[-V-]

In times like this, with Bush's popularity at an all-time low and the screw-ups, lies, and corruption at an all-time high, I can't help but wonder what the profile is of the last remaining supporters of this administration.

ILoveBush, you have inspired this thread. That you returned to read and post again on this progressive forum is some indication that you are for real and not just trolling. If so, you are a scientific and sociological wonder to be cherished on this forum in regards to our ongoing progressive project. I hope you don't mind the curiosity and that you or any other's like you can help us out.

What makes you tick? God? Money? Homophobia?, Terror? What is it???

If we examined your heart after you pass on for your alleged "reward in heaven" would we find a stamp on it saying "Reserved for everything that was mine"? Or would we just find a rotted out chamber with traces of human excrement due to a crosswiring between your bowel system and blood system?

Might we find an implant in your brain being broadcast from the same Carl Rove control panel that was connected to Bush's back or do you communicate telepathically with Jerry Fallwell.

Would we find traces of flesh under your fingernails of the people you clawed your way to climb over in life or, sadly, would we find the bruises from the abuse you suffered at the hands of other Regressives who have forever tainted your vision of the world.

I apologize if I'm way off base but in my "brother's keeper" naivete I aspire to identify the disease in the hopes of finding a cure. As a bleeding heart liberal if you need a hug instead of a debate I can do that too, or would that be too gay?

[JamesP]

Excellent post, -V-Soldier.

The mystery that the remaining Bush loyalists present to the world is indeed perplexing and worthy of exploration here.

I, myself, have struggled long to understand my Bush-loving bretheran, trying, in vain, to ascribe to them some noble, but to me undecipherable motivation that might bind them to the Bush.

My experience with those I've personally encountered has yielded but a simple and terrible answer:

As you peel the onion of "brutal self-interest and disdain for others", you uncover only layer after layer of the same. And the air around them is fouled by the stench of the false profession of faith that occupies the place that houses heart & soul in more enlightened men.

There is little they would not stoop to for a wretched tax cut and a chance at the crude sense of dominance over others sought by cruel, angry children. They are jungle-beings crouched behind spears peering fearfully out at the night, unfit for a civlized world - indistinguishable from their enemies.

There is no cure for a jungle soul - no way to bring the light of humanity to the dark dull eyes of the predator beast.

[-V-]

thank you jimmyp for you poetic insights into the heart of darkness

we can only speculate whether this jungle beast is
the ferocious predator peering through the Bush's
or
the frightened lamb HIDING behind the Bush's?

what brings them to forage on these progressive plains?
do they, in turn, seek to cure US?
are they on a crusade for GOD?
or on a mission to bring attention to themselves
in an unholy alliance with THEMSELVES?

perhaps these non indiginous foragers are masochistic creatures.
as they dip their fat heads into the POL watering hole
do they take some sick pleasure in us clamping down on their pig snouts
like a feeding alligator

the mere thought compells me to bathe myself vigorously
to erase their scent from my flesh after each encounter
but I will resolve to continue the dance
if by doing so the entertainment provided for cyber tourists
looking on through digital binoculars
helps in their understanding of both species
and moves us all forward...

[Mr. Magoo]

Thank you,-V-,for you have reaffirmed all of my veiws of liberals. You have NO idea who I am. You know absolutely NOTHING about me other than I am a staunch REPUBLICAN. Yet, you call me a homophobe. You say my soul is full of sh*t and that I "claw over people to get where I am". That is what liberals do, they pass judgement on others. If people have views that differ from theirs, those people are human scum. Liberals NEVER have ideas,just personal attacks and off the wall rants. If we were to examine YOUR heart after you passed on, would we find one? How about a backbone? Would your brain be too small to disect? Liberals pass themselves off as peace loving people. The only people liberals love are other liberals. I've been reading all these posts here. Man, what a circle jerk this is. This site is a bunch of liberals popping off about all the percieved problems in the world, without any solutions. You guys seem to love foreigners and terrorists, and HATE Republicans. I think you guys are smoking some good sh*t while writing this stuff. You wanna know what makes me tick? My family and friends. My children most of all. Money is not the center of my world. I work hard and I make good money. I don't apologize for that. Seeing able bodied people on welfare makes me SICK. Liberals LOVE government assistance. Why should I work 50 hrs a week and have half my check taken and given to the "poor"? Terror? I don't really know what you mean by that. Do I worry about another attack? YES, I do. And I would rather go on the offensive,than wait around for another surprise. That is why I support the wiretaps. I have nothing to hide. They can monitor me all they want. I am willing to give up some privacy for safety. My vision of the world has not been tainted as you said. Quite the opposite. I have a realistic view of the world. Liberals live in a utopian world, where everyday the sun is shining,the birds are singing and everyone loves everyone. Well, that ain't how it is pal. There are people in this world that want to kill us, for the simple reason that they don't like how we live. And make no mistake, if YOU were to be taken hostage by these people, your liberal views would not save you. They would kill you if given the chance. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT???? And to answer your last sentence. I would rather debate you than hug you. Not because it's "too gay". But, because I'd be afraid I'd end up with a knife in my back. One last thing....I LOVED seeing Cindy Sheehan getting arrested. Your views????

[scoff0165]

I am willing to give up some privacy for safety.

Then you deserve neither.

[Mr. Magoo]

Why?...... Your statement makes no sense.

[sweetpea]

In times like this, with Bush's popularity at an all-time low and the screw-ups, lies, and corruption at an all-time high, I can't help but wonder what the profile is of the last remaining supporters of this administration.

ILoveBush, you have inspired this thread. That you returned to read and post again on this progressive forum is some indication that you are for real and not just trolling. If so, you are a scientific and sociological wonder to be cherished on this forum in regards to our ongoing progressive project. I hope you don't mind the curiosity and that you or any other's like you can help us out.

What makes you tick? God? Money? Homophobia?, Terror? What is it???

If we examined your heart after you pass on for your alleged "reward in heaven" would we find a stamp on it saying "Reserved for everything that was mine"? Or would we just find a rotted out chamber with traces of human excrement due to a crosswiring between your bowel system and blood system?

Might we find an implant in your brain being broadcast from the same Carl Rove control panel that was connected to Bush's back or do you communicate telepathically with Jerry Fallwell.

Would we find traces of flesh under your fingernails of the people you clawed your way to climb over in life or, sadly, would we find the bruises from the abuse you suffered at the hands of other Regressives who have forever tainted your vision of the world.

I apologize if I'm way off base but in my "brother's keeper" naivete I aspire to identify the disease in the hopes of finding a cure. As a bleeding heart liberal if you need a hug instead of a debate I can do that too, or would that be too gay?
--------------------

I just love it when so-called progressives launch personal attacks and make strawman arguments. It just goes to show they are void of ideas and full of criticisms.

How about for fun let's put the shoe on the other foot and rewrite this survey. Full of personal attacks, gross assumptions, stereotypes and strawman arguments; but only directed at -V-.

It's times like these when liberals have been out of power for the majority of the last 20 years and when our great nation is at war that their true colors come through.

-V- you are a predictable liberal, but I will conduct the survey anyway. I hope you appreciate the condescencion and the pettiness returned to you in kind.

What makes you tick? Self loathing, pessimism, victimhood, class warfare, The New York Times?, Fidel Castro? What is it?

If we examined your heart after you passed on would it be full of jealousy of others' successes or just another liberal that refused to recognize evil when faced with it. If we examined your mind when you passed on would we see irrrational hatred of other's politics and beliefs or just a void where ideas should be? Would we see how you somehow think outcomes can be equalized for everyone and that communism is really a great idea, but just wan't given a fair chance. If we examined your soul would anything be there or does faith and/or religion scare you? FI we looked inside your body would a spine even be there or would a rolled up poster of Michael Moore in lieu of?

Would Pol Pot and Josef Stalin's ideas be ingrained into your thoughts of how societies should be formed? Would you even understand the terms lowest common denominator or personal responsibility?

Would we find a secret chalkboard where you kept a tally of times where you stuck it to the man and taxes were raised, bureaucarices were formed, and successful people were brought down a notch because it just isn't fair that they are successful when others (you) are not. Would we see the notches on your head where other liberals beat you down for trying to succeed in life becasue you weren't 'keping it real'?

I offer the same condescending bs apology you offered to iluvbush.

[-V-]

thank you for your participation Bushivics. ILB answered the survey, Pee ducked the survey and turned it around. I welcome both. Enjoy your drink from the watering hole. You've given me a lot to work with. I promise to be back to chew the fat when I have the time and the appetite.

[JamesP]

There are people in this world that want to kill us, for the simple reason that they don't like how we live.

Wow! Sorry, but I have to make a simple claim of "bullshit" here!

We all understand that there are people in the world that want to kill us, but no one who can write and read and think, not even the most blunt-headed and gullible Bush-lover, could actually think it's simply because "they don't like how we live".

Even you know (in your small, fearful heart of hearts) that they (your enemies) are very much like you and that you are both creating more of them & becoming more like them every day.

They don't care how you live. They just want you out of their lives. Their leaders tell them the same thing yours tell you: that the only way to get you out and live their lives without fearing you is to "shock & awe" and kill you. And they, too, twist religion to justify heinous acts.

[-V-]

ILB

"you call me a homophobe" - i asked if you were to understand if that was one of your motivations for supporting Bush. Then you do not oppose the Gay lifestyle?

"That is what liberals do, they pass judgement on others" - I assume you are here to judge our ideas. You came. You posted. Prepare to be judged!

"If people have views that differ from theirs, those people are human scum." it's not different views that make people scum. It's scummy views.

"This site is a bunch of liberals popping off about all the percieved problems in the world, without any solutions" - should i not talk about cancer or world hunger because i don't have a cure?

"You wanna know what makes me tick? My family and friends. My children most of all" - I assumed that much. If you had mentioned anything more inclusive, such as "children" without preceeding each with MY i would have been impressed.

"Money is not the center of my world. I work hard and I make good money." - it seemed unnecessary to mention you maked "good" money. I'm guessing money IS at the center of your world.

"Terror? I don't really know what you mean by that." - that makes two of us

"That is why I support the wiretaps. I have nothing to hide." - good for you, but what's your point? to excuse Bush for breaking the law?

"There are people in this world that want to kill us, for the simple reason that they don't like how we live" - they want to kill us for our hand in the way that they live. You know, like the way you feel about Big Government!

"if YOU were to be taken hostage by these people, your liberal views would not save you. They would kill you if given the chance. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT????" - indeed i do. And i sure hope they don't agree with you about torture!

"I would rather debate you than hug you. Not because it's "too gay". But, because I'd be afraid I'd end up with a knife in my back" - ummm, no i don't buy that. i still think you'd be afraid your peepee might move!

"I LOVED seeing Cindy Sheehan getting arrested. Your views?" - nope, don't like seeing Big Government suppression

I hope I've answered all of your questions. Unfortunately I still have no clue from anything you've written to shed light on the answer to my question which is why ULoveBush?

[-V-]

Pee

"I just love it when so-called progressives ... make strawman arguments" - you're confused, i'm -V-, not 1strawman

"How about for fun let's put the shoe on the other foot and rewrite this survey" - how bout for the sake of honesty you admit that you opted to, as usual, turn this this thread around out of insecurity.

"It's times like these when liberals have been out of power for the majority of the last 20 years and when our great nation is at war that their true colors come through" - do you think America is more appauled at the true colors they've seen from conservatives or liberals over these past 5 years?

"I hope you appreciate the condescencion and the pettiness returned to you in kind" - in the words of your hero, "bring it on!"

"What makes you tick? Self loathing" - no, i love me
"pessimism" - nope that's a drag
"victimhood" - iche, that's a big turnoff
"class warfare" - yes, like Jesus, i believe decadence is a sin against humanity
"The New York Times?" - just a paper, no biggie
"Fidel Castro?" huh?

in summation, the only one you got correct is "class warfare". You should have included, human rights, civil rights, racial equality, sexual freedom, animal rights, environmental preservation, justice, education, democracy, peace, love, etc..

"full of jealousy of others' successes" - i'm sure we both measure "success" very differently. my answer would be, no, i'm not jealous of how much a person gives love and receives it. the more succesful they are the better my world is.

"or just another liberal that refused to recognize evil when faced with it" - hey, we're not the ones under the illusion that Bush is a good man

"...that communism is really a great idea, but just wan't given a fair chance" - i confess that i don't really know enough about it, but i'm told that you are supposed to be the ones who do NOT believe that everyone with a different idea is "scum"

"does faith and/or religion scare you?" - YES, it is one of my greatest fears based on the historical record of wars, descriminitation, hatred, suppression, isolationism, eliteism, etc.. And based on what I'm seeing from the religious-right in the U.S. and Middle East I'm becoming more afraid every day...

"if we looked inside your body would a spine even be there or would a rolled up poster of Michael Moore in lieu of" - there is no one in America with more spine than Michael Moore. Thank you for including me in the same breath.

"personal responsibility?" - ask your boss, my employee, G.W. Bush about that

Would we see the notches on your head where other liberals beat you down for trying to succeed in life becasue you weren't 'keping it real'? - get you're act together man, I don't understand the logic or the english. Don't be going Barbara Streisand on me now, you know how "hypocritical" and "laughable" that can be!

Speaking of keping it real. Now that we've endured all of your indignations about this thread and I've answered all of your questions about liberals, how about getting back on topic.

What is it about YOU that makes you a Bushivic (bush supporter)
despite the lies and corruption?

[sweetpea]

"I just love it when so-called progressives ... make strawman arguments" - you're confused, i'm -V-, not 1strawman---You apparently don't know what a strwman argument is. Even though you use it to try and debate or bait.

"How about for fun let's put the shoe on the other foot and rewrite this survey" - how bout for the sake of honesty you admit that you opted to, as usual, turn this this thread around out of insecurity.
--How about for hte sake of honesty you admit that your post carried no value except to bait responses. Further it was full of stereotypes and all too predictable gross assumptions. It got turned around on you. More predictability. Can dish it out / but can't take it.

"It's times like these when liberals have been out of power for the majority of the last 20 years and when our great nation is at war that their true colors come through" - do you think America is more appauled at the true colors they've seen from conservatives or liberals over these past 5 years?
-Depends on the issue. But I would argue liberalism is more appalling (see, I can spell). Where should I start? I'll list just a some true colors from liberals.
--Partial Birth Abortion
--Partisan politics truming national security
--Hiding and removing classified documents (Sandy Berer in case you forgot)
--John Kerry (remmber him? he lost. that should answer a lot of your question)
--Dan Rather
--Yale University openly pursuing a member of the Taliban to be student while at the same time wanting to remove military recruiers from campus. This one is absurdly funny. The argument was that military recriers should be banned from campus becasue of free speech. i.e. let's protect speech by limiting speech. In case you missed it liberalism lost in the Supreme Court 8-0.
--Ted Kennedy preaching to Sam alito about ethics
--Al Gore getting paid to speak in Saudi Arabia while he bad mouths his own country.
---I couild go on. How much more you want?

"I hope you appreciate the condescencion and the pettiness returned to you in kind" - in the words of your hero, "bring it on!"
--I did. The next time you whine about pettiness or personal attacks try and remember who strated this thread.

"What makes you tick? Self loathing" - no
"pessimism" - nope that's a drag
"victimhood" iche
"class warfare" - yes, like Jesus, i believe decadence is a sin against humanity
"The New York Times?" - just a paper, no biggie
"Fidel Castro?" huh?

in summation, the only one you got correct is "class warfare". You should have included, human rights, civil rights, racial equality, sexual freedom, animal rights, environmental preservation, justice, education, democracy, peace, love, etc..
---You get the picture. It's not easy to get things right when you make gross assumptions about others. You should try to avoid it when debating with those that may not agree with you.
By the way I would love to debate with you animal rights (whatever that is) and education. Whenever you are ready. Bring it on.

"would it be full of jealousy of others' successes" - i'm sure we both measure "success" very differently. my answer would be, no, i'm not jealouse of how much a person gives love and receives it. the more succesful they are the better my world is.
--See what happens when you steroetype.

"or just another liberal that refused to recognize evil when faced with it" - hey, we're not the ones who believe Bush is a good man
--No. but you are the ones who want to understand the Taliban. Look to have Taliban members in student bodies. Would rather the UN spend a few more decades doing nothing about Iraq, Sudan, you name the country. Would rather go a few hundred miles from active fighting and for political purposes bad mouth your own country. Spend untold amounts of energy and political capital on Abu Ghirab adn completely ignore the fact that womer=n can now vote in Iraq. Treat Fidel Castro as some sort of hero. Same for that clown in Venezuela.

"...that communism is really a great idea, but just wan't given a fair chance" - i confess that i don't really know enough about it but aren't you supposed to be the ones who do NOT believe that everyone with a different idea is "scum"
--I honestly don't understand your point.
Take a look at the people in this country who latch onto Fidel castro and who latched onto Manuel Noreiga. They are and were liberals.

"does faith and/or religion scare you?" - YES, it is one of my greatest fears based on the historical record of wars, descriminitation, hatred, suppression, isolationism, eliteism, etc.. I'm becoming more afraid every day...
--That is truly ashame. There are hundreds of milions of religous and faithful people in this world and for whatever reason you focus on pre-conceived notions.
Let me ask you an honest question. Do you believe that this earth, its people and animals just happened to evolve or there was some gazillion to one chance where things aligned and life was formed? OR did soem higher power (GOD) make it happen?

"if we looked inside your body would a spine even be there or would a rolled up poster of Michael Moore in lieu of" - there is no one in America with more spine than Michael Moore. Thank you for including me in the same breath.
--Well well. I guess you lvoe hypocrites. That is fine. Since you acknowledge your lack of understanding about communism I'm sure Michael Moore can fill you in.

"personal responsibility?" - ask your boss, my employee, G.W. Bush about that
--cool. You work in the White House. How does that make you fell? with your hatred for him and all.

[sweetpea]

Quote:
Would we see the notches on your head where other liberals beat you down for trying to succeed in life becasue you weren't 'keping it real'?

- get you're act together man, I don't understand the logic or the english. Don't be going Barbara Streisand on me now, you know how "laughable" that can be!
Not that difficult. It was a response in kind to your question to bushluv.

Speaking of keping it real. Now that we've heard all of your indignations about this thread and I've answered all of your questions about liberals, how about getting back to the topic.

What is it about YOU that makes you a Bushivic (bush supporter) despite the lies and corruption.
That wasn't the question. But I'll answer anyway.
I don't support Bush in everything he does. What is it that makes you think I that because I disagree with liberalism that I automatically support Bush? remmebr that gross assumption thing? You should work on it. I think he should have vetoed a LOT of spending bills, for example. I think this port deal is a bad deal and was handled terribly. I don't believe creating another bungling bureacracy (Dep. Homeland security) is the answer to having homeland security.
I do agree that Iraq and the Taliban were a threat to this country. (By the way so did all of the Democrats that had the same intelligence he did) I do agree that the UN is proven to be useless and irrelevant. I do think a Presidnt's first and foremost responsibilty is national security. I do believe you and many on this board hate him so much that you forget he was elected and is only a temporary resident in the White House. Ya'll throw around these asinine facist references that do nothing but make yourselves look silly and void of ideas. And finally, I believe he should have pressed foward with SS reform. Even if all that comes of it is that we have the debate on a national level.
--See it isn't so hard to ask honest questions and get honest answers. you should try it more often.

[-V-]

you call your rehashing of a few specific policies an honest answer to,
"What is it about YOU that makes you a Bushivic (bush supporter) despite the lies and corruption?" which IS the question and theme of this thread.

I know you don't support EVERYTHING this president does from other threads. Your answer is as inept as me answering whether I supported Nixon after the Watergate scandel with "I agree with his diet" (if he were a vegetarian). We know you support general GOP policies that he shares.

What about this President? If you received the phone survey
DO YOU APPROVE OF THE PRESIDENT'S PERFORMANCE?
would you be with the 3? % that answer YES?

If no, I'm sorry that we've wasted each other's time. If YES, either tell me what is it about you that makes you willing to dismiss the lies and corruption or move on to another thread. It is not appropriate to debate liberalism or blow us away with the revelation that, like most Republicans, you also don't agree with the port deal?

[sweetpea]

you call your rehashing of a few specific policies an honest answer to,
"What is it about YOU that makes you a Bushivic (bush supporter) despite the lies and corruption?" which IS the question and theme of this thread.
Pay attention, 1 -V-. I stated I am not a Bush supporter for many of his policies and also stated some of ht epolicies that I do support. how many specifics you want? Keep in mind you gave none. Zero.

I know you don't support EVERYTHING this president does from other threads. Your answer is as inept as me answering whether I supported Nixon after the Watergate scandel with "I agree with his diet" (if he were a vegetarian). We know you support general GOP policies that he shares.
I gave specifics. It is a you problem that you don't like my answer. You asked a baited general question and I gave you honest specific answers. In return you give some ridiculous analogy. How about some specifics of your own? If you cannot tell the difference between Watergate ( a specific reference to a specific case) and "despite the lies and corruption" ( a general bs question with no specifics; just innuendo) then we may as well jsut give up. It is a you problem that you ask a general baited question and don't like my specific answers. You got specific questions, then bring them on. But, don't give me this whiny crap about me not answering presumptive questions appropriately.

What about this President? If you received the phone survey
DO YOU APPROVE OF THE PRESIDENT'S PERFORMANCE?
would you be with the 3? % that answer YES?
---3%? You making that up or you got a reference? I would answer yes, to that specific question? Ask me some more specific ones and I'll answer in kind. Get it, 1 -V-. Most reasonable people who are actually interested in debate or others' ideas understand the difference. Here's to hoping you grasp it.

If no, I'm sorry that we've wasted each other's time. If YES, either tell me what is it about you that makes you willing to dismiss the lies and corruption or move on to another thread. It is not appropriate to debate liberalism or blow us away with the revelation that, like most Republicans, you also don't agree with the port deal?
You start this thread with a complete persaonal attack on someone solely because of their political beliefs and then lecture me on how it is appropriate to debate. More predictable hypocrisy. Can dish it out / but can't take it.
By the way, the reason I would answer yes is becasue national security is the President's first and foremost job and i believe GWB has done a good job. Not stellar, but good. You got some examples of corruption and lies then we can talk.
However, I would expect just a smidgen of courtesy from you where you answer some of my questions. If you can't do it then you move on to another thread or maybe read the other points I made and other answers I gave.

[-V-]

Amidst all the huffing and puffing i believe there is the closest thing to an answer as we're going to get from you.

You would answer the survey YES to the Presidents approval rating, and the reason is because "national security is the President's first and foremost job and you believe GWB has done a good job"

I thought it would be redundant this late in the game to rehash the "lies and corruption" considering there are about 100 pages of specifics on that already on this site. Perhaps we should put together a concise list for future reference. Many of them, btw, are related to national security, which is the reason you say you support this president (despite you're opposing his port sellout).

For the purpose of this thread, it may suffice that, exhibit B, sweetpea, claims to have renewed his Bushivic membership because Georgey Jr. picked up a megaphone one day and promised he was going to protect him from the Boogeymen.

As to the profile of today's Bush supporter I'll just chalk up one to:

Motivated by Fear, Terror/Terrorism, Evil, Boogeymen
(though none of us can define those terms)

My prescription for you (the cure, if you will) is, next time, rather than vote for a pig like Bush, just sleep with your automatic weapon under your pillow and, though I'm sure they don't live in your neighborhood, just walk around Arabs, Gays, Blacks, the French, and Athiests if you should pass them in the street.

ILoveBush, you're up next. Let's see if I can help with your abusive addiction.

[JamesP]

Pea: You make some reasonable points in the debate...

but then you lose me (and most others that understand & value what is special about America) when you:

- speak repeatedly of it being wrong to "bad-mouth" America (as if, of all people, Americans must stay silent in the face of their government's misdeeds ... and as though you & yours stayed silent & respectful during the Clinton years)

- persist in the desperate, convenient and outrageous lie, in the face of all we now know, that "Iraq was a threat to this country".

In this latter case, you're simply playing word-games (like debating what the meaning of the word "is" is).

A weak case can be made that any nation is vaguely "a threat" and may harbor terrorists, but the
- unjustified mass murder of so many tens of thousands of virtually defenseless civilians
- wreckless incompetence in the handling of the war
- enormous waste in terms of American lives and treasure
whether based on erroneous info or lies is something no person of conscience can rationalize and should make every otherwise proud American shameful of their government and angry.

It is your "moral dodge" on this issue, your failure to hold the administration accountable and your comfort level with abusive power that casts a dark shadow on all of your other arguments.

An then..... one as well-read as you.... asks for examples of "corruption and lies" with respect to the current administration, thereby taking yourself completely and irretrievably out of the debate.

Still, I salute you for coming somewhere in the vicinity, Pea, of intellectual honesty and meaningful communication. Rare, thus far, for conservatives in this venue.

[-V-]

Your right, Jimmyp, there finally were some moments of honesty extracted from the pee, but he surrendered it kicking and screaming the whole way about my abrasive style (though I suspect that's the only way to get him to give up the goods).

As I warned you, pee, this thread is entitled "Internal Survey: The Profile of a Bushivic". This thread is not about -V- or liberals. I'll add that this thread is not about "Al Gore, Hillary, Madeline, John Kerry, Bill, Hans Blix, et." or about promoting the Free Republic. Trying to make it so is disruptive, Free Republic tactics, is called TROLLING in forum terms and is not permitted here.

You've been asked dozens of times by numerous posters to stop injecting Bill Clinton and other irrelevance into every conversation.

The right thing to do would have been for you to start your own thread entitled "Profile of a Liberal" so that you could take out his frustrations there.

Your last post has been moved. Unfortunately, some of the post WAS on topic but you can kiss my liberal ass if you think I'm going to work that hard to seperate out the irrelevant from the relevant from the simply irritating of each post.

Besides, you said the magic words "FREE REPUBLIC". It is not wise to out yourself as a FREEP here (though a few of us knew that already). Like good little Bush soldiers they make special efforts to thwarte and disrupt political free speech on sites that don't drink from the Bush coolade.

Regardless, our progressive doors are open to all Regressives, even Freeps who behave.

Sweetpea, I hope you continue posting, just try to make an extra effort to stay on topic. Sure, I know, everyone gets off topic. It's difficult. But you've earned yourself special status. From now on I'll be watching you like Robert Dinero watched Gaylord Focker in Meet The Parents. And I won't hesitate to bring your posts "Down to Chinatown".

Actually, I simply might move them if they're off topic. That is to say, if I have the time or inclination to read them.

[BenDover]

That is why I support the wiretaps. I have nothing to hide.

I get this argument a lot about this issue. You open the door for further suppression of your constitutional rights if you allow this to happen without warrants. "Not having anything to hide" has nothing to do with it. It's about legality. Where would you draw the line? Is it OK if government agents pop by your house every once in a while to look through your closets? How about if they pull your car over without probable cause and search the glovebox whenever the mood strikes them? Suppose they stop you on the street without provocation and ask you to empty your pockets? If you have nothing to hide, it's OK???

Think about this issue carefully....even if you are a die-hard Bush supporter. Bush won't be president forever and, even if you trust him, can you say you will trust every administration yet to come (you never know....it might even be a democrat).

[Mr. Magoo]

"I assume you are here to judge our ideas. You came. You posted. Prepare to be judged!"

You make judgements based on assumptions. You ask questions and make statements in a condesending manner. Bring some facts to the table,instead of the same liberal spewing. I'll answer any question you might have. But, you might want to try to ask them without all the hatred and anger that always comes through.

" it's not different views that make people scum. It's scummy views."

What a chidish and petty statement. So, your saying MY views are "scummy" because they differ from yours.

"This site is a bunch of liberals popping off about all the percieved problems in the world, without any solutions" - should i not talk about cancer or world hunger because i don't have a cure?"

I'm not talking about a "cure". But, how about some rational discussion, with some IDEAS for change. Instead, liberals just spew the same old Bush hating bullsh*t. And I'm talking about the liberal politicians also. They don't have any ideas either, they just bash the Bush administration.


"If you had mentioned anything more inclusive, such as "children" without preceeding each with MY i would have been impressed."

I'm not here to impress you. I wouldn't waste my time.


"it seemed unnecessary to mention you maked "good" money. I'm guessing money IS at the center of your world."

Did I hit a nerve? Are you one of the able bodied people on welfare?

"There are people in this world that want to kill us, for the simple reason that they don't like how we live" - they want to kill us for our hand in the way that they live. You know, like the way you feel about Big Government"

So your saying WE caused 9/11/01???

"if YOU were to be taken hostage by these people, your liberal views would not save you. They would kill you if given the chance. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT????" - indeed i do. And i sure hope they don't agree with you about torture!"

Don't worry, they don't. They BEHEAD people !!!!!

"I would rather debate you than hug you. Not because it's "too gay". But, because I'd be afraid I'd end up with a knife in my back" - ummm, no i don't buy that. i still think you'd be afraid your peepee might move!"

What an ego !!!!!

"I LOVED seeing Cindy Sheehan getting arrested. Your views?" - nope, don't like seeing Big Government suppression"

She wasn't being suppressed. She was invited to attend that meeting. She chose instead to lay down in front of a doorway. Is she allowed to break the law because she shares your views??

"I hope I've answered all of your questions. Unfortunately I still have no clue from anything you've written to shed light on the answer to my question which is why ULoveBush?"

You haven't answered my question from the other thread. You called Bush a murderer. The U.S. soldiers are carrying out HIS orders. Are you calling the soldiers murderers? Liberals support the troops but not the war, correct? So you support murderers. You also support two other murderers. Ted kennedy and John Kerry. Kerry was a soldier in a time of war. Didn't you vote for him?

[Jane of Arc]

Welcome aboard ILoveBush!

I keep trying to greet you in various threads, but I don't think you saw them. So again ... greetings! It's good to have the conservative voice represented here and I hope we can have some productive discussions.

I believe we have some serious issues facing America and we need to come together as We The People and try very hard to listen and understand each other. I think for a while, we have to turn off the radio stations that stay in business pitting the left vs. the right, and instead talk to each other. Because this country is getting torn apart. And if it gets pushed much further America WILL have some sort of civil outbreak or social collision or revolt.

There is real hatred out there. Conservatives truly HATE Liberals. Liberals truly HATE Conservatives. And while Americans are busy hating and blaming the other side ... the Democrats and Republicans in government are doing a rotten job of representing We The People.

Sorry for going off topic ... but maybe I didn't ... maybe I have to talk "truth to power." You see, -V- is the "Boss" here and I am a mere "Moderator". So I guess I have to pick a fight with my boss!!! :eek:

-V- says:
If we examined your heart after you pass on for your alleged "reward in heaven" would we find a stamp on it saying "Reserved for everything that was mine"? Or would we just find a rotted out chamber with traces of human excrement due to a crosswiring between your bowel system and blood system?

Might we find an implant in your brain being broadcast from the same Carl Rove control panel that was connected to Bush's back or do you communicate telepathically with Jerry Fallwell.

Would we find traces of flesh under your fingernails of the people you clawed your way to climb over in life or, sadly, would we find the bruises from the abuse you suffered at the hands of other Regressives who have forever tainted your vision of the world.

-V- ~ if you really want to find out what makes the hardcore Bush lovers tick ... this isn't the way to do it! It creates more anger ... more liberal haters. There is common ground between every American. We all want good jobs ... not jobs leaving the country. We all want our kids to have good education. We all want our country protected ... not open borders and ports. We all want to make a good living if we work hard. We all want production and manufacturing to return to America. We all want peace, no sane person wants perpetual war. We all want true democracy ...

am I wrong?

[scoff0165]

There is common ground between every American. We all want good jobs ... not jobs leaving the country. We all want our kids to have good education. We all want our country protected ... not open borders and ports. We all want to make a good living if we work hard. We all want production and manufacturing to return to America. We all want peace, no sane person wants perpetual war. We all want true democracy ...

am I wrong?

While this is true of most Americans, it is, unfortunately, not true of all Americans. A small but powerful segment of the country does not want good jobs here because then people make good wages, something that powerful minority is trying to avoid at any cost. That same group would prefer an ignorant and uninformed populace which is easier to manipulate and control. They want open borders that allow immigrants to come illegally into the country thereby allowing them to pay less than decent wages, no benefits, etc., because those cut into profits. They wage perpetual war because there's big money in hi-tech weaponry that has to be constantly upgraded (thereby reaping more profits) for their companies.

These people are called neocons. They have no concern for the country as a whole but care only for their profits and those who can garner more profits for them. They don't care who they hurt, who they sell out, or who they destroy as long as the profits keep rolling in. Most of all they have absolutely no sense of the community of citizens this country is supposed to represent. For them there is no US in U.S., only ME, ME, ME.

They have taken control of our government and usurped the power of We the People. It's up to us to take our government back from these scoundrels who preach morals but have none, preach responsibility but show none. In short, they are a scourge and a plague on the body politic of America, and we have suffered them far too long. They need to be relegated to the dustbin of history before they do irreparable harm to our nation.

[JamesP]

Scoffo: a 5 star post - eloquently said and precisely on target!

[Mr. Magoo]

I have to disagree Scoffo.

To listen to liberals, the world was like Disney world up until Bush was elected. If I recall, the U.S. has had the SAME issues it does now, during Clinton years. With ONE BIG difference. WE got attacked 4 months into Bush's term. Now if your naive enough to think that Bin Laden thought up, planned, and carried out this attack in 4 months, then you are ignorant. Bin Laden could have been in U.S. custody back in 1995. Sudan had him and offered him to the U.S. Hillbilly Clinton passed. So because of this, he was able to carry out the attack. If Bush hadn't been so busy having to protect our great country, some of these other issues may have been a higher priority. To listen to you, we went to war to manufacture weapons. That is ridiculous. Do you have ANY facts to back that up? The border was JUST as big a problem during Clintons terms as it is now. Or do you think these 12 MILLION illegals came over in the past 6 years? You don't like Bush, we get it. Stop trying to pin everything on him though. We had attacks during Clinton years. He just didn't have the balls to do anything about it. Republicans do. Why do you think Bush got RE-ELECTED???? If he was SO horrible Kerry should have crushed him. The American people do not see things like you liberals. They have a REALISTIC view of the world. I just wish we could have Bush for another 4 years !!!!!!!

[JamesP]

I have to disagree Scoffo.

The American people do not see things like you liberals. They have a REALISTIC view of the world. I just wish we could have Bush for another 4 years !!!!!!!

Tsk, tsk, "I Love Bush" .... not a very accurate statement .....

Are you just wrong or are you lying? Either way, you could grow up to be a Republican President.

"Realistic" doesn't translate into "cruel, corrupt & violent" for most Americans - just you and an ever-shrinking minority.


Poll Numbers on Bush Hit New Low
Nearly 70 Percent Say Country Headed in Wrong Direction
By RON FOURNIER, AP

WASHINGTON (March 10) - More and more Americans, particularly Republicans, disapprove of President George W. Bush's performance, question his character and no longer consider him a strong leader against terrorism, according to an AP-Ipsos poll documenting one of the bleakest points of his presidency.

[Mr. Magoo]

"Poll Numbers on Bush Hit New Low
Nearly 70 Percent Say Country Headed in Wrong Direction
By RON FOURNIER, AP"

Wow what a shocker !!!! A liberal run poll finds Bush's popularity is at an all time low.

"Tsk, tsk, "I Love Bush" .... not a very accurate statement ....."

What's not accurate? Didn't Bush DEFEAT Kerry to be RE-ELECTED? I would say that means MOST Americans have a REALISTIC view !!!!

"Realistic" doesn't translate into "cruel, corrupt & violent" for most Americans - just you and an ever-shrinking minority."

Sorry, but it does. Because I would say that the RADICAL MUSLIMS that are trying to kill us are "cruel,corrupt& violent". And they do exist in the real world !!!!!

"WASHINGTON (March 10) - More and more Americans, particularly Republicans, disapprove of President George W. Bush's performance, question his character and no longer consider him a strong leader against terrorism, according to an AP-Ipsos poll documenting one of the bleakest points of his presidency."

Washington what? The Washington post? That liberal biased paper? Where did this quote originate from? And I wonder how balanced these polls are. Do they ask an EQUAL number of liberals & Republicans? Do they ask ANY Repeblicans?

[BenDover]

"Poll Numbers on Bush Hit New Low
Nearly 70 Percent Say Country Headed in Wrong Direction
By RON FOURNIER, AP"

Wow what a shocker !!!! A liberal run poll finds Bush's popularity is at an all time low.

Is this source conservative enough for you?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1592827/posts

The evidence presented in the article about the poll would seem to be in concert with the input Congress is receiving from their constituents. This break with Mr. Bush is significant and a key indicator that many republican congressmen up for reelection don't want to be saddled with the label of being lockstep Bush followers.

[Mr. Magoo]

"Is this source conservative enough for you?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1592827/posts"


Ok. That was about the ports deal. Did I miss something in there about the "70% of the country thinks we're headed in the wrong direction"? I'm not being sarcastic. That link didn't prove anything as far as I can see. I know some Republicans didn't want the port deal. I did not see anything about the poll. I'll read it again.

[BenDover]

ILB...

I didn't say it mentioned the poll....just corroborative evidence that Mr. Bush's support, even amongst his own party brethren, is eroding. More than reflecting "exact" numbers, I believe the poll is indicative of this erosion. We'll see how events play out as the election draws nearer.

For a broader look at how the various polls are leaning, check out this website. Even Fox's poll shows Mr. Bush with an approval rating of only 39%.

http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

[JamesP]

"I love Bush" is now becoming tiresome, regurgitiating tripe about "liberal bias" when he doesn't like the news.

Maybe it's time for him to return to the "radical right" forums where his fantasies are shared with a dwindling number of others.

Need we point out again: We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts.

We can debate why virtually all of the polls reflect a widening dissatisfaction with the Bush administration and what can be done about it, but don't waste our time with "liberal bias" in the current media.

Dialogue at the current level of "I love Bush" is senseless.

Pick it up, ILB, or return to a place where your name is not an embarrasment.

(note: "I Love Clinton" would be equally childish - try "I Love Snoopy" at the kiddie sites - please not here)

[-V-]

ILB if you are going to continue arguing mere percentage points while ignoring the strong overall message ALL the polls are sending then you are on your way to being labeled a TROLL.

At a minimum, I should change your username to "the pinball wizard" because you are acting like a "deaf, dumb, blind boy" who is surely playing "mean game of pinball" with the truth.

[Mr. Magoo]

Gee What a surprise, I'm being attacked by a bunch of hypocritical liberals.

"I love Bush" is now becoming tiresome, regurgitiating tripe about "liberal bias" when he doesn't like the news.

Well of course the "news" on this site is liberal biased. You guys just don't like having a dissenting voice among you.

Need we point out again: We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts.

That opinion part goes for Republicans too right? And I haven't seen any facts from you guys yet.

We can debate why virtually all of the polls reflect a widening dissatisfaction with the Bush administration and what can be done about it, but don't waste our time with "liberal bias" in the current media.


You have got to be kidding. You believe the media is fair and balanced? You really are delusional.

Dialogue at the current level of "I love Bush" is senseless.

What's senseless is trying to have an intelligent conversation with a bunch of hypocritical, crybabies. You have absolutely NO facts to back up all the bullsh*t you spew.

Pick it up, ILB, or return to a place where your name is not an embarrasment.


What do you mean by pick it up? Don't ask for facts to back up your bullsh*t? Be like everyone else on here and just let all these comments slide by without question?

(note: "I Love Clinton" would be equally childish - try "I Love Snoopy" at the kiddie sites - please not here)

I didn't know I needed your permission on choosing a name. I should have been more original and used my first name combined with the first letter of my last name.

[BenDover]

You have got to be kidding. You believe the media is fair and balanced? You really are delusional.

You're right. Faux News is certainly not fair and balanced....it's slanted heavily toward the right and even they are saying Bush's approval ratings are abyssmal. Here's some unsolicited and perhaps unwanted advice for you....I'd heed the warnings you've been given and pick a battle that has more going for you than this one does, PW. You've lost credibility here indeed if you refuse to acknowledge documented facts.

[Jane of Arc]

"I love Bush" is now becoming tiresome, regurgitiating tripe about "liberal bias" when he doesn't like the news.

Maybe it's time for him to return to the "radical right" forums where his fantasies are shared with a dwindling number of others.

Need we point out again: We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts.

We can debate why virtually all of the polls reflect a widening dissatisfaction with the Bush administration and what can be done about it, but don't waste our time with "liberal bias" in the current media.

Dialogue at the current level of "I love Bush" is senseless.

Pick it up, ILB, or return to a place where your name is not an embarrasment.

(note: "I Love Clinton" would be equally childish - try "I Love Snoopy" at the kiddie sites - please not here)Give PW a chance, guys. He has to go through this phase. It's going to take him months to see us as Americans like himself. But, I believe his anger and hate will soften and he'll be able to see us a bit clearer soon. So, stop putting him down ... let him air his feelings freely ... and let's talk to him, not insult him.

Peace out. :sunny:

PS- And JamesP ... you're the most 'Chist-like' member here. You must be having a bad hair day.

[JamesP]

Give PW a chance, guys. He has to go through this phase. It's going to take him months to see us as Americans like himself. But, I believe his anger and hate will soften and he'll be able to see us a bit clearer soon. So, stop putting him down ... let him air his feelings freely ... and let's talk to him, not insult him.

Peace out. :sunny:

PS- And JamesP ... you're the most 'Chist-like' member here. You must be having a bad hair day.

Jane, I appreciate your view and, generally, agree.
Dissenting voices are valued.
Without some standards for quality, however, we all are diminished. Also, some aim simply at disruption.
It's a quandry. I leave it to-V-to decide, but I vote for some quality control on our right wing "guests".

[Jane of Arc]

Jane, I appreciate your view and, generally, agree.
Dissenting voices are valued.
Without some standards for quality, however, we all are diminished. Also, some aim simply at disruption.
It's a quandry. I leave it to-V-to decide, but I vote for some quality control on our right wing "guests".I respect both of you vastly. All decisions, of course, are up to -V-. The opposing voice, no matter how harsh, doesn't bother me. I perceive it as an opportunity. I don't feel it can diminish and I am not bothered by disruption. But that's just me.

Peace, always peace :sunny:

[Mr. Magoo]

Without some standards for quality, however, we all are diminished. Also, some aim simply at disruption.

Define "quality". Is quality any "facts" and views that come from the left? How am I being "disruptive"? I am just putting forth MY views. Do you consider them "disruptive", Because they do not match yours?

You guys should welcome an opposing voice. I personally am fascinated by the liberal point of view. It differs so greatly from my own. If I come across as "angry" and "hate filled", it could be because I am being attacked. Remember, we are looking at this situation through totally different eyes. Maybe you don't realize, that I find YOUR posts "angry", and "hate filled". I'm a big boy, I can take it. But, at the same time, I will give it back.

If -V- chooses to ban me from the site, so be it. I have no control over that. I would hope though, that you guys practice what you preach. Freedom of speech applies to the "right" also !!!!

[MAGI]

Define "quality". Is quality any "facts" and views that come from the left? How am I being "disruptive"? I am just putting forth MY views. Do you consider them "disruptive", Because they do not match yours?

You guys should welcome an opposing voice. I personally am fascinated by the liberal point of view. It differs so greatly from my own. If I come across as "angry" and "hate filled", it could be because I am being attacked. Remember, we are looking at this situation through totally different eyes. Maybe you don't realize, that I find YOUR posts "angry", and "hate filled". I'm a big boy, I can take it. But, at the same time, I will give it back.

Perhaps it would be helpfull if you see the definition of LIBERAL as most of us on this forum do?

Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal

"Liberalism is an ideology, broad political tradition, and current of political thought, which holds liberty as the primary political value.[1] Broadly speaking, liberalism seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on the power of government and religion (and sometimes corporations), the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy that supports private enterprise, and a system of government that is transparent. This form of government favors liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law, and an equal opportunity to succeed. Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions which dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, and established religion. Fundamental human rights that all liberals support include the right to life, liberty, and property. In many countries, modern liberalism differs from classical liberalism by asserting that government provision of some minimal level of material well-being takes priority over freedom from taxation. Liberalism has it roots in the Western Enlightenment, but the term now encompasses a diversity of political thought, with adherents spanning a large part of the political spectrum, from left to right. In academia, in the context of economics, the term "liberalism" refers to economic liberalism."

Also, those of us on the ladder reach out to our fellowman and help them up the ladder; as opposed to kicking them off into the quicksand below.... and.......

can't feel comfortable with "The Face in the Glass" with the growing inequality we see!

http://www.cybernation.com/victory/youcandoit/face.php

The Face In The Glass:

When you get what you want in your struggle for self
And the world makes you king for a day,
Just go to a mirror and look at yourself
And see what THAT face has to say.


For it isn't your father or mother or spouse
Whose judgment upon you must pass;
The person whose verdict counts most in your life
Is the one staring back from the glass.


Some people might think you are a straight-shootin' chum
And call you a wonderful guy or gal,
But the face in the glass says you're only a bum
If you can't look it straight in the eye.
That's the one you must please, never mind all the rest,
For that's the one with you clear up to the end.
And you know you have passed your most dangerous test
If the face in the glass is your friend.
You may fool the whole world down the pathway of life
And get pats on your back as you pass,
But your final reward will be heartache and tears
If you've cheated the face in the glass.

~ Dale Wimbrow ~

[Mr. Magoo]

Thank you Magi, for yet another condescending response. Let me ask you, have you ever posted that poem for any LIBERALS on here? Why do you feel I needed to see it? Are you suggesting that the way I live my life is so horrible That you find it hard to know how I can live with myself?

Again, you are just another self righteous liberal hate monger. I'm not liberal, so I need help, is that it? See, this is the problem with liberals. They believe that THEY are always right. They are the "good" people. The people on the right are "evil" and need to be "enlightened and "saved". Give me a break. Stop preaching, stop assuming, and most of all stop the hypocracy !!!!!

Now watch as I get replies to this, that I'm ranting and causing trouble. That I'm deaf, dumb and blind.

Then step back and YOU take a look into that mirror !!!!!

[-V-]

in case you missed it in the other thread, Pinball, I got your mirror right here:

=================================
My favorite part was hearing about all the bruises she recieved for being an anti- American, treasonous pig. Pinball, your remark is an example of hate speech, endorsing violence against a peaceful protestor who happens to define patriotism different than you do. That shit doesn't fly here. Read this forum's posting rules/policies.

Jane, bless her soul, keeps giving you the benefit of the doubt. But you extracting pleasure out of someone roughing up a greiving mother trying to prevent other parents from attending their children's funeral, is a clear indication to me of what is and isn't in your heart.
===================================

Today you made some open-minded comments, as follows:
Do you consider them "disruptive", Because they do not match yours? You guys should welcome an opposing voice... Remember, we are looking at this situation through totally different eyes... I would hope though, that you guys practice what you preach. Freedom of speech applies to the "right" also !!!! Cindy, is looking through the eyes of a mother who lost her son based on a lie. Odd how your guidelines do not apply to Cindy Sheehan (or Jane in her divorce thread):

If liberals "practiced what you preach" you'd have more bruises than Cindy to show for it. And should any civil human being take pleasure in that!

Not in this forum, not on my watch.

[wimzkl]

I am greatly troubled by the acrimony this thread has generated. Mostly I have heard name calling and that is not only childish, it is stupid. There is really only one meaningful difference between liberals and conservatives and that has to do with fiscal policy. We need to focus on our common ground before we can focus on the real problems facing this nation.

Do you believe in Liberty?
Do you believe in democratic “Separation of Powers?
Do you believe in capitalism?

We all agree because these systems have proved the most workable in history. We disagree on issues of less consequence. The conservative sees too much government and taxation. The liberal sees inequities and too much control of government by the rich and powerful.

All this stuff about what Bush has done or what Clinton did means little except hows it bears on where we are right now. The insults using past facts are pointless.

We will all agree that our situation in Iraq is problematic as is our situation in Afghanistan. We will all agree that our taxes are too high. We will all agree that our representatives may not be what we expect them to be. So, lets start where we all agree and try to find some solid ground that can solve our many problems.

I must say that I think too many look to recent history as a foundation to their political position. I think it is important to look back to the roots of liberty, democracy, the Separation of Powers and capitalism. When you do that, you get a completely different perspective on many of these issues.

For instance, the argument over the President's use of wiretaps and the like to monitor suspected terrorists. The conservative sees it as "necessary" to protect our way of life. The liberal sees it as curtailing our Constitutional rights. In this case, history says that the liberals are right. It was just this kind of terrorists threat that ended many democracies in the past. All truly interested in preserving personal liberty should be mindful that “necessity” is the powerful’s plea for increased control over common men. William Pitt, a British statesman, in 1783 warned: “It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves.” We must remember all those who fought and died to obtain those liberties. How can we give up liberties in order to defend liberties?

Lord Acton: "Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Liberty is the only object which benefits all alike, and provokes no sincere opposition.

Most of the great thinkers in history from Aristotle to Locke to Montesquieu to Adam Smith to Thomas Paine to Thomas Jefferson to James Madison to Abraham Lincoln have placed liberty at the peak of man's natural rights. There is no condition perilous enough to justify sacrificing the liberty of my grandchildren or their grandchildren. Do any of us really think it is worthwhile to risk our great-great-greats having to fight a war of revolution again?

Patric Henry did not say "give me some liberties or give me death." Benjamin Franklin did say "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

I am a fiscal and political conservative. I favor the democratic party because I fell they are less influenced by corporate America and the lobbyists system then the Republicans. You can see that in the additions to the national debt by the two parties. I am very much anti-Bush because he seems to personify the very elitism that has jeopardized many democracies in history.

The battle between elitism and populism took place 215 years ago and the populists won with the adoption of our Bill of Rights. I believe we all accept them as essential to our Separation of Powers. We must make sure they do not come into jeopardy.

One of the biggest barriers between our two political camps (not parties) lies in the lack of a well defined goal. What are we, as a nation, trying to accomplish. I have a terrible feeling that most conservatives do not have a national goal. There is no question in my mind that the only realistic goal is the public good.

First, if you believe in capitalism, you must accept the public good as the highest goal because the philosophic basis of capitalism (Adam Smith) is the "unseen hand" that promotes the greatest public good through individual selfish enterprise. Second, what other goal is there, when you recognize that the goal is for the benefit of your great-great-great grandchildren? Hugh fortunes come and go, but the public good goes on forever.

On the other hand, as a conservative, I recognize that fiscal responsibility is necessary. You can't solve a problem just with money. The welfare system is a dismal failure. The solution to poverty is education and opportunity not a free lunch.

I have posted to other threads in the last few day and most of them have a bearing on these controversies. Please stop the bickering and try to find common ground and solutions. We need ideas because our great nation has some major problems.

[Jane of Arc]

I've defended you Pinball Wizard, but I have to admit it made me sick the first time I read, " My favorite part was hearing about all the bruises she recieved for being an anti- American, treasonous pig." I let it slide in the hopes of reaching a common humanity I believe you have. But after reading -V-'s post ... I feel sick all over again.-V-is right. And any man that calls a woman a "pig" ... well ...

I have been here on POL for many months now and I haven't seen a single Progressive, Green, Libertarian or Democrat speak so misogynistically.

Can you cop to this?

[sweetpea]

Your right, Jimmyp, there finally were some moments of honesty extracted from the pee, but he surrendered it kicking and screaming the whole way about my abrasive style (though I suspect that's the only way to get him to give up the goods).

As I warned you, pee, this thread is entitled "Internal Survey: The Profile of a Bushivic". This thread is not about -V- or liberals.
This thread was based upon strawman, uninformed prejudices that you have. I returned them in kind. Put the shoe on the other foot, if you will. Suck it up. If you can dish out strawman, presumptuous and prejudicial posts then you better be able to take them. As to the warning; consider this one. I can return those types of arguments in kind.


I'll add that this thread is not about "Al Gore, Hillary, Madeline, John Kerry, Bill, Hans Blix, et." or about promoting the Free Republic. Trying to make it so is disruptive, Free Republic tactics, is called TROLLING in forum terms and is not permitted here.
This thread is about what I just posted above. Your prejudices. You present posts with gross assumptions and I reply in kind. You present posts with honest qestions and I reply in kind. I'm sorry you don't like being treated in the manner you treat others, but maybe you will learn a lesson from it. If this forum is for like minded "progressives" to sit around and tell themselves how smart they are and how much tey hate GWB then fine. But I understood the purpose of this site is to further progressivism (looking for ways to improve things) If so, you cannot do that by only considering one political persuasion. Wouldn't you agree? If so, ad hominem strawman posts do nothing but make the forum disruptive.

You've been asked dozens of times by numerous posters to stop injecting Bill Clinton and other irrelevance into every conversation.
--Please show me where I injected Bill Clinton into this thread. I'll be waiting and waiting and waiting. My reply post was in the same nature and used the same terminology as your original post except it had another viewpoint.

The right thing to do would have been for you to start your own thread entitled "Profile of a Liberal" so that you could take out his frustrations there.
--No. the right thing to do would be to reply to your thread jsut as I did. Additionally, the right thing to do woud be to answer your questions which I did. I'll be waiting on you to show me where I injected Bill Clinton or any otther irrelevant topic. My posts were replies to questions and/or rebuttals to arguments given. All in context. The right thing for you to do would be to debate my points.

Your last post has been moved. Unfortunately, some of the post WAS on topic but you can kiss my liberal ass if you think I'm going to work that hard to seperate out the irrelevant from the relevant from the simply irritating of each post.
--Let's hear it for open honest debates from progressives. Let's hear it for seeing a shining example of liberalism losing in the arena of ideas and resorting to ad hominem strawmwan attacks. And to show the true colors of liberalism let's hear it for moving replies because the forum founder doesn't want to debate, but would rather bait. Hey, you are the founder. But, you should take a long hard look in the mirror and ask yourself if you think you are representing progressivism by posting threads in the manner you started this one and then complaining about someone replying in the exact same manner.

Besides, you said the magic words "FREE REPUBLIC". It is not wise to out yourself as a FREEP here (though a few of us knew that already). Like good little Bush soldiers they make special efforts to thwarte and disrupt political free speech on sites that don't drink from the Bush coolade.
I used that as a response to another poster who asked why I was hear. To you not understand context? Now, concerning Free Republic, when was the last time you have been to the site. They are pretty rough on Bush. And fo rthe last time....just becasue I disagree with you doe not mean I some some sort of Bush flackie. Why, oh why is that so hard for you to understand? You should try to understand other points of view yourself. There is something to be said fo rdiversity of ideas. But, if you want to keep your mind closed and your scope of thought confined to only what you are comfortable hearing then keep making your strawman arguments.

Regardless, our progressive doors are open to all Regressives, even Freeps who behave.
--Thanks. No sweetpea on Free Repblic. Just reading. Maybe you should try TownHall or Citizens' Agaisnt Government Waste (we would probably actually agree on many of those issues) or NAtional Review.

Sweetpea, I hope you continue posting, just try to make an extra effort to stay on topic.
---Show me where I went of topic in this thread.

Sure, I know, everyone gets off topic. It's difficult. But you've earned yourself special status. From now on I'll be watching you like Robert Dinero watched Gaylord Focker in Meet The Parents. And I won't hesitate to bring your posts "Down to Chinatown".
--Waiting on you to show me.

Actually, I simply might move them if they're off topic. That is to say, if I have the time or inclination to read them.
You're the founder. It's your pony show. Do what your conscience allows. I would still like to know where I went off topic on this thread and/or injected Bill Clinton.

[-V-]

pea, as I said, you went into "Al Gore, Hillary, Madeline, John Kerry, Bill, Hans Blix, et." in this thread as well as the whole "liberal" thing in general. Also, as I said several people in OTHER threads have reiterated that the topic was not about Clinton, Ted Kennedy, whoever...

wimzki, you are correct sir. This thread got out of hand and became far too petty. I should have known better. MY BAD. It was meant to have a wimsicle, sarcastic side to it. Even bleeding heart liberals and progressives need to let out a little insensitive steam now and then.

But inviting Bush supporters to this particular party, considering the contents of the invitation, was a recipe for disaster.

[BenDover]

I am greatly troubled by the acrimony this thread has generated. Mostly I have heard name calling and that is not only childish, it is stupid. There is really only one meaningful difference between liberals and conservatives and that has to do with fiscal policy. We need to focus on our common ground before we can focus on the real problems facing this nation.



Wow, wimkzl!!! What a fantastic post. My sentiments exactly! I especially deplore the mudslinging and namecalling that goes on here on both sides. It is such a waste of time. This, and all such forums, whether conservative or liberal, should exist in an effort to bridge the gap and to help us to understand each other rather than simply as a means to rail against those who might dare to diagree with us. I try to make an effort to submit posts that are respectful even when I disagree vehemently with the opposing viewpoint. I wish I saw more of that here.

As you so capably stated, we have a lot more in common than we have that separates us. While we may disagree about what we should do and how we should do it, liberals and conservatives alike love this great nation, have hopes and dreams for our children, want to live in peace and prosperity, etc. I could probably think of a dozen more basic beliefs and values we share if I took the time.

I agree that there is no well-defined goal....by either side. In our short-term thinking we are forgetting where the long road would and will lead us depending upon what we decide to do with the choices we have. The lives of all of us depend on these choices, so dissenting views are a GOOD thing....not bad. Too many times, however, in our dedication to philosophies, we hesitate, and even sometimes refuse, to consider that, after all, we might just be wrong.

When I was a kid my mother taught me that there are two types of people in the world....those who really listen and those who simply wait to talk. I think there are a lot of us here who simply wait to talk rather than really considering, in an unprejudiced and honest way, what the other side has to say.

I am a libertarian liberal but I realize that it is possible that I might be wrong about something. Stranger things have happened. A reasonable and mutually-respectful dialogue would go a long way toward helping me to realize the error of my ways if I truly am misguided. On the other hand, insults, put-downs and self-righteous tirades that seem to go out of there way to sound condescending are more likely to provoke a defensive response from me rather than a sincere "Gee....you're right. I never thought about it that way".

I think we'd all agree that this nation faces incredible obstacles as I write this. I believe that a unified America is virtually invincible. On the other hand, a divided America, at least to the degree of polarization that we see today, faces a future that is in very much in jeopardy. The choice is ours. We can either continue to contribute to those things that divide us or we can attempt to find the common ground. I think this effort has to come from the people. Our so-called leaders certainly show no inclination toward bridging this gap.

Thanks for bringing this up, wimkzl.

:thumbup:

[BenDover]

PISS ON LIBERALS !!!!



This guy could have saved us all a lot of time and grief if he had simply made one post with this statement. A perfect example of what wimkzl mentioned in his excellent post.

[kyudowind]

Thanks wimzkl, BenDover,

We are wasting precious time and energy throwing tomatoes at the conservatives when we should be policy-building and securing the voting system.

Best Regards

[tcnj_libertarian]

First, if you believe in capitalism, you must accept the public good as the highest goal because the philosophic basis of capitalism (Adam Smith) is the "unseen hand" that promotes the greatest public good through individual selfish enterprise.

Please defend this statement. You recognize that Adam Smith's philosophy is based upon individual enterprise. Individual enterprise need not be aimed towards the public good -- it may be pursued "selfishly", that is, with only ones self in mind. Adam Smith argues, however, that despite that individual's goal, the public will indeed be benefitted. Smith argues that the public benefits naturally from free enterprise, but not that the public good should be the ultimate goal of such enterprise. You can't get an "ought" from an "is".

[sweetpea]

pea, as I said, you went into "Al Gore, Hillary, Madeline, John Kerry, Bill, Hans Blix, et." in this thread as well as the whole "liberal" thing in general. Also, as I said several people in OTHER threads have reiterated that the topic was not about Clinton, Ted Kennedy, whoever...
-V-, as I said before I answered questions and/or replied to posts well within context. You brought up the standard GWB lied in this thread adn I reminded you that those folks said the same things, but for whatever reason you insist on giving them a free pass. The topic of this thread is the whole "Bulshivic" thing based upon your prejudices. I replied in kind to the whole liberal thing and it seems to have bothered you. Good. Maybe you will refrain from starting baited, prejudicesd, presumptuous posts with nothing but strawman arguments.

wimzki, you are correct sir. This thread got out of hand and became far too petty. I should have known better. MY BAD. It was meant to have a wimsicle, sarcastic side to it. Even bleeding heart liberals and progressives need to let out a little insensitive steam now and then.
---Additionally, even liberals and progressives shouldn't whine when others do the same within context in the same thread.

But inviting Bush supporters to this particular party, considering the contents of the invitation, was a recipe for disaster.
--Why? Because you may hear a differing opinion? Does that scare you? ARe you surprised that people don't irrationally hate a temporary office holder?

[Jane of Arc]

BULLSHIT, SHE IS A TREASONOUS PIG !!!!!

They are spineless,gutless weasels !!!!

This site sucks.

I'm going back to the "dark" side.

You all can now continue your CIRCLE JERK !!!!!

THANK GOD REPUBLICANS ARE IN THE WHITEHOUSE !!!!

ILOVEBUSH !!!

PISS ON LIBERALS !!!!When-V-started this controversial, 'tongue in cheek' thread the basic question was ... who are these remaining people in America still applauding this dismal presidency?

Well, the red type above I think makes up most of them. I've known quite a few people like Pinball Wizard and I still believe he's not a bad guy at all. He's just a very angry guy. And he's part of one-third of the country left that blames liberals rather than the worst leadership this nation has ever seen.

I pray that the other 2/3 of Americans ... and growing ... can clean up elections and stand up tall against these horrific Regressives and their liberal lapdogs in Congress now. There is so much clean-up to be done after Hurricane George! Damn.

[-V-]

thank you for bringing this thread back on point, Jane.
I'll leave it there.

[wimzkl]

Quote:
Originally Posted by wimzkl
First, if you believe in capitalism, you must accept the public good as the highest goal because the philosophic basis of capitalism (Adam Smith) is the "unseen hand" that promotes the greatest public good through individual selfish enterprise.

tcnj_libertarian - quote
Please defend this statement. You recognize that Adam Smith's philosophy is based upon individual enterprise. Individual enterprise need not be aimed toward the public good -- it may be pursued "selfishly", that is, with only ones self in mind. Adam Smith argues, however, that despite that individual's goal, the public will indeed be benefited. Smith argues that the public benefits naturally from free enterprise, but not that the public good should be the ultimate goal of such enterprise. You can't get an "ought" from an "is".

You and I have no argument here. As an entrepreneur myself, I am totally in favor of capitalism and the merit of honest selfish motives. On the other hand, I am anti-corporation. Corporations today have all the rights you and I have except the right to vote. But then, they can't be tried in criminal court and you and I can. Adam Smith opposed corporations as restricting competition. They wield enormous influence over our government and that may become a threat to many of our basic liberties.

Smith, widely considered to be the intellectual father of capitalism, says in Wealth of Nations: “By pursuing his own interest [an individual] frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good.”

Why are the interests of society more important? Simply because that is what we all want. It is not what your selfish motive for yourself, it is what you want for your grandchildren and for their grandchildren. You may make a great fortune through you selfish activities, but when your grandchildren fritter it away, you want their children and grandchildren to have the opportunity to succeed as you succeeded. To ensure that opportunity, we must make sure that the system we now have will be there for them.

Our problem, then, is to make sure that our system is stable and safe. That is the public interest. Public interest is not welfare and not pork, but it is a safe environment, it is clean air and safe streets and decent pay and working conditions and safe food and good schools and so many other things.

Historically the greatest threat to democracy has been the concentration of wealth in few hands. In my opinion, corporate America poses the greatest threat to our liberties and democracy. Every historical democracy came to an end. Ours can be different only if we make sure that all potential danger are contained.

That includes terrorists but it also includes the rich and powerful. They deserve what they earned, but they do not deserve dominance over our government. I am a democrat because I feel the Republicans have come too much under the influence of the lobbyists. I see them as a great problem - I also see them as the main source of our excessive budget and deficit. I am a fiscal conservative and a history buff. I am opposed to Bush because he epitomizes the very elitism that separated our Founding Fathers into Federalists and Democratic-Republicans. Jefferson and Madison won that battle and we got our Bill of Rights. We don't want our grandchildren to have to fight that battle again.

[sweetpea]

When-V-started this controversial, 'tongue in cheek' thread the basic question was ... who are these remaining people in America still applauding this dismal presidency?

Well, the red type above I think makes up most of them. I've known quite a few people like Pinball Wizard and I still believe he's not a bad guy at all. He's just a very angry guy. And he's part of one-third of the country left that blames liberals rather than the worst leadership this nation has ever seen.

I pray that the other 2/3 of Americans ... and growing ... can clean up elections and stand up tall against these horrific Regressives and their liberal lapdogs in Congress now. There is so much clean-up to be done after Hurricane George! Damn.
----------

who are these remaining people in America still applauding this dismal presidency?
-I'll answer. They are hte people that believe a Pres.first job is security. they also beleive there were much worse choices. They are alos the people that have voted in elections and made sure that Dems. have lost the White House twice in a row agaisnt a less than stellar opponent AND haven't controlled congress since who knows when.

they are no angrier than your Dem. Undergrounders / Michael Moore's / Progressive onliners. They don't support everyting the temporary office holder does, but understand what progressive onliners would rather have.

I have a question for you. Who are these people that actually believe polls in March will have anything to do with Congressonal elections in Nov? AND who are these peopel that are politically vested in our country's failure and have irrational hatred of a TEMPORARY office holder?

[Jane of Arc]

I have a question for you. Who are these people that actually believe polls in March will have anything to do with Congressonal elections in Nov? AND who are these peopel that are politically vested in our country's failure and have irrational hatred of a TEMPORARY office holder?

I'll answer. Yes, you're right. There's million of Americans, almost 70% of the American population who are consumed with irrational hatred. They are absolutely crazy! Show them a "temporary office holder" and they go bonkers! They just can't get a grip.

I try to tell them that everything is peachy keen. This country is in tip-top shape. Never been better!

[JamesP]

Adding to Jane's response, I will ask a general question which must be approached in a non-partisan fashion:

Is it not right, proper and constructive that the party in power be punished politically for failures, mis-deeds, mistakes, scandals, misjudgments, etc....?

If they are not punished through election results, does this not encourage more of the same and render our system useless in terms of punishing failure, rewarding success and delivering effective and efficient government to the American people?

Do the few lingering Bush supporters then, support a political system that rewards failure?

Even Pea minimizes Bush and his administration as "temporary office holders" in an effort I suppose to deflect from their importance - even he relinquishes the effort to defend the indefensible.

Yet he persists in his hope and insistence that Republicans prevail at the polls.

Isn't an attitude such as Pea's "partisanship at it's most heinous and harmful"?

Isn't he (and those few remaining like him) the most guilty of blinding hatred toward the other political party and aren't they the ones that advance America's failure by validating it and/or turning a blind political eye toward it?

So many vexing questions arise when trying to unravel the "enigma wrapped in a puzzle" that is the Bush supporter at this juncture of his Presidency.

Later - we'll deal with other vexing questions i.e. How can anyone who believes "a President's 1st job is security" possibly support the Bush administration in light of the results of their policies/performance?

[MAGI]

It's difficult to understand those remaining supporters of this Republican administration after all we know of their sabotage of "We The People"! I believe this editorial from the BuzzFlash crew pointedly sums it up............

"March 19, 2006
EDITORIAL ARCHIVES
BuzzFlash Now Officially Declares Bushevism a Cult

Let's face it, there are only three segments left to the much-vaunted GOP Base: the corporate profiteers who wouldn't care if Satan was president, as long as they got their pockets lined with taxpayer funded no-bid contracts; the Stepford Evangelicals; and the Bush cultists.

(If you are wondering why the Neo-Cons are not listed here, it is because there are clear signs that most of them -- outside of Administration staff -- now understand that their policy in Iraq has failed. Although there are enough left supporting Bush wholeheartedly that you can add them to the cult list, if you prefer. We won't object.)

Because Bushevism long ago became a cult. After all, what is a cult?

It's a movement that is comprised of people who believe in a leader contrary to reality and the harm that the person does them.

That sounds like people who support Bush alright, except for the corporate profiteers (who will always be hanging around for the money, no matter who is in power.)

Okay, honestly, and we are not being provocative. If a foreign enemy wanted to place someone in power as a mole to destroy and bankrupt America, could they have done better than George W. Bush? We think not. Jim Jones is dead and wasn't available for the part.

But, let's talk amongst ourselves here. Sit down and make two lists.

On one side, put down what Bush has done that has made America better. On the other side, put down what Bush had done to make America worse and less secure.

We rest our case.

A BUZZFLASH EDITORIAL "

[wimzkl]

Pinball Wizard
Quote
I work hard and I make good money. I don't apologize for that. Seeing able bodied people on welfare makes me SICK. Liberals LOVE government assistance. Why should I work 50 hrs a week and have half my check taken and given to the "poor"?

If you would examine the Federal Budget and the facts conserning recent shifts in the tax burden here in America, you would find that the amount of your check that goes to welfare is very small. The vast majority goes to corporate America. I will not defend welfare; it is a failed system that needs major revision. The solution to poverty is education and opportunity, not public dole.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin. When you advocate giving up any liberty, you violate the memory of those who fought and died to give us liberty.

There can be no question that we need to protect ourselves. Teddy Roosevelt said “We should speak softly and carry a big stick.” However, It may be beyond our capabilities to fight gorilla wars around the world. We have the armaments but not the incentive to risk massive personnel. What we should do is let the world know of our big stick and that we will not tolerate war or terrorism. If you mess with us, or if you aid and protect someone who messes with us, we will come to you and remove the violating leadership; and then we will promptly leave you to your own devices.

I think it is conservative to support our defence against terrorists. I cannot fathom any situation that would require that we give up liberties. Doing that threatens all our liberties. That is how democracies came to an end in the past. All truly interested in preserving personal liberty should be mindful that “necessity” is the powerful’s plea for increased control over common men. William Pitt, a British statesman, in 1783 warned: “It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves.”

The acrimony between liberals and conservatives is uncalled for. State your opinion, give your reasons and leave it at that. We are not really as far apart as many think because we don't have a good definition of either side.

[JamesP]

[I]"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin. When you advocate giving up any liberty, you violate the memory of those who fought and died to give us liberty.

There can be no question that we need to protect ourselves. What we should do is let the world know of our big stick and that we will not tolerate war or terrorism. If you mess with us, or if you aid and protect someone who messes with us, we will come to you and remove the violating leadership; and then we will promptly leave you to your own devices.

I cannot fathom any situation that would require that we give up liberties. Doing that threatens all our liberties. That is how democracies came to an end in the past. All truly interested in preserving personal liberty should be mindful that “necessity” is the powerful’s plea for increased control over common men. William Pitt, a British statesman, in 1783 warned: “It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves.”

Well said, Wimzkl. I'm almost ready to vote for you in the next election.

[sweetpea]

I'll answer. Yes, you're right. There's million of Americans, almost 70% of the American population who are consumed with irrational hatred. They are absolutely crazy! Show them a "temporary office holder" and they go bonkers! They just can't get a grip.

I try to tell them that everything is peachy keen. This country is in tip-top shape. Never been better!

Finally, some optimism from a "progressive". too bad it takes sarcasm to bring it out. You are absolutely naive if you believe that a poll or two in March will have an impact on a Nov. election........just as naive to think that a poll where a sampling of a miniscule % of citizens really translates into millions via a true ratio.

Keep thinking it though and keep egging on the Russ Feingold's of the world to continue his path. Ever wonder why nearly every Democrat has been running from him like Jewish convenient store owners run from Al Sharpton?

[wimzkl]

If nominated, I will not run. ;)

I am hearing a lot of "did too ... did not ... did too ... did not ... "

Too often, I think, participants in these threads get caught up in personalities and who did what and sometimes why. The fact that Kennedy killed a young woman is not relevant now. It is over - I think he should have been jailed, but so what? The fact that Bush took us into a war perhaps based on false information is over and we may never know, but so what? The fact that all people are fallible and have made errors is just not relevant. The polls, while interesting, are not particularly relevant. Many site them as supporting an opinion, but the opinion better have a better basis than that. It is the basis that we need to discuss and forget the polls since they will change.

What is relevant is the present situations. Where are we, what are the problems and what can we do to make things better. Let us get down to basics.


Assuming that we have the best political and economic system known to man, the basics are, in my opinion:

1. What are the essential factors of our system?
2. Are there any threats to our system?
3. What can we do about those threats?
4. Where are the major faults in our system?
5. What can we realistically do about those faults?

We are all in this together and we need a meaningful dialog so that those of differing opinions can find a common ground of agreement. When we do that, we can start solving problems. This is difficult because we are just citizens with nothing more than a voice in a blog of few. How can we reach a meaningful audience? If I knew, I might change my mind about running - just kidding.

[JamesP]

The fact that Kennedy killed a young woman is not relevant now. It is over - I think he should have been jailed, but so what? The fact that Bush took us into a war perhaps based on false information is over and we may never know, but so what? The fact that all people are fallible and have made errors is just not relevant. The polls, while interesting, are not particularly relevant.

Starting to lose me now, Wimz.

The "so what?" has to do with accountability and consequences...

- consequences for the people who bear the brunt of the misdeeds & bad decisions of politicians... in the case of Iraq: thousands of US soldiers & their families, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens and millions of US taxpayers

- and consequences for the politicians themselves

When the rest of us fail, we face consequences,
our politicians seem to fail with impunity -
we re-elect them.

...and polls, on election day, put people in office who impact us all and, on non-election days, they reflect the mood and will of "we, the people" - hardly irrelevant.

I'm reconsidering my vote :D .

[wimzkl]

James P

I regret using the Bush example with the Kennedy example. You are right, the mistake is over and past but we still have the consequences and that is a current issue. The point that I was trying to make was that WMD and ties to Al Quada will be subject to controversy forever and there is little to be gained in arguing about them since neither side can prove or disprove their beliefs. Even if you accept them as valid, the war has reached a point of apparent stalemate and it has become evident that it was a mistake. We are not getting anywhere. We need to get the UN to take over or we just need to get out.

Current issues should be our main concern. Our politicians fail with impunity for many reasons. One is the Machiavellian dictum to never admit an error, but more important is that they are the ones with the financial backing of corporate America and the rich and powerful. Another is also Machiavellian in their use of smear campaign advertising to discredit their opponent. We need to make some basic changes to impede their advantage.

A politician’s fiscal conservatism is unsustainable over time and becomes liberal because of career motivated public spending. Campaign contribution quid pro quo inevitably produces legislation specifically benefiting the rich and powerful to the detriment of the public interest.

[Jane of Arc]

Keep thinking it though and keep egging on the Russ Feingold's of the world to continue his path. Ever wonder why nearly every Democrat has been running from him like Jewish convenient store owners run from Al Sharpton?Huh? Translation please? Or some soma? Anybody got some soma? I NEED SOME SOMA!!! Where are those pushers when you need one???:eek: