Originally posted by JBurns
Warmonging and Christian agenda? I don't see how you could consider Bush a warmonger. If Bush was a Muslim, would you think he has a Muslim
I dunno, it would depend on MoveOn.org. None of what I quoted I actually believe, I do, however, believe groups like MoveOn.org and DailyKos believe
that. I also believe Howard Dean, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and others want to capitolize on that belief as best they can by making statements
similar to those I just made up. I mean, we got attacked, and I heard people in my office saysing, "I knew George Bush would get us into
a war." WTF?! We
get attacked, and we don't bend over and take it so Bush is a warmonger? I disagree, completely, but people do feel that
way, and these politicians are trying to take advantage of that divide. Both sides do it, and it's exploitation. It's like getting a retarded kid to
be a suicide bomber because he doesn't know better. The polarity exists, and it creates blind spots in people who don't see it, and the politicians
who do take advantage of that turning people into mindless sacks of anger repeating their party's talking points. Both sides are guilty of that, and
it really sucks.
Now, Rant asked if it wasn't better to get the input from all
the American people in choosing a supreme court justice. I disagreed with that
article I linked to. I read through it and thought the idea was completely rediculous. So I threw it up there; in my opinion, being a conservative,
the liberals make my case for me. First, I do not think our founding fathers are infallable like many do. Get back to the core of the constitution
because it was perfect. Sorry, but I'm not into ancestor worship.
However, no, all the people shouldn't have a second time to give thier input on a court justice. They had their opportunity with the election. The
people chose. They wanted Bush. If you look back at all of Clinton's appointments, they were voted by 70%+ margins in the senate. If you look a
little bit further back to when a republican was in charge, their conservative choice was attacked on every level, from being sued to having his
mental abilities questioned (Justice Thomas). So why does this only happen when republicans are in office? Because the Democrats are fair in their
choices? Was Ruth Bader Ginsburg a moderate? I don't think so!
The climate on the extreme left, from everything I read on DU, Kos, and MoveOn,
is one of pure hatrid. George Bush could run into a burning building and save an infant, and he would be vilified for it. It's amusing to read, but,
in my opinion, sad that they're convincing people that George Bush is the most evil thing to walk the earth, eclipsing Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Nero,
and Kain combined, by a long shot.
Now these two statements may seem to be a dichotomy. They are not, however. They are my interpretation of what is going on in politics. Yeah, I see a
lot wrong with my party, but I see a lot more wrong with my opposition. That's why I've chosen the party I chose.