To those who voted.

[tomrasdf]

Wow. I kinda feel like I'm preaching to the choir. I think three people posted just about the same thing I wrote while I was typing.

Also, I've got a book recommendation: Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in one lesson". For all who are on the fence about the bailout of the nationalization of charities and industry. It was written in 1946 (before the 'Great Society' and the welfare state) and proved to be rather prophetic. It's a quick, easy to read, objective, rational, and to the point. You can either agree with it or not, but it does a fantastic job of laying it all out there in a concise way. I think it's worth reading so much that if you can't get a copy, PM me and I'll send out one free of charge (limit three, I'm poor).

[CaseyJones]

We can blame our presence in Iraq on a period of intense emotion where both sides failed to analyze properly. Yes, even analytical thinkers can be overcome by emotion. Hindsight is always twenty-twenty but prior to the invasion there were voices in both camps saying let’s roll. This was due to the fact that faulty intelligence said Saddam had WMD’s he could give to the terrorists to use against us. That scared the shit out of the emotional side and planted resolve on the analytical side. In that post 911 America we were all in sync pounding on Dr. Frankestein's door with our pitchforks. It’s a shame we came together for such a non-rewarding effort for America. The unintended positive result was we got rid of a devil and his boys who were busy torturing and persecuting those in their country of the opposite sect. The unfortunate truth today is that country may fall right back into a second verse, same as the first scenario as it has done for centuries just like others in that region. The bottom line is it will probably be a waste of blood and treasure in the end.

Let's look at it with a historical perspective, shall we? Goin' back to the late '70s a religious insurrection deposed our puppet in the region (the Shah) and the insurgents took U.S. hostages. The whole thing was handled badly, it ended badly. Talk about emotion over intelligence... Hussein became our new stooge in the region. We turned a blind eye to Hussein while he dumped chemical weapons on the Iranians and even his own people. We knew exactly what was on the ground in Iraq prior to the First Gulf War, we had a very precise inventory. We, the U.S., supplied Hussein with much of his material prior to The First Gulf War.

During the same period Osama bin Laden was trained by U.S. operatives to be our (the U.S.) liason in Afghanistan to funnel U.S. covert aid to the mujahideen (factions of which became The Taliban) to facilitate the expulsion of Soviet forces from Afghanistan. The Soviet occupation of Afghanistan imposed enough ecomomic strain on the Soviet Union that it was instrumental in the dissolution of the Soviet Union. That's an important point...

We lost precise track of material and arnaments in Iraq after the first Gulf War. Still, inventories of material in-country could be extrapolated from known inventories prior to the First Gulf War. (Which might have been part of the problem. We knew what Hussein was dumping on the Iranians and the Kurds.)

What comes around... goes around. Hussein was in fact a tyrant but he was in good company. Hussein's execution was a travesty, as a human being he at least deserved to be put down as humanely as a dog. Hussein's execution fell short of that minimum standard.

We can't expect humane treatment at the hands of our enemies if we don't treat our enemies with basic human dignity and observe our enemy's basic human rights.

Rednecks can shout, "Remember 9-11!" but that has little connection to Iraq.

If our president has brown skin and a foreign sounding name... and he meets with our allies and our adversaries who also have brown skin and foreign sounding names... and that furthers the elusive cause of genuine world harmony... I'm all for it.

[bnwitt]

Your history lesson completely leaves out the other countries involved in the region. It was not just the U.S. providing arms and supplies to Iraq and Iran or having puppets. Russia, France, Germany and a litany of others pumped equipment into the region. The history of the Middle East involves a lot of players all vying for control of oil, ports and strategic positions in a global domination effort. The key players, of course, were Russia and the U.S. during our cold war for that global domination. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, arms went everywhere to the highest bidders. For these reasons, (along with the evidence of our inept intelligence community) to say we had an accurate inventory of weapons in the region at any time is very optimistic.

To single out the United States for it’s less than honorable actions in a theatre where human rights violations are a way of life and where Russia and others made daily moves of their chess pieces towards control of a globally strategic area is myopic at best. Calling the U.S. the sole monstrous culprit in this Passion play is naïve. Insinuating we got what we had coming on 911 is hateful. We can’t give everyone a pretty flower and hope all will be well in the world. One of George Bushes biggest errors has been cozying up to Putin. He is an evil KGB killer who will (if he can) reinstate Russia’s dominance over free peoples. He is not the only power crazed human on this planet.

There are still many countries and persons actively attempting to control the Middle East on a daily basis. To expect the U.S. leaders (democratic or republican) to sit back, say “Can’t we all just get along?” and do nothing beyond what Mother Theresa or Mahatma Gandhi would do in an environment like that is foolish. Fire with fire is sometimes the only route.

I hate to tell you this, but we can’t expect human treatment from these enemies at all no matter what we do. If they just wanted to kill us to seek revenge for our medaling in their region your argument might have merit. But that is not their problem with us. They believe that because we don’t follow their religion and subjugate our women like they do, we are a godless evil that must be destroyed. Allah forbid their wives might speak up about how it is wrong to stone your daughter to death after she has been raped or set your wife on fire if she is disobedient. Uppity bitches. How dare we come into their neighborhood and encourage freedom for all.

If the plan is to send our brown skinned president to make nicey nice with these fellows so we can believe we will be safe in our homes and will have “genuine world harmony” then it is a flawed plan. We won’t be safe, just delusional. And, we will be hypocrites for turning a blind eye to their inhumanity.

But that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong. And, I appreciate you have yours.

[gearhead]

Let's look at it with a historical perspective, shall we? Goin' back to the late '70s a religious insurrection deposed our puppet in the region (the Shah) . . .

Welcome to GeoPolitics 101. Yes, by all means, -Try- and do whats "right". However, based on your country's best interests, you sometimes have to make friends with folks you'd rather not, and do things that aren't pretty. And yes, this changes over time based on the changing world situation.

We can't expect humane treatment at the hands of our enemies if we don't treat our enemies with basic human dignity and observe our enemy's basic human rights.

Fundamentally, that is the best we can do. However, when you have an enemy that has consistently proven that they have no intention of abiding by such rules, then they are the ones who have changed the game.

[tomrasdf]

I think WWII changed a lot.
A quick though exercise:

Winter of 1937, Chamberlain dies of pneumonia and is replaced by the hawkish Churchill.
In the US election of 1938, Roosevelt gains a democratic super-majority in congress.
The two immediately conclude that Hitler is a threat and unilaterally decide to invade. Casualties are minimal. In one year, Hitler is dead, and the west forces a parlimentary system on Germany directed by Allied oversite. Japan stays put and the Soviets, weary of western aggression, remain in their boarders. No Bomb, no millions dead, and the Holocaust remains nothing more than synonym for confagration.

People would probably be angered by an unprecedented invation of a sovereign nation with no viable threat of war on the horizon. The world would probably blame the US and UK's Treaty of Versailles for germany being so bad in the first place and we would be viewed as villians.

Point is, you can talk about 'what if's' and 'it's our fault' and 'there was no smoking gun' all day long.

For all we know, Syria could be sitting on a few thousand tons of Saddam's sarin gas, and Iran's nuclear program is being powered by those men left unemployed when the previous boss was dragged out of a hole in the ground and hung.

Making a call like that can't be easy and I believe that Bush did was any reasonable and rational man would have done at that time knowing what he knew, especially with the context of history.

[bnwitt]

You had me until you said Roosevelt and the super democratic majority decided to invade.

The post WW1 isolationism in our country was a crippling force that almost kept us from coming to Europe's aid in WWII. Our WWI ace Lindbergh even gave Hitler a pretty flower and endorsement. There is nothing more dangerous to a country's self defense awareness and willingness to fight than a celebrity who knows first hand the horrors of war. I don't mean to criticize these men though, as I imagine how horrible the memory of war must be. Still it amazes me how some men come back from the horror ready to do it again if need be and others come back not willing to do it again for any reason. I think of it as The Wesley Clark/Oliver North dichotomy.

[CaseyJones]

Your history lesson completely leaves out the other countries involved in the region. It was not just the U.S. providing arms and supplies to Iraq and Iran or having puppets. Russia, France, Germany and a litany of others pumped equipment into the region. The history of the Middle East involves a lot of players all vying for control of oil, ports and strategic positions in a global domination effort. The key players, of course, were Russia and the U.S. during our cold war for that global domination. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, arms went everywhere to the highest bidders. For these reasons, (along with the evidence of our inept intelligence community) to say we had an accurate inventory of weapons in the region at any time is very optimistic.

Maybe so. But we tend to skip from one stooge from another. There's a whole bunch of F-16s still grounded in Iran. Shah wanted nice jets, we hooked Shah up with nice jets. I don't have access to the list of what Hussein wanted.

To single out the United States for it’s less than honorable actions in a theatre where human rights violations are a way of life and where Russia and others made daily moves of their chess pieces towards control of a globally strategic area is myopic at best. Calling the U.S. the sole monstrous culprit in this Passion play is naïve. Insinuating we got what we had coming on 911 is hateful.

Which isn't what I'm saying. I will say that both Hussein and bin Laden are monsters we had a hand in creating. The assumption was and is that we'll create something that will be contained more or less in its intended theater of operation. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" which means we climb into bed with critters we perhaps shouldn't entertain, the further assumption is that they'll just go away when they've achieved their intended purpose. They're warriors. Right or wrong once their battle is over they'll look for another theater of operation. In our handy-dandy global society that means someone can bring his war to our doorstep.

Remember, "what comes around... goes around."

We can’t give everyone a pretty flower and hope all will be well in the world. One of George Bushes biggest errors has been cozying up to Putin. He is an evil KGB killer who will (if he can) reinstate Russia’s dominance over free peoples. He is not the only power crazed human on this planet.

I thought Bush and Putin made a cute couple.

It's too bad things didn't work out between them.

No argument on the KGB connection.

Putin to the left of me... Cheney to the right... here I am, stuck in the middle with you!

There are still many countries and persons actively attempting to control the Middle East on a daily basis. To expect the U.S. leaders (democratic or republican) to sit back, say “Can’t we all just get along?” and do nothing beyond what Mother Theresa or Mahatma Gandhi would do in an environment like that is foolish. Fire with fire is sometimes the only route.

Dammit, no argument there, either.

It would be great if we could all sit down at a tit bar and have a beer. But Islam prohibits the consumption of alcohol. So no beer for Achmed. Discussing the game over a beer is a Western cultural phenom that just doesn't translate.

Titties don't translate, either. Achmed doesn't like titties on display or if he does he won't admit it.

How can you find common ground with someone who doesn't approve of titties and beer?!

Seriously, it's a cultural difference that must be taken into account. That and others. To think you can beat the Afghans into submission is as you say "myopic", those guys are the toughest SOBs on the planet.

Oddly enough many of my biker associates were hell-bent on killin' me before we sat down fer a beer. We got the hell-bent on killin' us part down, now we gotta figure out the "sittin' down fer a beer" part 'cuz they don't drink beer...

I hate to tell you this, but we can’t expect human treatment from these enemies at all no matter what we do. If they just wanted to kill us to seek revenge for our medaling in their region your argument might have merit. But that is not their problem with us. They believe that because we don’t follow their religion and subjugate our women like they do, we are a godless evil that must be destroyed. Allah forbid their wives might speak up about how it is wrong to stone your daughter to death after she has been raped or set your wife on fire if she is disobedient. Uppity bitches. How dare we come into their neighborhood and encourage freedom for all.

Right or wrong how would you feel if a foreign force occupied your neighborhood? Right or wrong we can't fight injustice with more injustice, truth be told I'm fairly certain that two wrongs don't make a right. Numerous repeated wrongs certainly don't make a right.

Rednecks can't see the difference between fear and respect. You can't beat me enough to make me respect you, that's not how respect is earned. Oh, I might respect your skill as an opponent but I might not necessarily respect you as a human being. Take heed:

Use only the minumum force necessary to solve the problem or to resolve the conflict. Anything more is excessive. "Shock and Awe" in itself infers excess. We are dealing with a culture that reveres martyrs. Serious question: If they value martyrs how many martyrs are too many?

If the plan is to send our brown skinned president to make nicey nice with these fellows so we can believe we will be safe in our homes and will have “genuine world harmony” then it is a flawed plan. We won’t be safe, just delusional. And, we will be hypocrites for turning a blind eye to their inhumanity.

Human rights violations weren't an issue when Hussein was dumping chemical and biological weapons on the Iranians and the Kurds.

I don't mind bein' a hypocrite. I'd be in good company!

But that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong. And, I appreciate you have yours.

Well, we're close enough. Here's my beef: The Powers That Be have distracted the public from the worst stewardship by a public official or officials ever. That's obvious to everyone at this point, left, right, middle, whatever.

We can't expect humane treatment at the hands of our enemies if we don't treat our enemies with basic human dignity and observe our enemy's basic human rights.

Fundamentally, that is the best we can do. However, when you have an enemy that has consistently proven that they have no intention of abiding by such rules, then they are the ones who have changed the game.

Yeah, but doncha get it?

When we give up that which makes us... us... and when we start playin' their game by their rules...

Well, if ya can't beat 'em... join 'em! 'Cuz beyond that point the difference between us and them gets kinda blurry.

Oh yeah. It's not a game. Don't think that, ever.

[jimipage]

Does anybody else here find it rather creepy that Barry gave his acceptance speech ALONE onstage? Where was his family? His running mate? Seriously. To me it appeared strangely dictatorial.

[jimipage]

When we give up that which makes us... us... and when we start playin' their game by their rules...

Well, if ya can't beat 'em... join 'em! 'Cuz beyond that point the difference between us and them gets kinda blurry.

Oh yeah. It's not a game. Don't think that, ever.

Definitely not a game. However, it is a great album:

[img:200:197]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... _or_Us.jpg[/img]

[gearhead]

When we give up that which makes us... us... and when we start playin' their game by their rules...

Well, if ya can't beat 'em... join 'em! 'Cuz beyond that point the difference between us and them gets kinda blurry.

Oh yeah. It's not a game. Don't think that, ever.

It's a figure of spech, and you know it. Don't get all self-rightesous about it.

I agree that doing what is not "us" will lead down the path towards changing what "we" are. If it means losing a battle of extinction tho, you gotta do what you gotta do. Or there is no more us to be who we are.

[bnwitt]

Here's my beef: The Powers That Be have distracted the public from the worst stewardship by a public official or officials ever. That's obvious to everyone at this point, left, right, middle, whatever.

Where here's where we disagree as well. I believe that the current and past presidents of both parties all the way back to John F. Kennedy have been total washouts with one exception and that is Reagan. And guess what, I voted for Carter. Just goes to show what I knew at the time.

I don't think that dubbyah is any worse than the other self serving losers we’ve had. They have all sucked for many individual reasons and the decline of America hasn't happened in the last 8 years alone. You can't hang it all on Jr., just some of it. The odds are great that Obama will continue to screw things up as well in his pursuit of a utopian Marxist society.

Just think about it:

Kennedy couldn't keep his dick in his pants and was nepotistic (hired his own brother) as well as pissed off so many folks they wacked him. He also brought us to the brink of nuclear war, started Vietnam and was involved in invasion plans for Cuba.

Johnson was a war mongering cowboy with a larcenous bent (I know, I'm from Texas, we got the cash) who was responsible for the stupid escalation of the Vietnam war from Kennedy's advisory force levels.

Nixon was a power hungry lying cheat.

Gerald Ford was a drunken football star we didn’t elect without any accomplishments other than surviving falls down jet ways and making the deal of the century with Nixon. Well, if you don't count the Betty Ford abuse clinic.

Jimmy Carter tanked our economy big time. The worst I've ever seen. This current tanking is minimal compared to that episode.

Ronald Reagan brought back some of our global respect and ended the cold war and did it all with mad cow disease.

Bush the elder was a mamby pamby tax raising lip lying diplomatic core idiot with no known accomplishments.

Clinton couldn’t keep his dick in his pants and pardoned criminals on his way out the door. He lied left and right and totally negated the good he did in his two terms. He was asleep at the wheel (or distracted by the chick under the desk) while the 911 attack was being hatched. And let’s not forget Somalia.

George W attacked Iraq to get even because Saddam put a contract out on his daddy post gulf war 1. And, he's had no other accomplishments other than tanking the economy.

What a poor performance by our presidents. Let's not even talk about Congress. They are all just a bunch of carpetbaggers ripping us off on a daily basis. Anyone who currently believes one party is better than the other doesn't know their history, is thinking emotionally rather than tallying the facts and is doomed to repeat history again.

The size of the Federal governments' money pot is the problem here. I have said for years that when the government at all levels in this country employs more voters than productive business does, the blood flow to the tumor will be guaranteed and that lump will kill us. Everyone, and I mean everyone (me too) votes for the candidate(s) they believe will help them the most or hurt them the least. If you are supported by the government (the tumor) you will vote to grow that government. If you are doing business with the government, you too will vote to expand it. If you are supported by business, you will vote to shrink the interfering government.

The government and its minions are so vast now it is driving more voters than non government related business is driving. We're totally screwed. There is no going back to the form of democracy which our founders envisioned and which our grandfathers enjoyed, because the tumor is self supporting. Just resign yourself to watching the decline and don’t get your blood pressure up aligning with one nasty screaming crowd or the other. And now for the Obama-Democratic Majority control era. I predict it will be just as detrimental as what has come before it. For a country of such wonderful people, we have a lousy government.

[Jana]

Lol, sure seems like a lot of pissed off conservatives. The same thing I have been hearing for years, misinformation, purported facts, which is in fact misinformation veiled in irrelevant historical data, fear mongering, appealing to stereotypes while claiming it is only liberals who stereotype, the list goes on.

One example:

"Technically, he is only a small percentage black and mostly Arab."

His father was from Kenya, take a look at his picture, he looks black. Do your geography, Kenya is part of Africa.

His mother was white, born in the USA of English, Irish, and German descent. Not sure there is much Arab there.

Oh wait, I get it, it is his middle name, Hussein, a common Arabic name. That makes him mostly Arab.

I am born in the USA, of Norwegian, German, and Lakota descent. But my middle name is Lee. I guess that makes me mostly Chinese.

Ah, I stand corrected, thank you so much for a conservative lesson in logic, which, according to the general consensus, the conservatives have so highly developed as an art form and is an alien concept for a liberal.

[CaseyJones]

When we give up that which makes us... us... and when we start playin' their game by their rules...

Well, if ya can't beat 'em... join 'em! 'Cuz beyond that point the difference between us and them gets kinda blurry.

Oh yeah. It's not a game. Don't think that, ever.

It's a figure of spech, and you know it. Don't get all self-rightesous about it.

I agree that doing what is not "us" will lead down the path towards changing what "we" are. If it means losing a battle of extinction tho, you gotta do what you gotta do. Or there is no more us to be who we are.

Oh. Sorry bro, I came off as a bit harsh.

I wish I had time to scrutinize all the trends I'm vaguely aware of. My current fascination is the interaction of securities traders at sports bars.

To them it is a game. It doesn't matter what the actual numbers are or that we're not talking so much about market futures as talking about human futures. Market goes down, it takes the price of oil with it. To my mind that's agood thing, it makes the market pseudo-self correcting. Wall Street says it's bad, commodities are soft. Retirees take a hit becuase they're living partially off dividends but the hit isn't as bad as it could be because commodities correct. It almost makes me believe that regulation is a bad thing...

If not for the hosebags who bankrupt their companies and make billions personally while they're at it. If the markets take care of themselves that shouldn't happen...

BTW less expensive oil IMHO is a good thing. Remember however we have very short attention spans. Less expensive oil will give us a break until oil becomes expensive again. Let's use this information wisely...

It's the "game" aspect that's fascinating. With a Wall Street salary and bonuses how long does it take you to make all the money you ever need? Here's the thing: Once you have "all the money you ever need" there's no point beyond that. It's just "keeping score". So it is a game. Bag all the cash you can before you die, you win.

What happens to the losers?

[CaseyJones]

I don't think that dubbyah is any worse than the other self serving losers we’ve had. They have all sucked for many individual reasons and the decline of America hasn't happened in the last 8 years alone. You can't hang it all on Jr., just some of it. The odds are great that Obama will continue to screw things up as well in his pursuit of a utopian Marxist society.

Oh, that's beautiful. That's poetic. Who said we disagree? We got common ground right there.

Just think about it: (truncated)

Nixon was a power hungry lying cheat.

But, dammit, like he said... "I am not a crook!"

When he was in fact a crook. A damn good one at that. I respect that, we needed an oily profane bastard and he was indeed that. That's the problem with the public, they don't respect a proper crook when they have one in their midst.

Gerald Ford....

Not especially memorable. Kinda like the '90s...

Jimmy Carter tanked our economy big time. The worst I've ever seen. This current tanking is minimal compared to that episode.

But dammit he meant well. Just goes to show ya, it's a popularity contest. What we need is a good crook. Nice guys finish last. Hell, some countries reliably get a crook every time.

Ronald Reagan brought back some of our global respect and ended the cold war and did it all with mad cow disease.

'Nuff said.

Bush the elder was a mamby pamby tax raising lip lying diplomatic core idiot with no known accomplishments.

Oh, I disagree. Compared to Junior he looks like the Elder Statesman.

Clinton couldn’t keep his dick in his pants and pardoned criminals on his way out the door. He lied left and right and totally negated the good he did in his two terms. He was asleep at the wheel (or distracted by the chick under the desk) while the 911 attack was being hatched. And let’s not forget Somalia.

C'mon, Sport. If you were Prez you would... wouldn't you?! Tell the truth! 'Cuz I would!

There's a Man of the People. There's a certain trailer park charm to gettin' serviced at work, if nothing else it erodes Hillary's street cred. If Hillary was my ol lady my sack would be hangin' on a nail over the headboard!

The size of the Federal governments' money pot is the problem here. I have said for years that when the government at all levels in this country employs more voters than productive business does, the blood flow to the tumor will be guaranteed and that lump will kill us. Everyone, and I mean everyone (me too) votes for the candidate(s) they believe will help them the most or hurt them the least. If you are supported by the government (the tumor) you will vote to grow that government. If you are doing business with the government, you too will vote to expand it. If you are supported by business, you will vote to shrink the interfering government.

The government and its minions are so vast now it is driving more voters than non government related business is driving. We're totally screwed. There is no going back to the form of democracy which our founders envisioned and which our grandfathers enjoyed, because the tumor is self supporting. Just resign yourself to watching the decline and don’t get your blood pressure up aligning with one nasty screaming crowd or the other. And now for the Obama-Democratic Majority control era. I predict it will be just as detrimental as what has come before it. For a country of such wonderful people, we have a lousy government.

Dammit, we are on the same page! 'Cuz government is a business. It's a business that never has to turn a profit. It's there primarily to spend our money. In theory it's supposed to return service for our money, as it is it burns more and more money and returns less and less service.

[Tubetwang]

Lol, sure seems like a lot of pissed off conservatives. The same thing I have been hearing for years, misinformation, purported facts, which is in fact misinformation veiled in irrelevant historical data, fear mongering, appealing to stereotypes while claiming it is only liberals who stereotype, the list goes on.

One example:

"Technically, he is only a small percentage black and mostly Arab."

His father was from Kenya, take a look at his picture, he looks black. Do your geography, Kenya is part of Africa.

His mother was white, born in the USA of English, Irish, and German descent. Not sure there is much Arab there.

Oh wait, I get it, it is his middle name, Hussein, a common Arabic name. That makes him mostly Arab.

I am born in the USA, of Norwegian, German, and Lakota descent. But my middle name is Lee. I guess that makes me mostly Chinese.

Ah, I stand corrected, thank you so much for a conservative lesson in logic, which, according to the general consensus, the conservatives have so highly developed as an art form and is an alien concept for a liberal.

A breath of fresh air...

Thanks Jana...you took the words off my mouth...

Right on Bro...

I'm Major Twang
I only have one house
and i apppproved this message