Ahhhh.... a double-post; I've done that myself on occasion 8^)
Well.... how to reply. It appears we've gotten quite a bit off-topic here (and it also appears that no-one has caught us yet, hehe 8^) I do agree
with some, if not much, of what you have said. First, let me put my views/position into context. I would consider myself a Constitutional,
Libertarian Conservative. I don't believe that one can be a "moderate" or "liberal" Conservative; you are or you aren't... McCain and Sphincter
come to mind.
To me, The Constitution and Bill of Rights are first and formost.. as they were written, not as they have been construed by past and present Supreme
Court decisions. That court has abbrogated powers from the state (since the mid-1800's), and they are NOT the end-all be-all when it comes to laws;
that remains with the states.
Please note that, for the sake of space (if not convenience), I'll reply to as much as possible before I get off to work, and I might remove things
not related to what I respond to, or am able to at this time.
Oh.... as to the report you mentioned, I did find the name of that investigative body I mentioned (pertaining to what we did and did not provide
Saddam); it's the Stockholm International Peace Institute.
".... The SIPRI Arms Transfers Project maintains an extensive computerized database on arms transfers to help identify trends in global weapon
flows. The database contains information on bilateral transfers of major conventional, and biological weapons since 1950."
Also..... one must consider who controlled the Senate at that time.
"... I'm pretty sure it was Americans... oh you mean Democrats. Now, even though we all know that nothing a Democrat says is ever true because they
are all the spawn of Satan himself."
REPLY: No, I didn't implicate that. You forget that the Dems were in charge for much of the past 45+ years, their (failed) programs have done much
to divide America, and has quite literally destroyed the inner-cities. Look at Americas poorest cities, and the history of same (IE: New Oleans;
Cleveland, Ohio; New Jersey), and you will find that they have been run or controlled by Democrats for decades.
My main concern is the fact that so many people don't realise that the Dem. Party is not the same as it was in the 30's, 40's or 50's. They indeed
have changed from an "American" party to one with Socialist/Marxist views.
There's no denying the fact that the Communist prty of America has voted Dem. for many, many years. Also the fact that there currently is over 150
members of the "Progressive Caucus" in the government. Much of what they believe is directly contrary to the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and
because of their beliefs, it is a blatant lie when they take the Oath of Office. There are some on the left I not call American.
There's a quote I've yet to have anyone disprove: "The positive economic activity in any given area is inversely proportional to the number of
Democrats in charge."
"... Before we get too far ahead of ourselves on that point though, you really should give some kind of reliable documentation to the effect that the
highly plausible US Senate Report, wherein the guilty parties (the government and the companies) have essentially confessed, is for some reason
REPLY: I can only mention that much of the chemical weapons Saddam had were chemically different than what companies here produce. I cannot provide
the link to that info, and much of what is available from the org. I previously mentioned must be purchased.
"... There's no putting a positive face on what America did. America is no better or worse than most Western governments. Yeah, the UN is pretty
screwed up, but let's be fair about this. All of this black and white nonsense about the US being the good-guy and everyone else being the bad-guy?
Please. It's like my original post in this thread said- The UN is no different from every other government- corrupt and of highly questionable moral
REPLY: You know as well as I that the "war for oil" thing is crap, as I believe we both know how oil is bought and sold in the world market. Is
America perfect.... no. But we HAVE done more throughout our history than anyone to save or promote some form of liberty and freedom to many
countries. Was all of it ethical? .... by whose standards? Those are things that we all could debate/discuss for decades.
The U.N. is not a government. Thankfully, any treaty we have with them is not enforceable, as our laws only allow treaties with "countries".. NOT
organizations.... that would like having a treaty with the Elks Club.
quote: REPLY: See above. Also, there wasn't a large enough faction available to have success in a coup.
"... That assertion can not possibly be confirmed or debunked. All we can possibly hope to go on, unless of course there was a poll taken of every
soldier in Iraq, where they all told the truth, is probability, historical trends, etc. There was ample precedent for Saddam to be concerned, but we
could have kept him from having to invade Kuwait if we'd been upright with the people of Iraq. To hell with Saddam even, let's think about the
people of Iraq. We sent them into a proxy war for us that ruined their promising future, then instead of helping them back up we cannibalized them
because they'd been wounded while fighting our war for us."
REPLY: It would have been much better if Bush 1 would have ignored the cease-fire the UN talked us into, and we wouldn't be there now... for the most
A) Social Security: you can thank Dem. President Johnson for that. He's the one who folded the SS funds into the "general" fund, then they (Dems)
spent all the money on failed Socialist/Marxist giveaway programs, mostly to buy votes.
"... Republicans have controlled both houses of congress and the presidency for years now and they haven't done anything to help."
REPLY: The reduction of the tax rates (not "tax cuts") is working quite well, which it has done every single time it's been tried; when Queen
Elizibeth did it, ditto John Kennedy; Reagan and now Bush 2. That is something I've studied for 40 years. Since 9-11, an average of 75,000 new jobs
per month; the stock market is booming since the bubble burst..... reductions in the tax rates helped a great deal there.
"... The parties love to blame one another, but they rarely ever undo one another's wrongs."
REPLY: I agree with that, although I'd have to say that many of the "wrongs"... at least how they conflict with the Constitution, come from the
"... We have only one party in this country, it just operates in two halves, and sometimes experiences minor internal disputes,
REPLY: I might have agreed with that 50 years ago.
"... B) Voting transparency: Best idea? Go back to all paper ballots, and no absentee ballots except for on-duty military, and those physically
unable to make it to the voting places. And no "motor-voter" crap, either. Will that happen? Heck no."
"... Good luck blaming that one on the democrats. You do realize that we'd be well on our way to rounding out 16 consecutive years of Democrat rule
right now if your idea was embraced, don't you? I consider that a crying shame, because my leanings are conservative (in a mild and sensible sort of
way) but I can accept the fact that I am in the minority; that's the curse of intellect."
REPLY: Actually, more like 50 years. Voter fraud began with the Dems, many, many years ago, and continues to this day. "Daly" or "Chicago"- style
voting comes to mind IE: vote early and vote often. Even if the Republicans wanted to, it would take many years to reach the level of the machine the
A minority? I don't think so. I think that much of the increase in Republican voter turnout has more to do with more people paying attention to
what the Dems. want to do.... what they have to say... and more and more people don't like it. Of course the Dems. consistantly whine that they
"haven't gotten the message out", but they have... and the people don't like it.
"... C) Patriot Act: 99% of which are laws which have been on the books for decades, merely put under one controling body. Padilla? GOOD!
"... Do you even see the contradiction here??? What ever happened to due process?"
REPLY: ..... does not apply to what might be loosely termed enemy combatants. Just as the Geneva Convention does not apply to soldiers who do not wear
a uniform from an acknowledged country, or who don't openly carry their weapons, etc.
"... D) JFK; RFK; MLK: Much of which, we'll unfortunately never find the truth about, although MLK is pretty easy to figure out.
"... What's not to know? Arlen Specter came up with the Magic Bullet Theory and the Republicans are now obligated to him for that reason to put up
with him no matter how much he ticks them off. The military-industrial complex (aka the army, intelligence community, and defense contractors), which
has always been conservative leaning, was the beneficiary."
REPLY: Good 'ol Arlen Sphincter... another RINO. Yeah.... that theory is crap, and only the politicians in power at that time could pass it as truth
... for whatever reason they chose to. There WAS a shooter on the 'ol grassy knoll, but evidence of that is long gone. Just like when Clinton said,
many times: ".... there's not a shred of evidence I ...." SHRED being the operative word.
"... The resultant Vietnam War effectively ended an age of Democratic dominance, ushering in a primarily Republican age- realize that there have only
been 2 democrats elected since Johnson."
REPLY: And crap they were; one, Jimmy Carter, who gave us the "Agreed Framework"... which, of course, gave the world a nuclear N. Korea.... then
won a Nobel for it. Well, a Democrat started the vietnam war, a Democrat escalated it, and a Republican ended it. A war which we won by the way....
at least on the ground over there. That war was lost gecause academia, politics, media and law lost it for us over here, and which they're trying to
do again in this one. They somehow convinced an ignorant public that it was a "civil" war (NOT) instead of what it was... a war against a Communist
expansionist buildup in South Vietnam. "They" wanted us to lose that war because the idea of Communism/Marxism/Socialism is a good thing to them.
"They" don't care if we lose or surrender in Iraq, and in fact would like it..... as long as they get their power back.
"... REPLY: Being a Poly-Sci major is part of the problem, considering when most of the (current) professors grew up, and what their beliefs were in
the 60's and 70's.
"... Why in the world is it that the overwhelming rejection of far-right ideology by the academic community is considered and indictment of the
academic community, rather than of far-right ideology?"
REPLY: Somewhat of an apology here. Whoa... I'd never call you ignorant, and I didn't. What you might consider is that there wasn't a "right"
until there was a "left." Most all of those who are called "right" are actually right smack dab in the middle.
I made that comment because of a poll and study concerning 20 major colleges, which discovered that (on average) 80% of professors are far left, which
would provide a basis for that indictment.
If college is supposed to be an arena of education, and an open expression of ideas, then an outright "rejection" of Conservative ideas/ideals
shouldn't exist. Educators.... especially ones who accept public money, should be teaching using facts, not what their views, or ideas of how the
world and/or America should be.
Just as in the 60's and 70's, campus protests erupted over "free speech", when it wasn't about free speech at all... it was about THEIR speech,
not yours, and it continues, even more so, to this day.
Yes, I DO have a problem when they sit, ensconced in their ivory towers, and write books spouting THEIR ideals, then those same books are used to
teach throughout the lower levels of education.... books that have been found to contain so many errors and re-writing of history.
Isn't it odd that there are only 4 or 5 colleges that require a major in American history... and three of those are military. Very sad.
A knowledge of American history would do one a better service that "civics" or "liberal arts."
"... Most conservatives don't know what the hell they're talking about."
REPLY: I'm not sure what you're referring to here, but I think it could refer to many things. I'd like to hear a few, though.
"Ditto for most Liberals. I consider myself a liberal by conservative means. I think that liberals have their hearts in the right place by their
heads in the wrong orifice, and I think that the Rush Limbaugh/Bill O'Reily Conservatives have the same problem, except for the part about their
heart being in the right place.
REPLY: Politics is politics, the law is the law, and the constitution/Bill of Rights are what they are; The heart should have nothing to do with it.
By todays definition of what "liberal" means, you can't have conservative values, especially when it concerns the economy. Sorry... I don't buy
Do I agree with everything that Rush Limbaugh/Bill O'Reily et-al say? No. But in some ways they are better than many professers, if only because
they admit when they're wrong, and they slam the "center/right" too, if they disagree on things said or done. One should not shoot the messenger
because of the message. If one cares about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and American ideals, then one cannot have ones heart in the wrong
After 40 years of left/liberal teaching in colleges, the first generation of "Limbaugh" kids are just starting to enter college... and the left
doesn't like it one bit.... even if only because they (professors) will be challenged in their views.
"... I agree with that almost in it's entirety. However, most every "Socialist/Marxist" program (WIC; Welfare; Medicare; medicaid, and on and
... meaning "from each according to his needs, to each according to his needs", are most definately against everything this country was founded
"... These programs hardly take "from each according to his means."
REPLY: Yes, they do. If money is taken out of my pocket every week, through threat of government force, and given to someone who did nothing for it,
that is exactly what it is.
"... It is still perfectly possible to survive and thrive in America by the sweat of your own brow. These programs are badly managed and badly
targeted, but they have a valid constitutional purpose as a matter of infrastructure."
REPLY: Badly managed and badly targeted, for sure. But if executed (sorry Tookie 8^) by Marxist principles, it's still Marxist/Socialist.
Since Roosevelt (and Johnson made it worse by far), We've had too many people who somehow think (no... they don't think.... they "feel") they have
the right to all sorts of things, the largest of which is free money. We don't have the "right" to an education, health care, free drugs or a job
or a car or a house.
"... Medical care is an infrastructure item every bit as much as highways, infact more so. This nation cannot do business, cannot defend itself,
cannot live, enjoy liberty, or pursue happiness, if everyone is dead or dying from disease. We need a working social medical program. We don't have
one because we're being too liberal ideologically but too conservative fiscally. By that I mean that we can't afford to insure both our nation and
Mexico, among other things, but we can afford to insure Americans if we will stop being so tight and pay the price of infrastructure."
REPLY: It's not governments job to provide most of those things, and trying to do so will bankrupt this country. Already, Medicare and Medicaid
comprises 48% of our GDP. Socialised medicine works nowhere on the planet. More Canadians (and those from other countries) come here for treatment
because of the wait for basic services. Six months for an MRI? Please. Recently the High court of Canada repealed the law which forced people to go
to government medical facilities and doctors. Why? Because too many people were dying waiting for healthcare.
The third-party payer system escalates the cost of all medical services because those people dont care how much a service costs, because they don't
have to pay it, which takes market forces out of the equasion, hence higher prices. Every single time the government gets involved with any economic
activity it creates another bureaucracy, and the money goes mostly to keep that bureaucracy operational.
Another good example is when Devil-woman (Hillary) did. So.... the government passed a law whereby they would buy the vaccines (sp?) produced by
American companies, but they would only pay so much. Before the law, there were 23 companies that made vaccines.... now there's one. Why? Not enough
profit to stay operational, and put enough money away for possible/probable litigation.
One may be able to control the price of something (as in Canada) but one CANNOT control the cost. So, as many Canadians and Americans are getting
cheaper drugs from Canada, who makes up for the lost profit? Americans buying drugs here in America.
"... Tell me, do you think that the department of transportation is a good thing? On the one hand, they keep us from getting raped on the price of
transported goods and personal travel, and ensure our freedom of movement.
On the one hand, they keep us from getting raped on the price of transported goods and personal travel, and ensure our freedom of movement."
REPLY: They don't control supply and demand, 'nor the cost of privately owned transport companies, or fuel, or profits made by those companies...
except raising the cost to us through taxes.
"... On the other hand, you've got this big, slow bureaucracy managing our roads and..... you really would have to agree that private toll-roads are
the only way to go for a top-notch road system."
REPLY: Highway systems are more controlled by each state through taxes, and I have no problem with that whatsoever. Our road system here in Wisconsin
is well known for being so good; better than most toll roads, in fact.
"... Obviously socialized road construction is necessary. How can you agree with subsidizing a sunday drive but not a life-saving surgery?"
REPLY: Roads are a true infrastructure, they "work" for the "right" to be repaired. Roads have no capability to amass/save profit from that
"work" and so repairs must be paid by others. Profits are made by many by using the roads, and the roads sometimes fail (need repairs) one way or
another. Taxes from those profits from the many pay for the repairs.
99% of Americans, on the other hand, can choose to work and save profits from that work, to pay for their own "repairs." I should not have my
profits taken from my pocket (thus reducing what I could save for my own repairs) and given to support some bureaucracy, to reward the failures (not
working/saving) of others. Life-saving surgery? Sure! ... if it's mine and I pay for it.
Am I hypocrite? ...... no. I have no outstanding health care or insurance. Other than what I've managed to save, if something catastrophic happens
to me, and the money runs out, I already have it in writing that I refuse help from the state-run "Badger-care", Medicare, Medicaid, et-al. But
every week money is taken from me, through threat of force, to give to strangers; money that I can't use .... money that I could be putting into my
own savings for my own health care, and most of which goes to pay some government wonk and THEIR health care. Sorry.... that's not American. I'm
not one of those who does not insist on living longer than God or Nature intends, and being a burden on my fellow man. THATS American.
Again, most of that is true, but it used to be that people would WORK... do whatever it took, to better themselves, such as an education. Education is
a privelege, not a right.
"... Education has traditionally been the good fortune of a wealthy few who did nothing to earn it other than being born into the right family.
REPLY: That hasn't been true for the past 40 years. I just looked..... nope.... no "right to an education" in the Bill of Rights; 'nor medical
care for that matter.
The need to import skilled workers is the direct result of the failed education system, as is the outsourcing of some jobs.
"... Which aspect of the education system has failed though?
REPLY: Well.... from pre-school right on up through 12th grade, for starters, thanks to the federal Dept. of Education (which hasn't educated a
single child), and the teachers unions. Public schools have become an industry.... and union work, rather than concentrating on the education of our
children. It used to be you had to learn how to read in the 1st grade, or you didn't go on to 2nd. Now it's a 12 year course and, if you can't
read by then.... oh well, off you go.
America used to be firsts in education on every level. Now, in science and math for example, out of the top 28 industrialized nations we rank 6th. Two
years ago a test was given to random high-school teachers across America; only 30-some% passed. The same things that were being taught to the
children. How sad, and outrageous.
I have a copy of an 1886 8th grade final exam, from Kansas. I doubt many of the nations professors and teachers would pass it.
REPLY: I like some of Mr. Mill; however, in this case, I think that "...as a thinker it is his first duty to follow the facts to whatever
conclusions... " would be better all the way around.
I submit that the intellect acts upon facts to yield a conclusion. A fact not touched by an intellect is but a page in the Guiness Book of World
How true... how true. But "centrist" facts, nor viewpoints or ramblings.
It'll be good hearing from you again, and your replies. Of course, with this belonging in another thread, we might get our pee pee's smacked if we
[edit on 16-12-2005 by zappafan1]