charged “feel gooders” that want to paint all those who disagree as “warmongers”, are constantly telling us who they really are and what they are all about. And, that is why they will never (ever) be trusted with National Security.

rahdigly,

I know this is a waste of time but I will try this once more.

“That’s exactly what I’m talking about; you want to treat everyone like humans, regardless of the fact that they don’t even come close to treating people like human beings. And so, that kind of ideology will only grant rights and liberties from our constitution to terrorists; the same terrorists that want to destroy our constitution and way of life.”

You still don’t get it. This “IS” what separates us from them.

We, who are trying to spread Democracy throughout the world still need to prove that we are supposed to be the good guys, and because we are supposed to be the good guys, we treat ALL people the same regardless of ideology, even if they are criminals.

We want to treat those at Gitmo as enemy combatants simply because they don’t wear the uniform of a specific army.
Can anybody out there show me a picture of an Taliban army uniform?
The Taliban were running Afghanistan, weren’t they?

“Remember, the apologists, for the terrorists, and the emotionally charged “feel gooders†that want to paint all those who disagree as “warmongersâ€, are constantly telling us who they really are and what they are all about.”

And so what you’re saying is that the “majority” of those that aren’t Republicans are “apologists” and emotionally charged “feel gooders”?

It’s cool that some of you keep trying to educate G Rah. Here, come over to my house, I’ve got a brick wall you can bang your head against. I lived in GA for a while myself. Tell me Rah, if you’re a carperbagger, do you still call others who move in from the North “Yankees”?

ray,

“It’s cool that some of you keep trying to educate G Rah. Here, come over to my house, I’ve got a brick wall you can bang your head against.”

Yeah, but ray it feels sooo good when I stop.

I’m the one who gets it; along with our military and the majority of Americans. This whole “we don’t want to be just like them” notion is complete and utter nonsense. Look at what FDR and Truman did in WWII: treatment of prisoners; interning Japanese Americans; how “extreme” the fighting was in the war, and we were nothing (NOTHING!) like the enemy. What we “were” was vitorious and the enemy was defeated. Maybe the “treat the terrorists fairly” crowd could wrap themselves around that little history (and reality) lesson for a change; though I don’t expect they will. Yet, all that does is prove the original point which is that the dems are not to be trusted with National Security. There are far (far) more dems than repubs that fit this mold of “don’t be like them”, so that’s why the dems get the label.

Terrorist are the enemy, not the U.S. gov’t or the Bush administration! It’s just absurd how people don’t get that fact. Allowing the enemy to use our laws and way of life to destroy those same laws and way of life is just asinine. It’s not a winner in the electorate; however, I don’t mind people telling us who they really are, so they can keep it up as far as I’m concerned.

And, Ray, I never call anyone from the north a yankee; it’s me that “still” gets called that. It’s all good though, it’s all in good taste.

Terrorist are the enemy, not the U.S. gov’t or the Bush administration! It’s just absurd how people don’t get that fact.

Actually, the absurdity is the straw man you’ve created in your own mind in believing people who support the Constitution and its protection consider the government a bigger enemy than terrorists.

Then again, it’s easier to argue against the the puppets in your mind than to argue against the real situation.

It’s cool that some of you keep trying to educate G Rah. Here, come over to my house, I’ve got a brick wall you can bang your head against.

Uh oh. Someone pointed out that Rahdigly was wrong and used his name in doing so. Anything said from now on will be dismissed as an “ad hominem” attack.

Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Radhigly:

Thanks for your opinions…now how about some facts…

Jack:

Wow…you’re just a master at this…if it isn’t “hysterical” it’s “outrageous”…how about a few more facts and little less hyperbole in the headlines…

rahdigly,

“I’m the one who gets it; along with our military and the majority of Americans. This whole “we don’t want to be just like them†notion is complete and utter nonsense.
Look at what FDR and Truman did in WWII: treatment of prisoners; interning Japanese Americans; how “extreme†the fighting was in the war, and we were nothing (NOTHING!) like the enemy.”

I hate to be the one to burst your bubble, but our way of life has already been changed.

What FDR and Truman did with the internment of Japanese/Americans was dispicable, and it in no way shortened the war nor did it enhance our national security.
It was wrong and there is no excuse for it.
FDR and Truman ruled over a time of great fear in America.

What we are doing with the internees at gitmo and other places is just as dispicable.
It is wrong and there is no excuse for it, it in no way shortens the war, nor does it enhance our national security.
You just don’t hold human beings without any redress indefinitely.
And now, just as in the time of WW2, the far right has attempted to scare the American public into a state of fear.

The only thing you’re right about is that the enemy isn’t us, but that said, you still have to treat people like humans if you don’t want to lower yourself to what the enemy is.

Just a thought to add. How outraged would we be if things like this started appearing in our major newspapers? http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/index.asp?cu_no=2&lng=1&template_id=47&temp_type=42

Maybe it’s all sentimental drivel, but it seems to me that we have a great many things in this country, and many of the best are intagible and fragile. It really is worth fighting for some of our ideals both at home and abroad, so the real question is just what those ideals are. I’m not sure if we even have a coherent idea at the moment, but all of us should step back from the heat of the argument once in a while and take time to think: are we seeking to define our ideals? Are they good ones? Consistent? Or are we only trying to sate our egoes and feed our anger?

Hello folks just so you are aware may 1 is set for national hispanic walk out.Thought when they do we should help them leave the democratic republic of america then file there papers and go to the end of the line.If you are as an example(promoting not going to school but marching in protest adults fine school kids not good)

We as a nation facing a nasty election coming up and people are gona vote there own mind and what they feel is right and wrong not left and right we are living in a world ruled by guns and politions meanwhile nada gets done because no one group can decide anything with out the tv news!He stole the election cause mr kerry said so and therfore no one is goin to do thing but complain about it there not goin to solve a thing just complain that hes doin every thing wrong so they go steal his idea and try to spin them as there own still nothing acomplished shame shame

allen stephens,

“We as a nation facing a nasty election coming up and people are gona vote there own mind and what they feel is right and wrong not left and right we are living in a world ruled by guns and politions meanwhile nada gets done because no one group can decide anything with out the tv news!”

Actually it isn’t the news but the advertising departments of the TV stations, and Madison Avenue, that will decide the next election.

Prepare yourself for the onslaught of the nobody’s better than me campaign.

Rock,

Wars are extreme and they are no place for moderates. That’s why FDR, Truman, Lincoln, Teddy, etc. were all great Presidents in war time. The did what they had to do to win and they didn’t listen to “spineless” pi$$ants talk about becoming like the enemy. WWII didn’t make us like the Nazis or the imperialist Japs; it made us winners and the Japs and Nazis Losers! That’s how you win in wars.

Now, the “be humane to terrorists” crowd out there can try to spin it whatever way they want; however, to the majority of Americans, we know that placating to the terrorists is like trying to train a snake. And, I’m talking viper snakes here. We know what’s going on and I thank all that think otherwise for letting us know where you stand.

Now, you had a great idea earlier. Why don’t you take some of the “ad hominem” attacking bloggers and try that “brick wall” thing together.

THANX ROCKEY YOUR RIGHT ABOUT THE TV ADDS.And your right indeed in a dance hall it takes 2 to tango.and the frinzy thats coming we as in the people will suffer.Because nothing will still get done!(AL THE BORE GORE)is worried that the republicans are the cause of globale warming!Christ we are in a war wecant control our own border problems.And that nut case mckinney from georgia it a racial thing look at that hair do that by itself would scare even the strongest cop! we as a countrie need to be very alert very because binladins watching and listening so is iran to see if they can spot a spinless whimp to jump allover.And mcain oh plz no Fred thompson from tenn would be a good name to toss in the ring hes an actor senator now actor again?One point both parties need a big change

rahdigly,

“Wars are extreme and they are no place for moderates. That’s why FDR, Truman, Lincoln, Teddy, etc. were all great Presidents in war time. The did what they had to do to win and they didn’t listen to “spineless†pi$$ants talk about becoming like the enemy. WWII didn’t make us like the Nazis or the imperialist Japs; it made us winners and the Japs and Nazis Losers! That’s how you win in wars.”

I am truely sorry I wasted all this time trying to make sure that you might have a glimmer of humanity.

I now admit it was all a mistake.

Oh, and btw, this doesn’t mean that I concede the point.
What it means is that I have actually found somthing more painfull than a poke in the eye.

Have a life.

We as americans do truly need to take a look at this mess we are in.While both partys live on the thrill of the gotcha game.Ole binladin and even older fidel and that other idiot from vinizoooala are laughing ther buts off.Why kill us we are doin a fine job of that ourselves!Just how fare up there butts are both partys goin to stick there heads!we are in a war thats already started .and every political party want to tell us how to fight retired generals need to stay that way and if they were so good and so smart why are they not still out there.We cannot control our borders and now they are saying lets stage a wet back walk out and cause more focus on our ileagel needs keep our kids from school and forget that we have laws and an army in harms way not cool at all.the man in charge is gona be there till 08 so now 06 is just a pralude to terror to come and i will happen again while finger pointing were all dead.Tradjic and truly preventable the sad thing is our border problems do not really have a fair fix but both partys must fix it and then stick to it.And whats wrong with a young student carrying our nations flag while others carey theirs what we can burn ours because of free speach we can carie it also as free speach and as of the last i looked california texas colorado new mexico are american states payed for in blood from all ethnic groups.AND condem our own milatary they cant come into schools they fought to protect yet the taliban can go to yale.

president eisenhower was a six star general before he was president he made the peace in korea and did not involve us in vietnam and a quote of his (not one soldier lost there lives under my watch of eight years, in a war!) he was really proud of that fact! and so was I.

Sorry, Radighly…

You’re still spouting opinions, not facts…

rahdigly,

One last thing before I go.

I say life has been changed forever here and not for the good. We all will have to put up with those that fear their shadows and the al qaeda boogieman.
I have had the distinct pleasure of being on a concert tour these last couple of weeks and in the last two weeks alone have had the privilege of being searched at the airports of Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, and Denver, all for the crime of having a single destination ticket.
I will be in Dallas and Houston this weekend, how many bets are there I will have this privilege again?

Please, somebody ask me if I actually feel safer.

Mr. Humane,

You may want to try to convince the terrorists to have humanity rather then harping on us “Inhumane” Americans. But that won’t happen now will it?! It’s the same old copout sh*t; blame the US and not the real people responsible. With that kind of logic, in WWII, we all would be speaking German and high saluting. Nice. People bess wake up and smell the Jihad. It’s b/c of this “inhumane” treatment to inhumane pigs that they’re not making us like them.

So, “life changed forever”, huh? Tell me, did it change b/c we started acting like them or has terrorism been going on for decades b/c the terrorists were acting like themselves? It’s b/c nobody did a thing about it that they “attacked” us; not the other way around. Guess some people forget 9/11; well I don’t. And many Americans and our military surely don’t, either. It’s real and there are no bogey men that are to blame. But, if some feel better blaming America, Bush or both, just to sound “humane”, well then go right ahead. We all have eyes and know exactly what we’re reading. I say “Keep telling us what you really believe and we’ll take it from there”.

The comments about humanity only proved the point that Dems/libs/and weak repubs are not to be trusted with national security. Someone (actually) tried to argue that I was wrong with my assertion that dems/libs concentrated more on “criminalizing” than using “military” force in this war on terror. That I was incorrect when saying the libs/dems are concerned more about what the US did wrong rather then what the terrorist do wrong. Less than a day later, I get arguements about how terrorist should get fair treatment b/c we are a nation of laws; we shouldn’t be like them; and we are sooooo “inhumane”. My goodness, when am I ever going to learn?!! Ha! Ha! Some people make it that easy. Too easy!

rahdigly,

“With that kind of logic, in WWII, we all would be speaking German and high saluting.”

What a load of manure!
Learn your history pal. Hitler couldn’t even take England, how do you suppose the Germans could have possibly ever taken America?

It’s reactionaries that give America a bad name throughout the world.

rahdigly,

Mr Humane, kinda catchy, I like it. I remember when you thought I was a clown. I guess I have come up in the world after all.

“You may want to try to convince the terrorists to have humanity rather then harping on us “Inhumane†Americans. But that won’t happen now will it?! It’s the same old copout sh*t; blame the US and not the real people responsible.”

No where, not once, have I used America and Inhumane in the same sentence. I have used dispicable, and a few other choice words, but never inhumane.

You’re never going to understand this, so I am not going to waste a lot of time trying to explain it.
Your concept of what America is, and mine are diametrically opposed.

You see an America with an overwhelming military that every other country should fear.

I see an America that is a shining beacon of light, and is an example of what every country should aspire to.

You see, that was pretty simple.

By the way, here is the definition of diametrically opposed from the Mirriam-Webster on-line dictionary;

2 : completely opposed : being at opposite extremes.

Thank you and good night.

“You’re never going to understand this, so I am not going to waste a lot of time trying to explain it.
Your concept of what America is, and mine are diametrically opposed.”

That’s the problem, right there. You see this as trying to change ones opinion to think like you with this blog. That’s not how debate works. It’s (perfectly) ok to have “diametrically” oppossing viewpoints; that’s what debates and this blog are all about. You’re supposed to argue your point, yet it’s not a definite that you’ll change anyones opinion. As I’ve been saying, debates are good b/c you can find out exactly who people really are. History and even hindsight can dictate (“the smell test”) how situations would be if you took each persons argument and played it out in that moment in time; to see if it would work or not.

For example, how do you think your “humane” argument would work in 1942? Hmm! What would the world be like if the US used the “enemy has rights, too” approach in WWII?! Try and think about that w/out throwing your hands up and holding your breathe.

“Learn your history pal. Hitler couldn’t even take England, how do you suppose the Germans could have possibly ever taken America?”

The allied powers were getting are a$$e$ kicked during that war. The Japs were tearing up the South Pacific well into 1942; ever here of the Baatan Death March?! Pretty gruesome stuff. Hell, “your boys” the French were carrying around three flags with them at all times. The British flag, Nazis flag and the WHITE flag. Stupid frogs!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwtwo/

“It’s reactionaries that give America a bad name throughout the world.”

Uh, no. It’s the reactionaries and the extremist that win wars; the apologists and passivists are the ones that get killed and (more importantly) get other people killed. Check out the isolationists in the mid to late 1930’s. If it weren’t for that movement, millions of Jews could have been saved.

What would the world be like if the US used the “enemy has rights, too” approach in WWII?

Not markedly different. We treated German and Japanese prisoners of war humanely, with a few rare exceptions.

The problems is that we treated some of our citizens as though they had no rights, for reasons that have never been shown to have advanced our security or our war effort one bit.

So, go ahead with your fear-mongering that we have to be barbarians to beat the barbarians. Don’t let logic affect your argument. That seems to be what you think a debate means.

The allied powers were getting are a$$e$ kicked during that war.

Check out the isolationists in the mid to late 1930’s. If it weren’t for that movement, millions of Jews could have been saved.

Huh? Talk about historical revisionism. Wow.

rahdigly,

If you noticed, Hitler gave up on Britan before America evan got into the war, which is why statements like,

“With that kind of logic, in WWII, we all would be speaking German and high saluting.”

seem just ignorant.

There are always reasons that wars start.
Hitler wanted revenge for the way Germany was treated after WW1, Japan wanted resources to fuel it’s growing economy. Neither had aspirations to invade America.
Admiral Yamamoto knew that once America geared up Japan was going to get it’s ass kicked.

“The Japs were tearing up the South Pacific well into 1942; ever here of the Baatan Death March?!”

Yeah, I have. Japan tore up the pacific because they had a modern navy. America had a fleet that was built to fight in WW1, and was hampered by treaties that were designed against the U.S. because England was afraid that they would have to fight a war against America for sea superiority.

All this is well and good, and has nothing at all to do with the “war” we are fighting now.
After Sept. 11th Bush had carte blanche to fight the war on terrorism. The whole world (including some of our most dubious allies), was behind us. We did a great job in Afghanistan.

The strategy in Iraq was lame. We blew by the Iraqi army and in the process left our ass hanging out to be attacked from the rear. Which, BTW, is one of the reasons that this is still a problem. We left ammo dumps that we knew were there unsecured. We didn’t have the “hearts and minds” of the Iraqui people.
Dispite the protests on our initial invasion of Iraq, Bush said that he knew what he was doing, and nothing could be further from the truth.

In other words, we didn’t do what we did in WW2.
Any comparisons to that war are moot.

Now, had we followed the example of WW2 and actually kicked ass, everything would be totally different.

People like you want to “blame the pacifists” for the all the problems. Nothing could be further from the truth.
People like me want blame the gross mis-management of this “war on terror” on those that made the stupid mistakes, that alienated virtually all of the previously mentioned allies, and are the cause of the polorization of America.

Rocky,
“Now, had we followed the example of WW2 and actually kicked ass, everything would be totally different.”

No. If we had followed the example of WWII, according to you, we would be “inhumane” and “acting just like the enemy”. That’s what your argument has been; whether it’s intentional or not. That was my point to you; the previous wars couldn’t be fought like the way your talking about. And, the previous wars, especially WWII, weren’t fought like the way you’re talking; in fact, they were worse.

“People like you want to “blame the pacifists” for the all the problems. Nothing could be further from the truth.”

No. I just believe they’re wrong and they aren’t helping our country win this war on terror.

Lawnboy,
“Not markedly different. We treated German and Japanese prisoners of war humanely, with a few rare exceptions.”

Well, talk to your buddy Rocky “humane”; he would certainly disagree with the “few rare exceptions” comment.

“Yes, we were at one point. But we won without turning into our enemy, for the most part.”

Oh really?! So the incindiary bombings and the atom bombs weren’t “turning into the enemy”?! Again, not according to your pal Rocky. You two should discuss that issue, b/c it sounds as though your viewpoints are “diametrically” opposing.

>>Why don’t you take some of the “ad hominem†attacking bloggers and try that “brick wall†thing together.

Posted by: rahdigly at April 4, 2006 10:19 PM

rah,

And, speaking of ‘ad hominem’…

Now, now Mary, that’s not ad hominem. I responded with a sound arguement and then I finished with that line; it was innocent and the “blogosphere” knows it. :O)

Here’s the entire quote:

“Wars are extreme and they are no place for moderates. That’s why FDR, Truman, Lincoln, Teddy, etc. were all great Presidents in war time. The did what they had to do to win and they didn’t listen to “spineless” pi$$ants talk about becoming like the enemy. WWII didn’t make us like the Nazis or the imperialist Japs; it made us winners and the Japs and Nazis Losers! That’s how you win in wars.

Now, the “be humane to terrorists” crowd out there can try to spin it whatever way they want; however, to the majority of Americans, we know that placating to the terrorists is like trying to train a snake. And, I’m talking viper snakes here. We know what’s going on and I thank all that think otherwise for letting us know where you stand.

Now, you had a great idea earlier. Why don’t you take some of the “ad hominem” attacking bloggers and try that “brick wall” thing together.”

“Not markedly different. We treated German and Japanese prisoners of war humanely, with a few rare exceptions.

Well, talk to your buddy Rocky “humane”; he would certainly disagree with the “few rare exceptions” comment.

Unless I missed it, Rocky’s complaints regarding WWII and our behavior have been limited to our internment of American citizens of Japanese descent, not what I was explicitly talking about.

Yes, we were at one point. But we won without turning into our enemy, for the most part.

Oh really?! So the incindiary bombings and the atom bombs werenâ