Deciding between Liberal and Conservative Politics

[bombardier52]

66% of Americans want the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to end. That 66% is comprised of more than just Dems. It also includes Indies and Pubs. That 66% doesn't mean "the wars were wrong"...all it means is let's get the hell out of there and let "the world" monitor Iraq and let Iraqis build their nation. That is what it means.

So I have to agree with the 66%? Sorry but I don't. A Brit told me once tha the problem with Europe is they think 500 miles is a long way. The problem with America is they think 500 years is a long time. The president said it was going to be a long war and I think he is right. We could just retreat to fortress America and continue to let this group of bad guys take Poland but I don't choose to do so Mr Chamberlain. I am sick of my embassies and ships being blown up and I am not so interested in watching the Sears Tower fall in 10 years. That is what I believe will happen because this enemy does have patience.

All of the reasons for going to war in Iraq have proved false or were lies. Take your pick. I don't really care about Saddam. I'm glad he's gone today. Sure. But I'm not in favor of spending endless tax money to "rebuild" Iraq or police a Civil War.

If you say so. What do you want to spend tax money on? What if what you want to spend it on doesn't interest me either?

Your reasons for voting Repub in the fall are "keep the blinders on" reasons or "bury your head in the sand" reasons. They will not get any Repubs elected in November--on any level--Governor/Congress/Mayor.

I totally disagree. I think to vote for either Mr Obama or Ms Clinton would be vote for putting my head in the sand. You can do that if you want but the people that want to see you dead will still be trying to kill us. That is my belief.

The Dept of Homeland Security is a colossal bureaucratic nightmare. It must be "broken up" back to the pre-existing Gov't Orgs--Fema--Coast Guard--whatever other orgs which were "folded into" it. TSA might need to remain but it needs to be funded better.

I have to agree but I blame the president and congress for this. The only good thing about the whole deal is that the coasties are finally funded as they should be.

The Patriot Act is a mess. It needs to "go away."

I disagree with this also. Has it hurt some American that I am not aware of? If so I will change my tune. I don't think it is being used for any purpose other than fighting terror and as soon as I see a case where it isn't I will rally to the cause to kill it.

Bush's tax cuts worked for about 2 years...but the economy has evaporated, we're bleeding jobs and our currency is worth about as much as the peso was a decade ago. Bush is too "out of touch" to do anything and McCain has already admitted he's "not very strong on economics." That is a recipe for disaster.

I have never thought that government could do much for the economy other than tax less. That has always helped. Other than that, the market is a fickle mistress. People don't buy shit for a million reasons. As I said before though, I don't have anything wrong in my economics other than gas prices. I don't think I know anyone that is having a hard time either. What candidate is strong on economics though? Does anyone have a track record or is it all talk right now?

The price of oil/barrel will drop by 45% once we leave Iraq. It is not economically feasible to believe anymore that the economies of China and India are "raging" and keeping the price skyrocketing while the greatest consumer nation of Oil (the U.S.) is in deep recession....the basic economics don't "add up" anymore. There is a 45% "fear quotient" built into the price/barrel which will "go away" once we leave.

Why? I think this one is a reach. Show me anything that backs this up.

The Republicans are going to get slaughtered at the polls. Barry Goldwater was an Arizonian politician who suffered the greatest loss at the polls in the history of modern American politics. John McCain will be repeating this historical fact this November.

Well then so be it. I'm not sure what your point is although I think Goldwater carried 6 states and got 52 electoral votes. George McGovern carried 1 state (MA and not his home state) and got a whopping 17 electoral votes. I think Goldwater got about 1.5% more of the popular vote too but who's counting?

Hillary's chief strategist resigned today. Her campaign is in shambles. Obama will begin to focus on McCain and we'll all start seeing how poor a choice McCain really is.

I look forward to it. I still haven't heard any reason to vote for him. Last time I looked hope wasn't a plan and neither was change. Maybe he has some substance that he is saving up for the big fight but I haven't seen it yet.

 

[Will E Worm]

American politics are a joke. Different names with very few different opinions to make you believe you have a choice. You don't. The same puppeteer holds both candidates.


Bill Hicks on politics


Who owns you?

 

[titsrock]

Bombardier...sadly...you are the precise person that "is being played" by the Republicans. They have you under this "fear cloud" so much so that you can't even name any of these "enemies" who will *potentially* bring the Sears Tower down "someday.." Oh, what's the difference between an insurgent and al Qaeda, eh? What's the difference between a Shiite and a Sunni, eh? But you're confident that we have the money and all we need is "patience" to "wait them out?" Yikes. Dude. Major misinformation there. For one thing it is grossly ignorant to accept tax cuts in war time. You do know that we have raised taxes to fund every war our country has "officially" fought? I guess you don't really care that the economy is in the crapper today. As long as we can buy bullets, we'll be fine, huh? Yikes dude...

I should've asked you, specifically, earlier on in this thread, why we went to war in Iraq and what is the present mission now, if it has changed?

You don't believe 65% of Americans are against the War? Why don't you Google this info yourself? If you don't believe my words, my posting a link to some website won't really matter to you, huh? Perhaps it's best for you to learn this information yourself? :dunno:

Luckily for me, you are precisely the misinformed and outnumbered person who will be voting Repub in November. The "informed" and "embarrassed" Pubs aren't going to be turning out at the elections. They're staying home...especially after a summer and fall seeing McCain being humiliated in debates by Obama....

 

[Member2019]

Why decide?

Why decide?

In fact, it's funny watching others "decide" for me. I.e., there are no end of American Democrats who say I'm a Republican and American Republicans who say I am a Democrat.

I'm not even a strict American Libertarian for that matter. I differ on two major things of the American Libertarian party too. I also modify my stances based on what people are going to do anyway.

E.g., if we're going to have socialized medicine, I have argued to do it at the state-level, not the federal. There have been repeat issues with the federal government and its contracts as of late -- from the war to wall street.

I take each issue on their own. No need for me to "side" with anyone. In fact, most of the time, the "issue" isn't argued by the two parties on the real "issue."

 

[Facetious]

Re: Deciding between Liberal and Conservative Politics

Some thoughts -

We must first decide how we interpret "liberty".

Some people like the power of government to provide for their needs.

Kick them out of the house, so to speak, and they can't function within the context of a capitalist system. They can't handle their affairs. They know little about what it takes to be enterprising and earn a living free and clear of government intervention. (aside from taxes )
These individuals will live out their lives in one singular economic order.
In order to be self sufficient and enterprising, one has to have the ambition to carry themselves up, out, away, free and clear of the subsidies (financial assistance). I can understand the difficulty in suspending that type of lifestyle. It's the human version of feeding the animals at Yosemite Park. Winter is harsh for the animals as the humans have exited 'till spring. Many don't make it through the winter.
If we wish to survive, we must have a back up plan. Those who accept subsidies typically do not.
I wish not to be beholden to specific guidelines.
I prefer my choosing as to how I select my clients, bid my jobs, purchase materials etc.


First decide how you interpret LIBERTY and go from there.

What is liberty to one is oppression to another.

Choose your political affiliation wisely . . .or don't choose at all, as I.

 

[bombardier52]

Titsrock,
I don't think you read my post correctly. I get the feeling that anyone that does not think what you think is wrong no if and or buts about it. I believe that I have arrived at my positions in a thoughtful logical manner. I am not being played by anyone and I think that was kind of rude to assume that because some dumb ass politician says things I believe it. "They" don't have me under a fear cloud. I have me under a fear cloud. I am very aware of who the enemy is and if you mull over my board name you might guess that I just might have "met" some in my day. I certainly know the difference between a Shiite and a Sunni. Heck, I have even conversed and shared tea with both. I have the patience to see this through because they do. In my opinion, and I respect that it isn't yours although you don't give me the same courtesy, they will continue to be at war with us even if we pretend we aren't at war with them.

I don't care that the economy is in the crapper today because I don't really think it is. Nothing I see in my life, my town, my county... tells me that the economy is bad. The only place I see that the economy is bad is on the news. The actual effect on my life (other than gas prices) is just minimal.

Ah, the war in Iraq. I don't really care why we went there. We are there and again, IMO, we can't just blow out of there now. I like the Iraqi people. I don't like too many people from other countries in the region I have been to. They are different because they work hard. They have a middle class of people that you would recognize in America as small business owners. IMO, as the economy and security of Iraq get better the country will become a stable anchor in the Middle East. The Arab street will see that economic success is a possibility and that there own ruling elite have been giving them the shaft and using the US and Israel as a false reason for their own poverty. I believe that will drive change for the better. The religious crazies that want you dead because you are not Muslim will still be there but the ocean that the fish swim in (to paraphrase Mao) will dry up.

I never said that I didn't believe that 65% of Americans were against the war. I said I don't have to agree with them. It obvious that I can use Google because I handed you your ass on that Barry Goldwater thing, didn't I?

Again, pretty rude to say that I am misinformed just because I disagree with you. Perhaps McCain will get his ass kicked come November but that is a long way away. I'm not even really a fan of McCain. I don't think he sees things the way I would like on immigration and many other issues. He may be the only person that agrees with me on some or any issues though.

I love the give and take of this board and this thread but I can't think of anything I said (until that Goldwater crack above) that would make you hostile except that I don't think like you. I'm not sure that I am the one with the hive mentality.

Let the flaming commence.

 

[bombardier52]

Dang, sorry about that. I seemed to have sucked the life right out of this thread. Pity, I looked forward to reading responses to it all day.

 

[bombardier52]

Nothing? No response? How come?

 

[Rattrap]

Titsrock,
...they will continue to be at war with us even if we pretend we aren't at war with them.

The religious crazies that want you dead because you are not Muslim will still be there but the ocean that the fish swim in (to paraphrase Mao) will dry up.

Someone recommended in some thread similiar to this a book called Dying to Win by Robert Pape. I found it to be one of the most compelling and fully researched accounts of suicide terrisom to date.

The big conclusions? They won't continue to be at war with us if we are not at war with them - however, the "war" began much earlier with our stationing of troops in the Arabian peninsula back in the 90's.

The other big conclusion: it isn't the religious crazies that want us dead at all. Religion is a tool, but not the driving force: it's the nationalist crazies that want us dead. And what pisses off nationalists more than anything? Foreign nations tromping around their regions, invading their country, and reforming their government. For better or worse, this is the greatest tool we could give terrorist leaders in breeding the next generation.

Pape states a number of time in his book (to paraphrase): "The stationing of US troops in the Arabian peninsula from the early 90's on made the attacks of September 11th 12 to 20 times more likely."

The Iraq war only makes future attacks likelier still. This is only one reason why I disagree, strongly, with the Iraq war.

 

[bombardier52]

Someone recommended in some thread similiar to this a book called Dying to Win by Robert Pape. I found it to be one of the most compelling and fully researched accounts of suicide terrisom to date.

The big conclusions? They won't continue to be at war with us if we are not at war with them - however, the "war" began much earlier with our stationing of troops in the Arabian peninsula back in the 90's.

The other big conclusion: it isn't the religious crazies that want us dead at all. Religion is a tool, but not the driving force: it's the nationalist crazies that want us dead. And what pisses off nationalists more than anything? Foreign nations tromping around their regions, invading their country, and reforming their government. For better or worse, this is the greatest tool we could give terrorist leaders in breeding the next generation.

Pape states a number of time in his book (to paraphrase): "The stationing of US troops in the Arabian peninsula from the early 90's on made the attacks of September 11th 12 to 20 times more likely."

The Iraq war only makes future attacks likelier still. This is only one reason why I disagree, strongly, with the Iraq war.

I love Dr Pape and have had the honor of attending a couple of his lectures. In Air Power studies he is a god. I consider myself a Papist as far as air power goes.

One of the other main points of this book is that suicide attacks are used against the west because they have learned it works. Or perhaps they have learned that causing casulties works. It is just that the only means at the disposal of these groups (since the don't have bombers and aircraft carriers) is the suicide attack. But is it a winning strategy?

I think that it is not. I would recommend back to you a book by Caleb Carr called The Lessons of Terror. His theory is that if you stick it out terror always loses. I think he reaches a bit on that point but he does have some pretty good backing for the theory.

 

[morethanthis]

Only Ron Paul offered something truly different from this group. He wanted to end the war, tear up the Patriot Act and he did offer up a solution to the economic mess--return the U.S. to Gold Standard--but he didn't offer up a way to get there. Nobody knows what this actually means, I think.

Unfortunately, Ron Paul's brand of Republican politics would destroy the domestic system of our country because he would tear down "Gov't" only to return to a system of "States Rights" which, if he would only remember, led to secession and the Civil War back when we tried that. We would become a nation of Rogue States under President Ron Paul. That's not quite good for the country either...

.

Ron Paul's brand of politics is what the country was founded upon. Unfortunately, no brand of politics is absolutely perfect. The issue of slavery could not be solved at the constitutional convention.....hey....they did the best they could....and formed the greatest government on earth imho.

What the founders did that we have strayed away from so much is the issue of money. The founders knew we shouldn't have a "central" "bank" to control the money. The federal reserve is not federal and there are no reserves. ......there is just one big stacks of checks and no balance of money necessary to cover them.....only "confidence" that things will work out.

One huge constitutional duty of government is to maintain a sound currency. Our government has failed miserably in this regard.....but most Americans don't understand it.

Hopefully.....freedom loving patriots like Ron Paul will be steadfast to inform Americans to not trust the powers that be behind the "democrats and gop"( a nice little game the big bankers play that most Americans think is legitimate.....it's a farce......so that we will not see the banking power behind both parties) who can create money out of thin air.......to control our society.

 

[morethanthis]

(Without reading any of the posts here) I'm Indie all day. I think Pat Buchanan is the greatest American alive today. (Ron Paul is right up there too).

Put that in your pipe and smoke it. impdaddy

Pat Buchanan can't hold Ron Paul's jockstrap....sorry.

Ron Paul is the Thomas Jefferson of our time. The man is an expert on Freedom and Monetary Policy. Pat was in the Nixon Administration...the administration that got rid of the gold standard for good.

I like Pat. I respect Pat. Pat is no Ron Paul.

I do appreciate you compliment for Ron though....most Americans don't know who he is.

 

[LBP 76]

Ron Paul's foreign policies are by far the best of any candidate. But some of his domestic ideas are dangerous to middle and lower class American's.

 

[bombardier52]

Ron Paul's foreign policies are by far the best of any candidate. But some of his domestic ideas are dangerous to middle and lower class American's.

I think the opposite. I think his foreign policy is bad but like his domestic policies.

 

[ninetysixcavy]

Pat Buchanan can't hold Ron Paul's jockstrap....sorry.

Ron Paul is the Thomas Jefferson of our time. The man is an expert on Freedom and Monetary Policy. Pat was in the Nixon Administration...the administration that got rid of the gold standard for good.

I like Pat. I respect Pat. Pat is no Ron Paul.

I do appreciate you compliment for Ron though....most Americans don't know who he is.

And I believe I heard PB endorse Paul on CNN at one point a while back.

 

[Rattrap]

I think that it is not. I would recommend back to you a book by Caleb Carr called The Lessons of Terror. His theory is that if you stick it out terror always loses. I think he reaches a bit on that point but he does have some pretty good backing for the theory.

I don't disagree with this: it's pretty logical. My question would be: is it worthwhile for us to stick it out? The costs, as we all know, are rising rapidly in every category (human life, debt, et cetera). Our progress is fragile.

I guess looking at it from a purely cost-effective standpoint, the question is what will cost us more: staying the course as we are, or pulling out the region entirely and losing control of the oil resources there? Both are potentially very dangerous. Both can wreck lives (though I'd argue that only one can directly end them). Both can cripple the US economy.

I'm not even sure if I'm arguing against anyone, but I'd wager the latter course would serve us best in the long wrong.

 

[LBP 76]

I guess looking at it from a purely cost-effective standpoint, the question is what will cost us more: staying the course as we are, or pulling out the region entirely and losing control of the oil resources there? Both are potentially very dangerous. Both can wreck lives (though I'd argue that only one can directly end them). Both can cripple the US economy.

why does one need to control the oil with troops and forcing regimes to be friendly.
Do you want to know how to guarantee the Middle East will keep supplying oil to America? Keep paying for it. Like they are going to turn down cash? Well maybe if America piss's them off. Solution? Don't piss them off.

 

[Friday on my mind]

why does one need to control the oil with troops and forcing regimes to be friendly.
Do you want to know how to guarantee the Middle East will keep supplying oil to America? Keep paying for it. Like they are going to turn down cash? Well maybe if America piss's them off. Solution? Don't piss them off.

While you know I agree with you mostly LBP it isn't quite that simple IMO.We are getting the oil at less than real market prices right now I think.We protect the Saudis regime,the ones with the most oil and in return they sell us oil at somewhat reduced costs.The oil wealth is not spread among the masses in the middle east with such arrangements.That's why their was a 1st gulf war saddam would have displaced the sheiks in Kuwait and started charging more for oil and probably would have liked to see the royal family in Saudis Arabia deposed.That is really one of the big problems in the mid east,the oil wealth is confined to a few nations whose borders were created by the english in the early 20th century.This is all nothing new arab nationalists going back to someone like Nasir of Eygpt in the 50s have had a dream of dimantling these western created borders and uniting the arab nations.Saddam saw himself as a succesor to the legacy and ambitions of Nasir.If that ever happens count on the price of oil going up I think.Now as to what is right or wrong in that is another question and i guess its all if you think we have a right to cheap oil.And while some would say it isn't cheap now,if people like the realatively friendly cooperative saudis were gone it probably would rise much more.And again I think thats what iraq is about we want a precense to step in and prevent any significant realignment of power in the mid east and be able to dictate oil flow.

 

[D-rock]

Most libertarians have good social policy. I agree with the majority of it. The bad thing about Ron Paul and libertarians is the fact most of them can't seem to get off cowboy capitalism. If libertarians could get off their idiotic economic policies I would highly consider voting for them. As far as economics go they seem to have an anything goes mentality on what people and businesses can do. I guess everybody could all go back to working in late 19th century coalmine conditions, with the very few ruling over everybody else like gods. That’s where unregulated capitalism leads. To many libertarians seem to have this ideology where the free market has magical powers to work itself out to the betterment of everybody, which history has proven to be laughably false. It's not taking anybody freedom away if laws are made to keep people or businesses from exploiting each other any more than in a social sense it's taking freedom away from not allowing somebody to murder another person. Yet too many people can't seem to grasp that concept.

Liberals would be better if they actually treated the constitution and the "self-evident" truths in it as inalienable, human rights instead of suggestions and fluff text that they feel the need to go willy nilly with as soon as they don't suit them anymore or society has changed where it makes it inconvenient for them. Of course to be fair today the Republicans are pretty much equally as bad when it comes to that. They just have different rights they want to take away from you. Likewise one of the Liberals major advantages before, the fact they had more sane economic policies when it came to the middle class and the poor, is almost gone. They pretty much have sold out almost as much as the Republicans. Look at how many free trade agreements they want along with, with Bill Clinton being one of the biggest examples.

 

[LBP 76]

2 great posts directly before this one. Especially D-rock's first paragraph.
As for Friday's great post; yes, I forgot about the cheaper price for oil the US probably enjoys with the Saudi's. But at what cost? Supporting a ridiculous monarchy that treats many of it's citizens like sheep and it's woman like slaves. Is slightly cheaper gas worth abandoning one's ideal's for? Not to me (or to you I suspect). Besides, the financial cost to America to throw her weight around everywhere may outweigh that oil discount anyway.

'Better to die cool, then live uncool.'