|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
What's funny to me, is certain people don't think the government would lie to them, but don't trust the government to get involved in everday affairs like health care.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I've been down this road enough and have no real desire to go back down it.. but lying by omissions presumes that the person knew the truth and kept silent... which is different than not knowing the truth...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563 |
Quote:
Quote:
One soldier dying because his Commander in Chief lied about the need to go to war, is too many.
So let me get this straight---you think that Bush basically knew that their were no WMD's but insisted there were anyway. You're saying he just openly lied in order to provoke a war and kill a bunch of people---and he got re-elected while doing this. Not only are you calling into question Bush but also you are questioning the intelligence of every person who cast a ballot with his name on it. That is pretty ridiculous.
I think Bush may have been wrong about the WMD's, but I don't think he blatantly lied so that he could sacrifice the lives of countless people.
That's exactly what I'm saying. We were a bunch of sheep that didn't take a minute to examine how obvious it was that something was wrong. The rest of the world figured it out. People here wanted to boycott France for their lies, except that they were right. We should all feel responsible for these kids dying, because we gave that idiot the go ahead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
Quote:
What's funny to me, is certain people don't think the government would lie to them, but don't trust the government to get involved in everday affairs like health care.
What's funny to me is that some people are convinced the government will lie to them, yet still want them to get fully involved in our health care. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What's funny to me, is certain people don't think the government would lie to them, but don't trust the government to get involved in everday affairs like health care.
What's funny to me is that some people are convinced the government will lie to them, yet still want them to get fully involved in our health care.
It's called a necessary evil. Fact of the matter is we need to make sure that our citizens are in good health, and have access to good health care. I'm not saying that universal health care is the answer, but it's a good question.
But, a catch 22 nonetheless...what are you gonna do?
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What's funny to me, is certain people don't think the government would lie to them, but don't trust the government to get involved in everday affairs like health care.
What's funny to me is that some people are convinced the government will lie to them, yet still want them to get fully involved in our health care.
Which is why I want them involved in as little as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
That's exactly what I'm saying. We were a bunch of sheep that didn't take a minute to examine how obvious it was that something was wrong. The rest of the world figured it out. People here wanted to boycott France for their lies, except that they were right. We should all feel responsible for these kids dying, because we gave that idiot the go ahead.
What "Rest of the World"?? I keep hearing this but it's utter garbage. 
The only people opposing our invasion were France, Germany, Russia and number of Arab states that didn't want the US army right next door to them. The rest of Europe was behind us initially. As soon as we invaded ... word came out that France, Germany and Russia all had illegal "oil-for-food" deals with Saddam that were now null-and-void. The reason they opposed was strictly financial ... it had nothing to do what-so-ever with some sort of "inside knowledge".
If everything was so "obvious" as you claim ... why wasn't France, Germany and Russia presenting this "irrefutable evidence of no WMD" to the UN when we were making our case for invasion??? All we heard from them was ... "Lets give weapons inpectors more time."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
The Real Meaning of 4,000 Dead By LIEUT. SEAN WALSH 49 minutes ago The passing of the 4,000th service member in Iraq is a tragic milestone and a testament to the cost of this war, but for those of us who live and fight in Iraq, we measure that cost in smaller, but much more personal numbers. For me those numbers are 8, the number of friends and classmates killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and 3, the number of soldiers from my unit killed in this deployment. I'm 25, yet I've received more notifications for funerals than invitations to weddings. The number 4,000 is too great to grasp even for us that are here in Iraq. When we soldiers read the newspaper, the latest AP casualty figures are glanced over with the same casual interest as a box score for a sport you don't follow. I am certain that I am not alone when I open up the Stars and Stripes, the military's daily paper, and immediately search for the section with the names of the fallen to see if they include anyone I know. While in a combat outpost in southwest Baghdad, it was in that distinctive bold Ariel print in a two-week-old copy of the Stars and Stripes that I read that my best friend had been killed in Afghanistan. No phone call from a mutual friend or a visit to his family. All that had come and gone by the time I had learned about his death. I sometimes wonder, if I hadn't picked up that paper, how much longer I would have gone by without knowing - perhaps another day, perhaps a week or longer until I could find the time and the means to check my e-mail to find my messages unanswered and a death notification from a West Point distro list in my inbox. The dead in Afghanistan don't seem to inspire the keeping of lists the same way that those in Iraq do, but even if they did it wouldn't matter; he could only be number 7 to me. I'm not asking for pity, only understanding for the cost of this war. We did, after all, volunteer for the Army and that is the key distinction between this army and the army of the Vietnam War. But even as I ask for that understanding I'm almost certain that you won't be able to obtain it. Even Shakespeare, with his now overused notion of soldiers as a "band of brothers" fails to capture the bonds, the sense of responsibility to each other, among soldiers. In many ways, Iraq has become my home (by the time my deployment ends I will have spent more time here than anywhere else in the army) and the soldiers I share that home with have become my family. Between working, eating and sleeping within a few feet of the same soldiers every single day, I doubt I am away from them for more than two hours a day. I'm engaged to the love of my life, but it will take several years of marriage before I've spent as much time with her as I have with the men I serve with today. For the vast majority of American's who don't have a loved one overseas, the only number they have to attempt to grasp the Iraq War is 4,000. I would ask that when you see that number, try to remember that it is made up of over 1 million smaller numbers; that every one of the 1 million service members who have fought in Iraq has his or her own personal numbers. Over 1 million 8's and 3's. When you are evaluating the price of the war, weighing potential rewards versus cost in blood and treasure, I would ask you to consider what is worth the lives of three of your loved ones? Or eight? Or more? It would be a tragedy for my 8 and 3 to have died without us being able to complete our mission, but it maybe even more tragic for 8 and 3 to become anything higher. Link
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Mac, I see you still continue to disprespect the sacrifice these soldiers made. It really angers me that you throw out revisionist history and use the sacrifice that two of my family members made. You sit there and rewrite what actually happen, make groundless accusations, and spit on the things that my family members believed in and died for. You dishonor them, their memory, and their sacrifice. I'd prefer you just say thank you and move on. Making outlandish and false accusations is something those that actually HAVE sacrificed can do without. You don't speak for those that have lost loved ones in this battle. Stop pretending you do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563 |
Quote:
What "Rest of the World"?? I keep hearing this but it's utter garbage.
The only people opposing our invasion were France, Germany, Russia and number of Arab states that didn't want the US army right next door to them.
France, Germany, and Russia. Aside from England, the three most influential courntries in Europe. There were many others that were against it but not as vocal or as covered by the press.
Quote:
The rest of Europe was behind us initially.
You mean that vast coalition of Spain, Poland, UK, and the US?
Quote:
If everything was so "obvious" as you claim ... why wasn't France, Germany and Russia presenting this "irrefutable evidence of no WMD" to the UN when we were making our case for invasion??? All we heard from them was ... "Lets give weapons inpectors more time."
What evidence of "not there" were they supposed to present. Their intelligence told them that the things the US was claiming were WMDs weren't, in fact, WMDs. Why should they have had to present "irrefutable evidence?" We sure didn't. The burden was on us to show irrefutable evidence, we wanted to attack.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the UN against us invading as well?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Funny how you glossed over the "oil for food" situation that was the impetus for those three countries to be against the war. Typical liberal tactics, ignore the facts when they get in the way of their rants. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the UN against us invading as well?
The UN is nothing more than a collection of the countries you already mentioned, it is not its own entity no matter how much some people wish it was...... so no, it wasn't "collectively" against us.. it was against us to the extent that the countries listed were against us...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Wow, if only we had the advantage of hindsight before we invaded. 
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Quote:
Mac, I see you still continue to disprespect the sacrifice these soldiers made. It really angers me that you throw out revisionist history and use the sacrifice that two of my family members made. You sit there and rewrite what actually happen, make groundless accusations, and spit on the things that my family members believed in and died for. You dishonor them, their memory, and their sacrifice. I'd prefer you just say thank you and move on. Making outlandish and false accusations is something those that actually HAVE sacrificed can do without. You don't speak for those that have lost loved ones in this battle. Stop pretending you do.
I don't see how he's being disrespectful, at least in his most recent post, I haven't read through all of them admittedly.
He's talking about how people shouldn't trivialize the loss of "just" 4000 lives, because every one of those 4000 lives lost has family and friends and made the ultimate sacrifice for a war that had less than solid reason.
And we should never get into a war unless we have absolute concrete facts on something. We had no business getting into Iraq.
Afghanistan? That's another story.
Why can he only say "thank you" and move on? Why can't he state his opinion about the war? I don't think it's "spitting on what people believe in" per say, especially when every passing day goes by that we learn the reasons for the war were less than solid, and that's being nice about it.
I think it's BS to talk bad about the troops in this war, it's not their fault, they're just along for the ride. God bless them and I pray for a safe return for all of them. You can be against the war but support the troops, contrary to what was being said a few years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
France, Germany, and Russia. Aside from England, the three most influential courntries in Europe. There were many others that were against it but not as vocal or as covered by the press.
... such as? The only countries I remember that were actually against it were the three I mentioned ... and they all had financially vested interests in us not invading. A fact you don't even dispute. All the rest were either for it or neutral on the matter. Just because they didn't send troops doesn't mean they were against it.
Quote:
You mean that vast coalition of Spain, Poland, UK, and the US?
... and Portugal, Italy, Hungary, Norway, The Netherlands, The Chech Republic, Bulgaria, and Denmark among others. And those are just the countries that sent troops to the cause. Not counting other countries that might of been for the invasion, but not sent troops or those who were neutral. You know, basically every country that didn't have a vested illegal interest in us invading Iraq.
Quote:
What evidence of "not there" were they supposed to present. Their intelligence told them that the things the US was claiming were WMDs weren't, in fact, WMDs. Why should they have had to present "irrefutable evidence?" We sure didn't. The burden was on us to show irrefutable evidence, we wanted to attack.
These were countries that DIDN'T want us to attack because they had illegal dealings with Saddam that they didn't want revealed. They DIDN'T want us in there in the first place. If this was such an OBVIOUS lie that everybody knew was bunk, why weren't France, Germany and Russia up there showing everyone else it was false?? Heck, one peice of intelligence we used to justify the invasion was from Russia!! Why didn't they spring up at the first mention of thier own report and say it was garbage???
Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the UN against us invading as well?
No, it was mostly for it. Like I said before, the only people against it were France, German and Russia as well as a couple of Arab nations. The problem with the UN is France and Russia have full veto power for any resolution that wants to get passed. I think some of the top official at the UN also had some illegal dealings with the oil-for-food program if I remember correctly.
Again ... NOBODY was jumping forward to say the intelligence being presented was false. The only people against an immediate invasion were ones with illegal financial interests ... and even they were saying, "Let's just wait and see" ... Not, "Don't invade because all of this is lies!"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
And we should never get into a war unless we have absolute concrete facts on something. We had no business getting into Iraq.
I think everyone also forgets the events going on at the time. We had just been attacked by Al Queda a few months before. Word was getting out that the CIA had extremely vauge reports that Al Queda might try and attack us using jetliners a month before 9/11 occured. People started attacking the Bush administration and the CIA for not acting sooner to prevent it.
What were they really at fault at, other than waiting for more "concrete facts" ... the problem was, sometime those concrete facts come in the form of an actual attack. After 9/11, people weren't really in the mood to wait around and "be sure". Can you imagine the outrage if Iraq DID have weapons and were able to perform some sort of attack on us while we were verifying our information? Like several of us are saying ... hindsight is a beautiful thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
And,...we have not been attacked since.
And,...the likelihood of a future attack like 911 has been thoroughly eliminated from the minds of the American public. (Just my opinion.)
The price of freedom is not free. Sometimes it is high. Sometimes it is not totally justified. Sometimes, based on your position in the hierarchy, you just do what is necessary without question. Or, just do it based on the fact you love your country. If it is worth that to YOU, then it is worth that to me. More Americans need to understand that, and quit pissing on patriotic graves. We lost more lives last year to drunk drivers than we have lost Patriots in five.
Get a life people.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,682
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,682 |
Exactly.......some people want to live in their cocoon....they forget it takes the sacrifice of others to allow that cocoon to exist.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
Then again.............I bet that people in the countries we attack have a different perspective. People are people and killing is killing. But...........I do understand the mindset of the moral majority, so don't mind me.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
It's really simple, Ammo. Mac spouts lies about the reason we went to war. He rewrites history and makes false accusations as to the true motive for the war. In doing so, he is disrespecting the sacrifice that my family members made in order to prevent another attack on our country. That's how he is spitting on their sacrifice. When you invent (or reinvent) fabrications that demean the action, you demean the sacrifice.
When I said he should say "thank you" and move on, I meant that he should stop spreading his false information and disrespecting those that gave the ultimate sacrifice.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,671
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,671 |
"...RALPHIE...now you have no reason for being "uneducated" about the "NEOCONS"....mac"
The benevolence and magnanimous sharing of information that liberal Democrats decided was crucial to Americans is much appreciated.
So do you feel like predicting whether the party most often considered with "neocons" will select a "neocon" as it's standard bearer in November?
Do you think the party most often aligned with liberals will select a liberal as it's standard bearer?
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
What were they really at fault at, other than waiting for more "concrete facts" ... the problem was, sometime those concrete facts come in the form of an actual attack. After 9/11, people weren't really in the mood to wait around and "be sure". Can you imagine the outrage if Iraq DID have weapons and were able to perform some sort of attack on us while we were verifying our information? Like several of us are saying ... hindsight is a beautiful thing.
I was on these boards citing loads and loads and loads of information and intelligence reports before this war. To anyone properly read up on the situation, the notion that Iraq had WMD's was entirely laughable.
Take a look at who was properly informed in our government before voting for this war...it was six senators and if I'm not mistaken a handful of congressmen. And that only concludes that they sat down to read it.
You can say what you will about my opinion, but it ain't hindsight.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563 |
Quote:
Wow, if only we had the advantage of hindsight before we invaded.
A little foresight would've been nice.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
I was on these boards citing loads and loads and loads of information and intelligence reports before this war. To anyone properly read up on the situation, the notion that Iraq had WMD's was entirely laughable.
Are you kidding me?? You're saying you had full access to all the government intellegence that was only available to high ranking politicians and also somehow knew ahead of time that Bush was lying??
My memory is pretty good, but not great ... however I'm pretty sure I would of remember you standing out, pre-invasion, and claiming that "everything getting reported is bogus ... and that actual intelligence says otherwise".
Likewise, I'm pretty sure I remember you saying the same story most anti-war proponents were saying ... "nothing was conclusive". The UN had done inspections and they had found nothing. I remember having arguments with you about that very point ... you saying that the UN teams suspected that they had nothing, and me pointing out that military reconnaissance showed photographs of Saddam loading up trucks full of "something" the night before a planned inspection.
Nobody was claiming that any of the intellegence claims being made were irrefutablely false until WELL after the invasion. Most everyone who was anti-war was giving a "wait and see" argument ... not a "this is impossible and here's why" argument. Don't kid yourself otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
The only people kidding themselves are those who are like you. You don't represent what is right and wrong; moral vs amoral; or the truth vs deceitful lies. You, and the majority around here pledge all of your allegiance to political parties.
The democrats on here are repulsed by everything the Republicans do. On the other hand, Republicans on here defend even the most heinous acts that particular party commits. And will you all please stop w/the "liberal" term? Jesus! If I hear that one more time, I'm going to puke. You use it as a vulgar word, but it's true meaning is something quite different.
I have no ties to either party. I do know that my family could lose a lot of money if the Democrats reform the Healthcare system, because my wife is an Anesthesiologist. On the other hand, as an educator, I sure am fed up w/up w/No Child Left Behind.
But, in the end...........it shouldn't be about my individual wishes or party patriotism. It is about what is best for our country and the world. And frankly, Bush's War is not what is best for the people of the United States or the people of the world.
And Ralphie........if you call me a liberal.......I'm gonna knock your freaking teeth out. *L*
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
And will you all please stop w/the "liberal" term? Jesus! If I hear that one more time, I'm going to puke. You use it as a vulgar word, but it's true meaning is something quite different.
I've been saying this for years.
As a matter of fact, I'm damned proud to be a liberal
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
The only people kidding themselves are those who are like you. You don't represent what is right and wrong; moral vs amoral; or the truth vs deceitful lies. You, and the majority around here pledge all of your allegiance to political parties.
WTH? You have nothing to say about my actual post so you resort to some sort of personal attack?
And who said I've pledged my allegiance to anybody? I'm far more libertarian than republican.
Quote:
The democrats on here are repulsed by everything the Republicans do. On the other hand, Republicans on here defend even the most heinous acts that particular party commits.
The biggest reason I defend Republicans is because of your first point. And back to the original intent of the thread ... ... I defend attacking Iraq because I can see why we did it at that moment in time.
Quote:
And will you all please stop w/the "liberal" term? Jesus! If I hear that one more time, I'm going to puke. You use it as a vulgar word, but it's true meaning is something quite different.
I see the term "neo-con" far more than I see the term liberal ... why aren't you bemoaning that as well if you are so non-party affiliated?
Quote:
And frankly, Bush's War is not what is best for the people of the United States or the people of the world.
In HINDSIGHT, no. BUT pulling out now and leaving Iraq to fall into disarray might not be what's best for the US either.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
Sorry man. I really wasn't just responding to you. I should have stated that. And yes, I should have included the term "neo-con." I personally haven't seen it as much, but I avoid these types of threads a lot. I did not do it very gracefully or w/any amount of tact, but my point was/is that we would be a lot better off if we looked at each situation individually and used: ---right vs. wrong ---moral vs. amoral ---truth vs deceit as our guides rather than political party allegiance. I fully understand that will never happen, but I just have to get it out there once in awhile. And it really doesn't matter if anyone listens or not. 
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
Quote:
The only people kidding themselves are those who are like you. You don't represent what is right and wrong; moral vs amoral; or the truth vs deceitful lies. You, and the majority around here pledge all of your allegiance to political parties.
The democrats on here are repulsed by everything the Republicans do. On the other hand, Republicans on here defend even the most heinous acts that particular party commits. And will you all please stop w/the "liberal" term? Jesus! If I hear that one more time, I'm going to puke. You use it as a vulgar word, but it's true meaning is something quite different.
I have no ties to either party. I do know that my family could lose a lot of money if the Democrats reform the Healthcare system, because my wife is an Anesthesiologist. On the other hand, as an educator, I sure am fed up w/up w/No Child Left Behind.
But, in the end...........it shouldn't be about my individual wishes or party patriotism. It is about what is best for our country and the world. And frankly, Bush's War is not what is best for the people of the United States or the people of the world.
And Ralphie........if you call me a liberal.......I'm gonna knock your freaking teeth out. *L*
Whether you were joking or not saying your gonna knock someone's teeth out is down right childish.
First, I am a conservative so I am at odds with liberalism in general as pertaining to a free market economy.
I call people liberals because that is what they are. If they are offended by it then they are offended by thier political values.
If you feel that I or anyone else missunderstands liberalism then please explaine what we are missunderstaning. Instead of stating your going to puke and threaten someone with violence (whether joking or not).
But your comments are putting liberalism vs Bush's war as if Bush's war is the mainstream of the conservative movement. Which it's not.
I too want to do what's best for the country but its the liberals that want more government regulation, which I feel with my conservative thinking is not the best thing for the country.
John F. Kennedy was a liberal, but not a liberal of the modern day Democratic party. Kennedy once said "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country".
Unfortunatly todays American liberal wants to know what else the government is going to do to make thier life better, whether its free healthcare (that's not really free because we will pay for it with higher taxes) or going after the rich evil corporations because god forbid if they make a large profit.
Like I've said a number of times on this board. Let the democrats go after the Evil oil companies that are making billions of profit. Carter tried to cap the oil prices in the 70's and we had shortages.
As a conservative I believe in less government, lower taxes, strong military and reducing in spendings.
Just like a Kennedy Democrat is different that a Modern Democrat I am a Reagan Conservative and I am different that today's Republican (who had control of Congress for 5 years under Bush and were vastly overspending and Bush signed off on the overspending).
![[Linked Image from mypsn.eu.playstation.com]](http://mypsn.eu.playstation.com/psn/profile/Letherface.png)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,671
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,671 |
Vers.Dawg wrote, "..But, in the end...........it shouldn't be about my individual wishes or party patriotism. It is about what is best for our country and the world. And frankly, Bush's War is not what is best for the people of the United States or the people of the world.
And Ralphie........if you call me a liberal.......I'm gonna knock your freaking teeth out. *L*"
OH NO! Fight, fight, fight! Hit me in my gut- it's a muchlarger target.
We throw around terms such as liberal,neocon generally with ill intent.
Liberal is a fine term and means nothing harmful just as conservative means an equally good philosophy working in a different manner to reach a successful goal.
When we add adjective such as ultra left wing liberal and far right conservative is when we are making a critical assessment of that philosophy.
Many Liberals such as NDUTYME are proud to be called liberal...good for him. I wonder if the Dems. nominee will use the term as often and as happily as NDUTYME? Compare the frequency of McCain's claim that he is a Conservative to the Dems use of Liberal....it tells you all you need to know!
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
Quote:
I call people liberals because that is what they are. If they are offended by it then they are offended by thier political values.
First of all, I don't consider myself a liberal. Then again, I wouldn't say I am a conservative either. I believe in doing what is right. I try to base things on what is moral and I try to search for the truth. And despite what you say.........I have seen the term "liberal" thrown around on here a ton, and it IS meant as a derogatory term. Your cute use of language doesn't change that.
Quote:
If you feel that I or anyone else missunderstands liberalism then please explaine what we are missunderstaning. Instead of stating your going to puke and threaten someone with violence (whether joking or not).
Here is what I deem the word liberal to mean.
It's based on the word liberty. And liberty, by definition, means having the ability to act according to one's own free will.
Liberal thinking was in the front of the minds of our forefathers when they wrote the Declaration of Independence. They wrote something about having the right to life, liberty, and being able to pursue happiness. A liberal mind is one that respects individual liberty and opposes restrictions on one's freedom.
All I know.....the word is not currently being used the way it was intended. Instead, people use it as an insult, a character attack, a derogatory term. In truth.....being a liberal is far more patriotic and in tune w/our forefathers than the greedy rich who have overtaken this great country would want us to believe.
And whether you think I am childish or not..........come here and try and take my liberty away. You'll find out whether I am joking or not. 
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Amen brother.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
Quote:
And whether you think I am childish or not..........come here and try and take my liberty away. You'll find out whether I am joking or not.
I've never said I wanted to take your liberty away and if fact one of the main parts of the conservative movement is to protect and ensure your personal liberty so I don't understand your babbeling, and trying to be the internet badass is down right sad and pathetic.
Quote:
Here is what I deem the word liberal to mean.
It's based on the word liberty. And liberty, by definition, means having the ability to act according to one's own free will.
Liberal thinking was in the front of the minds of our forefathers when they wrote the Declaration of Independence. They wrote something about having the right to life, liberty, and being able to pursue happiness. A liberal mind is one that respects individual liberty and opposes restrictions on one's freedom.
All I know.....the word is not currently being used the way it was intended. Instead, people use it as an insult, a character attack, a derogatory term. In truth.....being a liberal is far more patriotic and in tune w/our forefathers than the greedy rich who have overtaken this great country would want us to believe.
Like I said in my first post, this is not what the modern day democrat leaders think. They are for seizing an WWII vet's land in New Jersey, giving him what they feel is market value just so they can put up condo's and get more tax dollars out. Well what about his personal freedom to live and die on a land he purchased when he got back from defending this country?
What about my freedom to invest my social security in stocks if I want to? That's my money, right?
What about my freedom to choose my healthcare plan instead of taking some government regulated one?
I know exactly where liberalism started out, but the leaders of the movement today don't share the same values as the founders 100's of years ago. So trying to teach me a history lesson is not needed, but you need to open your eyes and see that the movement has been hijacked by the extreame and they are now the rule and not the exception.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
Babbeling? {Btw.....it's babbling.} Sad? Pathetic? LOL..............go away.
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Let me give you some advice Vers...you can't win this fight...they will gang up on you to no end. I know firsthand. But fight the good fight.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
Quote:
Babbeling? {Btw.....it's babbling.} Sad? Pathetic? LOL..............go away.
Wow, I added an "E". Nice rebuttal.
No surprise you want me to go away after you had nothing to say on topic and had to revert to a grammatical error as your come back.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
I'm not really trying to win. I've seen them gang up on a few posters before and that is why I responded in the first place. If it were the conservatives that were being ripped on......then I would defend them. To me......it's all about doing what is right vs wrong. It's about being moral as opposed to amoral. It's about the truth vs. deceit. I think it's nonsense to base every decision along party lines or whether the guy making the decision is a conservative or a liberal. Then again..........I do understand that the majority of people do make their decisions based on those nonsensical manners. 
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
No, I want you to go away because I provided two legitimate answers to your questions and you replied w/a multitude of personal insults. The grammatical correction was a response to your high-handed, arrogant attitude. *L* Bye. 
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Well, if you consider giving another opinion ganging up on people, then yes.
Some of you think having to answer questions about what you post or someone else posting an opposing view is ganging up.
I don't understand that, but, oh well.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum U.S. toll in Iraq reaches 4,000
|
|
