nocal:
'And I'm guessing that precious few of any civilians are doing anything to secure Iraq -- and that's why they're still civilians and not soldiers or 'independent contractors' (read: mercenaries).'
Yeah, well I also wonder how much of that 55% mentioned are actively tossing a stick in the spokes of the effort to advance the security of a free Iraq so that U.S. military personnel can 'get out' as prescribed? My guess==a whole fuking bunch.
nocal:
'You're suggesting that the majority of those polled were Socialists? As much as 87%, or as little as 55%?'
Yes. That, or their over-inflated sense of entitlement makes them functionally, and morally no different.
AcheronDCS:
'I wonder how many of the 87% price hold a totalitarian grip on America's fuel supply and overcharge consumer's at the pump. My guess==none.'
I also wonder how many of that 87% hold to a political/economical ideology that allows the government to regulate commerce such that the consumers can be held by a a totalitarian grip on America's fuel supply. My guess==all of them.
IMBOLCPunxsutawneyPhil:
'Each round in 'the game' the losing and winning players kill off, sabotage or otherwise increase the MENDACITY of their ruling elite and the fan-boy pissdrinkers that worship them. Stop trying to make it right versus wrong, get over the fact that there are some sort of 'winnars', nobody wins.'
Yeah, provided you've drank the kool-aid being the notion that your only choices are socialism and fascism, you're right--there are no winners, because slaves don't fuking win.
Choose Liberty.
IMBOLCPunxsutawneyPhil:
'The need for oil is supreme to run our cars, fuel our factories and transport systems, keep the lights on when we open the refridgerator, heat our homes and it has become essential in our industrialized and post-industrial lifestyles. One minor problem, the supply of oil is not a free market nor is the dependency--because if it had been we would have stopped using it about the same time we started using alternatives to the combustion engine. Say, 30-50 years ago. We never did. I don't have to tell you why, because you already know. The same reason we are in war now, it's a power play for a dimminishing reserve.'
Nope. It's because we thought it should be all right to get something we didn't earn by voting to get it. This led to the ability to regulate free commerce such that legislators had to be bought to protect one's interest from other legislator's being bought--which led to the government advancing petro-fuel development over renewable, and environmentally cleaner methanol fuel development.
IMBOLCPunxsutawneyPhil:
'...in fact money is the root cause for world-wide starvation, wars [on drugs, on terrorism, on freedom and ilberty],... '
Nope. The unwillingness to earn for one's self and trade value freely--the subsequent stealing of value (represented by money) is root cause of these evils, not the money or the value it represents.
VladTweano:
'Somehow I missed the subtext that they're not wimpy appeasers, but rather dangerous socialists. Does this subtext only appear if I drop a lot of acid or something?'
You need only to read the part where Ms. Molly describes 'the center', which turns out to be the far socialist left, and then complains that Hillary (in Ms. Molly's opinion) ain't there, and that her Democrats are cowards for not proudly admitting to be the full blodded looters that she desires them to be.
VladTweano:
'Acheron: And Hillary Clinton sucks.
I agree that she's the wrong choice for a presidential candidate, for a lot of the same reasons that Ivins lays out here. But she's doing a good enough job as NY senator that she'll easily be re-elected in November (she recognizes that there's a big part of the state that's north and west of Poughkeepsie).'
Doing a good job, eh? I'm not seeing it.
Some of her actions that actually have an effect on me, let's see...
--Voted to adopt an amendment to the Senate's 2006 Fiscal Year Budget that allocates $100 million for the prevention of unintended pregnancies.
Why I should have to foot the bill for this shit, and why it should cost $100,000,000.00 is beyond me.
--Voted to pass a bill that would reauthorize federal agricultural programs, in such areas as rural development, food aid, price supports, and conservation, for a five year period.
Why I should have to foot the bill for Agri-Industry bail outs, price supports for poor planning, and conservation efforts caused by this very brand of bullshit legislation is beyond me.
--Voted for $2.8 billion for the Indian Health Service as part of $19.1 billion for the Department of Interior and related agencies to fund wildlife restoration, land management, energy programs and others in FY 2002--a $300 million increase.
As if the MADCA$H the indians are raking out of us at the casino is not enough--they then get our Hillary to reach into our wallets and gink $2.8 billion extra!
--Voted against increasing the standard deduction of married couples.
After all, I consider the money I earn mine, rather than the indian's.
--Voted against increasing the annual limit on contributions to Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) from $500 to $2,000, beginning in 2002.
Of course, rather than save for an education, I should seek governemt assistance instead.
--Voted against phasing out estate, gift and generation-skipping taxes gradually until January 1, 2011, at which time estate and generation-skipping taxes are repealed, and the maximum gift tax rate is 40%.
If the dead got money to give away, why, they should not be giving it to whom they wish, oh NOES!!! It should go to the senators to figure out what to do with it.
--Voted against increasing the annual limit on contributions to personal Investment Retirement Accounts (IRAs) incrementally to $5,000.
Why should I pay for my own retirement when i could be paying for someone else's?
--Voted against a bill that provides liability protection (from frivilous lawsuits) for manufacturers, dealers or importers of firearms or ammunition products, as well as their trade associations, for harm caused by criminal or unlawful misuse.
What a cunt.
If you mean Vlad, that she routinely feels free to prevent working folks from keeping the money they earn, and promises that in turn she'll give them more than they earn, then you are right--'she's doing a good enough job as NY senator that she'll easily be re-elected in November'--mostly because she is NOT any good.
VladTweano:
'For the stuff it takes to be a viable democratic presidential contender, I point to last week's Gore speech. Yeah I know it's Gore. Get over it and read it.'
Al Gore said:
'I do not believe that we should allow ourselves to be distracted from this urgent task simply because it is proving to be more difficult and lengthy than was predicted. Great nations persevere and then prevail. They do not jump from one unfinished task to another. We should remain focused on the war against terrorism.'
That was one sweet speech.
The fact that I agree with so much of it makes me suspicious. I think he's factually correct that the Executive Branch is in the midst of a grand power grab, but I suspect he brings this up now because he's NOT the one able to make the grab. He could have been, but his election was stolen from him while he was preoccupied with stealing the election for himself.
Al Gore said:
'One of the other ways the Administration has tried to control the flow of information has been by consistently resorting to the language and politics of fear in order to short-circuit the debate and drive its agenda forward without regard to the evidence or the public interest. President Eisenhower said this: 'Any who act as if freedom's defenses are to be found in suppression and suspicion and fear confess a doctrine that is alien to America.''
Al Gore also previously said:
'What makes Saddam dangerous is his effort to acquire weapons of mass destruction. What makes terrorists so much more dangerous than they have ever been is the prospect that they may get access to weapons of mass destruction. There isn't just one country that is attempting to get access, nor is there just one terrorist group.'
Al Gore said:
'Fear drives out reason. Fear suppresses the politics of discourse and opens the door to the politics of destruction. Justice Brandeis once wrote: 'Men feared witches and burnt women.''
Al Gore also previouisly said:
'We have other enemies, but we should focus first and foremost as our top priority on winning the war against terrorism.' AND 'Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.' AND '...we know that [Saddam Hussein] has stored away secret supplies of biological weapons and chemical weapons throughout his country.'
You know, thers nothing in Gore's speech, or Sen. Clinton's record in NY, that assures me that they are less inclined to abuses of our liberties than the present administration, and furthermore, I submit that all this criminal bullshit is going to be useful precedent for them when they get their turn (no thanks to the church of BushSux) riding high on their cries of 'FOUL' over it all.
