My political rant thread.

[crawfish]

So, two co-workers are arguing the relative merits of Guliani vs. Clinton. The fact that one of those two will likely be president makes me sad. Here was what I added to the conversation:

The #2 lie that is told to us in politics is, "it matters which party you vote for". You won't see any realistic difference between how the country is run no matter which party is in office, no matter what they say. Each party owes the same people the same favors and the only difference is what lip service they offer as an excuse.

The #1 lie is, of course, that there ARE two major political parties. There is, in reality, only 1.

</bitter rant>

[OUDoc]

Agreed.

[usmc-sooner]

yep, that's what cracks me up about these people who obsess about Bush. Things in this country are exactly the same as they were 8 years ago. Most people are in a better position because they are little older having had 8 years to grow and accumulate money.

Somebody will bring up Iraq but 9 times out of 10 the person who brings it up hasn't been there. I hear people saying "we're in Iraq or we're fighting an unwinnable war" and I'm like "we" I was there and I don't recall seeing you over there.

If you're not better off now than 8 years ago it's a you thing not a Bush/Clinton thing because nothing has changed.

[sooner_born_1960]

Eight years ago we didn't have this cool message board. I blame Bush.

[SoonerProphet]

I hear people saying "we're in Iraq or we're fighting an unwinnable war" and I'm like "we" I was there and I don't recall seeing you over there.


Yeah, kinda like "we the people", a fact that is apparently lost to some. Seeing how we the taxpayers pay for it...i'll go with the fact we have say. That goes for both politicians and military folk who seem to forget exactly what "we" means.

[usmc-sooner]

Yeah, kinda like "we the people", a fact that is apparently lost to some. Seeing how we the taxpayers pay for it...i'll go with the fact we have say. That goes for both politicians and military folk who seem to forget exactly what "we" means.

it's probably best that you don't try get what I'm talking about. What I'm saying is the people who scream the loudest about are usually the ones least affected by it.

[SoonerProphet]

it's probably best that you don't try get what I'm talking about.

typical reply.

we all pay brother, we all pay...one way or another.

[crawfish]

it's probably best that you don't try get what I'm talking about. What I'm saying is the people who scream the loudest about are usually the ones least affected by it.

I don't know, Cindy Sheehan is has a pretty loud, shrill scream, and I'd say she's been heavily affected by the war. :)

However, I'm not so sure that the Iraq war would not have happened even with Kerry in office. There are those who wield great influence over both parties who were interested in seeing it happen.

[frankensooner]

Finally, a political post I to which I can whole-heartedly agree.

People on both sides rant and rave about how their side is right and the other is wrong when there really isn't that much difference in either side.

[SoonerProphet]

I don't know, Cindy Sheehan is has a pretty loud, shrill scream, and I'd say she's been heavily affected by the war. :)

However, I'm not so sure that the Iraq war would not have happened even with Kerry in office. There are those who wield great influence over both parties who were interested in seeing it happen.

Right, the Clinton Whitehouse signed the Iraqi Liberation Act. Democrats in the heady days of 2002-03 barely spoke out or called for debate on the matter. Neither group has the cajones to discuss policy and its many facets, they think their schemes can solve all ills and consequences be damned.

[OklahomaRed]

I agree with what usmc is saying, in that if you are not better off now than you were 8 years ago, that the majority of the blame lies with yourself and not the government. The government is pretty much going to keep on catering to those with money, whether they are Republicans or Democrats. To a politician, it just deppends on who they owe a favor to? Also, the ones over there actually fighting and putting their own lives on the line, should be listened to more than someone back home who wants to whine about it. One point of view is if we don't fight them over there, we will fight them over here. The other point of view is that let's get out and see what happens. With the first you are taking a gamble with American lives first and foremost, and of course with American money second (which seems like a stupid comparison). With the second point of view, you are a genius if you are right, but you are going to look like a punk that a much smaller radical country can push around because they have no backbone when they attack us on our own soil "again". Either way SUCCS.

[usmc-sooner]

typical reply.

we all pay brother, we all pay...one way or another.

I'm sorry I didn't post a doom and gloom and Bush sucks posts but SP seriously WTF have you payed? Have you served in Iraq? Are you paying 60% of your income on some secret war tax? Are you making significantly less money now than you were 8 years ago? Did Bush get you demoted and call for you to recieve no pay raise in 8 years? Has your mother, father, brother, sister died in Iraq?
Brother you aint paid, you've gotten paid.

[mdklatt]

However, I'm not so sure that the Iraq war would not have happened even with Kerry in office. There are those who wield great influence over both parties who were interested in seeing it happen.

It would have happened, and it probably would have been the same kind of cluster****, and all the pubz would screaming about getting our troops home right now.

[OklahomaRed]

I expected, and "don't call me brother" in there? :D I have brothers, and you ain't him! :confused:

[usmc-sooner]

I don't know, Cindy Sheehan is has a pretty loud, shrill scream, and I'd say she's been heavily affected by the war. :)

However, I'm not so sure that the Iraq war would not have happened even with Kerry in office. There are those who wield great influence over both parties who were interested in seeing it happen.

you're absolutely right crawfish, but there are a lot of other mothers that don't do what she's doing.

But you're right we'd be in this mess Democrat/Republican either way. Heck we've been in it for the last 32 years with Dems and Pubs.

[usmc-sooner]

I expected, and "don't call me brother" in there? :D I have brothers, and you ain't him! :confused:

I didn't want to be disrectful in to a guy who has "payed" so much. It was like I was talking to Hulk Hogan.

[SoonerProphet]

yep, wars are free an nobody pays. we can cover up the costs with enron style accounting or simply printing more cash. and of course, only military folks suffer in wars. thanks for showing me the light.

[usmc-sooner]

yep, wars are free an nobody pays. we can cover up the costs with enron style accounting or simply printing more cash. and of course, only military folks suffer in wars. thanks for showing me the light.
you didn't even try to answer my question? How have you payed? If you're going to bring it up at least don't give me this generic response? So basically I'll say it again and also add how have you suffered? from my earlier post WTF have you payed? Have you served in Iraq? Are you paying 60% of your income on some secret war tax? Are you making significantly less money now than you were 8 years ago? Did Bush get you demoted and call for you to recieve no pay raise in 8 years? Has your mother, father, brother, sister died in Iraq?
Brother you aint paid, you've gotten paid.

[usmc-sooner]

and of course, only military folks suffer in wars. thanks for showing me the light.

not that I've ever said this but just to cover it,

I as a United States Marine would like to offer my deepest condolences to all the Jr. High Private School teachers of Texas for all the horrors of war that they have suffered.

No SP thank you for showing me the light, feel better.

[skycat]

At this point I just want a president whose last name isn't "Clinton" or "Bush".

You know, for the sake of variety.

[IB4OU2]

At this point I just want a president whose last name isn't "Clinton" or "Bush".

You know, for the sake of variety.

So is a Prez. with the first name of "Mitt" O.K.?

[usmc-sooner]

if Hillary gets elected we will have had a Bush or Clinton for at least the past 24 years.

[skycat]

So is a Prez. with the first name of "Mitt" O.K.?

As long as it's not Mitt Bush or Mitt Clinton I'm okay with it.

Unless this Mitt person is one of those shifty Mormons.:chicken:

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

With one of the parties, there's a POSSIBILITY things could get better in Washington DC. The other major party is so far gone to the left it's literally hopeless.

[Scott D]

With one of the parties, there's a POSSIBILITY things could get better in Washington DC. The other major party is so far gone to the left it's literally hopeless.

:pop:

[frankensooner]

See, there is another deluded person who actually believes one party is actually better than the other....heh.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

See, there is another deluded person who actually believes one party is actually better than the other....heh.I think you're being lazy at best, if you don't think that, too.

[frankensooner]

Isn't an AM radio calling you?

[crawfish]

I think you're being lazy at best, if you don't think that, too.

:rolleyes:

[SoonerProphet]

you didn't even try to answer my question? How have you payed? If you're going to bring it up at least don't give me this generic response? So basically I'll say it again and also add how have you suffered? from my earlier post WTF have you payed? Have you served in Iraq? Are you paying 60% of your income on some secret war tax? Are you making significantly less money now than you were 8 years ago? Did Bush get you demoted and call for you to recieve no pay raise in 8 years? Has your mother, father, brother, sister died in Iraq?
Brother you aint paid, you've gotten paid.

The cost to fill the pickup and heat and cool my home has gone up drastically since Feb of 03.

[OklahomaRed]

The cost to fill the pickup and heat and cool my home has gone up drastically since Feb of 03.


And U.S. soldiers being over in Iraq has actually kept the oil running and the cost down? Do you actually believe if Sadaam was still in control, or if terrorist attacks worldwide were up, that the price per barrel would be less? The price of oil being up is being set by the market, which I'm quite sure my 401K actually has some money invested in. Be careful for what you wish for. Oil prices might come down, but you might not have the money to pay the lower prices. A free market economy is something you don't really want to put government control over.

Rush, you are seriously diluded if you think the the Republicans actually don't have morons in their party that would be bad for America as a whole. I'm not particularly impressed with any politicians we have right now, even though I do normally vote Republican because they follow more of my core values on non-foreign affairs, and economical issues. As far as foreign affairs and the economy, they look out for the BIG boys; however, in Reaganest type views, we hope trickle down economics work. They did for Reagan.

:pop:

[usmc-sooner]

The cost to fill the pickup and heat and cool my home has gone up drastically since Feb of 03.

it was a toss up I was going to go with either post A which is

so you couldn't really come up with anything

or post B which was

wow your suffering is legendary even in hell.

[SoonerProphet]

And U.S. soldiers being over in Iraq has actually kept the oil running and the cost down? Do you actually believe if Sadaam was still in control, or if terrorist attacks worldwide were up, that the price per barrel would be less?

Is there any tangible evidence to support that first claim. By all accounts post-war production has not reached pre-war levels. I would think that the destuction of infrastucture and the insurgents attacks have kept the price per barrel up, even under Saddam and the oil for food production levels were higher.

[SoonerProphet]

it was a toss up I was going to go with either post A which is

so you couldn't really come up with anything

or post B which was

wow your suffering is legendary even in hell.

Well, there ya go...the cost of energy is soaring and Iraqi production and strains on supply and demand are made worse by the war. I had to set my thermostat to 78 this summer to get by.

[Veritas]

To get political power one has to whore out their ideals. So those of you that are so proud of the <insert your choice here> Party, keep on keepin' on, but the sooner you face up to the fact that you're just defending whores in different clothing the sooner you'll be less damned annoying on this board. You know who you are.

[colleyvillesooner]

...but the sooner you face up to the fact that you're just defending whores in different clothing the sooner you'll be less damned annoying on this board.

I doubt it. :D

[usmc-sooner]

Well, there ya go...the cost of energy is soaring and Iraqi production and strains on supply and demand are made worse by the war. I had to set my thermostat to 78 this summer to get by.

the cost of energy is always going to go up. If you can't afford to pay your bills thats not the fault of a political party or a war, it's a career decision that you've made when you entered your particular career field. You can get a higher paying job or continue to whine about how you've suffered through this war because you had to keep your thermostat at 78. Hell 78 would have been freakin lovely in Iraq.

[Veritas]

the cost of energy is always going to go up. If you can't afford to pay your bills thats not the fault of a political party or a war, it's a career decision that you've made when you entered your particular career field.
This point will be completely lost, but it's a great one.

[OUDoc]

To get political power one has to whore out their ideals. So those of you that are so proud of the <insert your choice here> Party, keep on keepin' on, but the sooner you face up to the fact that you're just defending whores in different clothing the sooner you'll be less damned annoying on this board. You know who you are.
Nicely done!

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

To get political power one has to whore out their ideals. So those of you that are so proud of the <insert your choice here> Party, keep on keepin' on, but the sooner you face up to the fact that you're just defending whores in different clothing the sooner you'll be less damned annoying on this board. You know who you are.You think Reagan got political power by whoring his ideals? Your premise is flawed.

When the republicans act like democrats, or the media convinces enough people they are acting like democrats, they lose. When democrats are honest about what they stand for, they lose. Until such a time that enough of the electorate wants government as nanny state(and that may be soon), America will vote for freedom and limited government.

Republicans in congress campaigned for freedom and limited government. Over the last 12 years, their increasing unwillingness to govern that way contributed to the republican voters sitting home in the '06 election.

[Veritas]

Evidently you don't know who you are.

[Chuck Bao]

I understand where USMC-Sooner is coming from. It must be galling to hear criticism of a war when our brave men and women have put their lives on the line, and in many cases pay the ultimate sacrifice, for that war cause.

On the other hand, our troops are fighting for the right for everyone, regardless of how informed and knowledgeable to openly express an opinion.

So, I have an opinion. It may not be popular or knowledgeable or even coherent.

1) If the consensus here is that the war in Iraq would have been started regardless of which party controlled the White House, shouldn’t that raise more than a few questions about the benefactors of this conflict?

2) Personally, I have doubts that the end result would be the same regardless of who was in the White House over the last six years. The unilateral approach of the early Bush administration did not play well in the international community. I know: international diplomacy doesn’t produce the desired and decisive action that is often needed. But, we had time on our side in this case. In hindsight the absence of weapons of mass destruction and misleading statements by the Bush administration only hurt us and helped them.

3) I do generally agree with the comments that it is better to fight the terrorists over there than to fight them here. I do disagree with the idea that we need to invade countries to do it. Bomb them, okay. Do like Mossad and assinate them. Like it or not, terrorism is here to stay and we don’t necessarily need state-sponsored terrorism, given the tech and motivations. Terrorism is cheap, particularly if they can brainwash young kids to kill themselves. In this regard, the US has been fortunate. Almost all other countries have to deal with it. In the future, we have to deal with it too. In my opinion, people dying because they lack basic health care is much more of a serious problem.

4) Regardless of the threat, our personal liberties should never be taken away. Spying on US citizens should never be allowed, unless reviewed by the impartial judge. Our checks and balances must be maintained, or the terrorists will succeed in turning us into them.

5) In economic terms, this war is a disaster. Everyone will have to pay for it – our children and grandchildren. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong. Didn’t in the early stages of the war, the Bush administration put out the idea that oil revenues would help pay for the liberation of Iraq? I wouldn’t be surprised if that is no longer a tenable proposal.

6) Servicemen cannot question the chain of command in uniform. Citizens can. The whole idea of putting our troops unnecessarily into harms way should be openly debated and not ever seen as unpatriotic.

So, I think our vote counts.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Evidently you don't know who you are.If you disagree with my comments of a couple threads ago, I would appreciate knowing the nature of the disagreements. The main point is that your premise is flawed.

[Veritas]

If you disagree with my comments of a couple threads ago, I would appreciate knowing the nature of the disagreements. The main point is that your premise is flawed.
You say potatoe, I say whores. You're not changing your mind, I'm not changing mine. Let's save the time.

[usmc-sooner]

I understand where USMC-Sooner is coming from. It must be galling to hear criticism of a war when our brave men and women have put their lives on the line, and in many cases pay the ultimate sacrifice, for that war cause.

On the other hand, our troops are fighting for the right for everyone, regardless of how informed and knowledgeable to openly express an opinion.

So, I have an opinion. It may not be popular or knowledgeable or even coherent.

1) If the consensus here is that the war in Iraq would have been started regardless of which party controlled the White House, shouldn’t that raise more than a few questions about the benefactors of this conflict?

2) Personally, I have doubts that the end result would be the same regardless of who was in the White House over the last six years. The unilateral approach of the early Bush administration did not play well in the international community. I know: international diplomacy doesn’t produce the desired and decisive action that is often needed. But, we had time on our side in this case. In hindsight the absence of weapons of mass destruction and misleading statements by the Bush administration only hurt us and helped them.

3) I do generally agree with the comments that it is better to fight the terrorists over there than to fight them here. I do disagree with the idea that we need to invade countries to do it. Bomb them, okay. Do like Mossad and assinate them. Like it or not, terrorism is here to stay and we don’t necessarily need state-sponsored terrorism, given the tech and motivations. Terrorism is cheap, particularly if they can brainwash young kids to kill themselves. In this regard, the US has been fortunate. Almost all other countries have to deal with it. In the future, we have to deal with it too. In my opinion, people dying because they lack basic health care is much more of a serious problem.

4) Regardless of the threat, our personal liberties should never be taken away. Spying on US citizens should never be allowed, unless reviewed by the impartial judge. Our checks and balances must be maintained, or the terrorists will succeed in turning us into them.

5) In economic terms, this war is a disaster. Everyone will have to pay for it – our children and grandchildren. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong. Didn’t in the early stages of the war, the Bush administration put out the idea that oil revenues would help pay for the liberation of Iraq? I wouldn’t be surprised if that is no longer a tenable proposal.

6) Servicemen cannot question the chain of command in uniform. Citizens can. The whole idea of putting our troops unnecessarily into harms way should be openly debated and not ever seen as unpatriotic.

So, I think our vote counts.

that's all fine with me, I know however that most people in this country there every day lives have not changed that much. I'll respect your right to your opinion, I don't have a problem with that at all. What I do have a problem with is someone who blames everything on Bush/or Clinton. Someone who's telling me how much he's payed or suffered, then backs it up with something as dumb as his electricity bill has gone up and gas is high. That won't ever sit well with me.
I agree with everything Veritas and crawfish are saying----meet the knew boss same as the old boss.

I'll lastly state this. Bush will be gone in a little over a year. Which of the following is likely to happen.
A. We elect a Democrat, then overnight gas prices goes down, we don't have to pay taxes anymore, peace sets in on the Mid East, we don't worry about terrorists, or extremists ever again.
or
B. We elect a Democrat or Republican and things keep on rolling the same as always.

[SoonerProphet]

that's all fine with me, I know however that most people in this country there every day lives have not changed that much. I'll respect your right to your opinion, I don't have a problem with that at all. What I do have a problem with is someone who blames everything on Bush/or Clinton. Someone who's telling me how much he's payed or suffered, then backs it up with something as dumb as his electricity bill has gone up and gas is high. That won't ever sit well with me.
I agree with everything Veritas and crawfish are saying----meet the knew boss same as the old boss.

I'll lastly state this. Bush will be gone in a little over a year. Which of the following is likely to happen.
A. We elect a Democrat, then overnight gas prices goes down, we don't have to pay taxes anymore, peace sets in on the Mid East, we don't worry about terrorists, or extremists ever again.
or
B. We elect a Democrat or Republican and things keep on rolling the same as always.


Dude, wtf?...I mentioned budget deficits, rising energy costs, burying former students, and how we as a society pay the costs of war and you get all weepy about the military.

[Pricetag]

What I'm saying is the people who scream the loudest about are usually the ones least affected by it.
That goes for the chicken hawks on the other side, too. Lots of folks out there walking around with stiffies by proxy and beating their chests over something that deep down, they know they would not be up for doing themselves.

[usmc-sooner]

That goes for the chicken hawks on the other side, too. Lots of folks out there walking around with stiffies by proxy and beating their chests over something that deep down, they know they would not be up for doing themselves.
Believe me I know.

[usmc-sooner]

Dude, wtf?...I mentioned budget deficits, rising energy costs, burying former students, and how we as a society pay the costs of war and you get all weepy about the military.

you started crying about how you couldn't afford your heating bills, remember you had to keep your thermostat on 78.

You're day to day life hasn't been changed. You haven't suffered. Your day to day life has been affected is that you chose a career field that does not allow you live in the luxary that you want.

OK you might have buried a student, well not bury them you showed up to their funeral. Teachers attend their former students funerals all the time. Car wrecks, cancer and many other things not just war. I doubt you've had to attend mass funerals, to be honest.
What did you do after the funeral? Huh I'd bet you went back to your every day routine.
It's always people like you who want so bably to get it out there that they are suffering, so eager to cry about every little inconvience. You cry cause your AC was at 78 and I'm telling I would've loved 78 most times in Kuwait and Iraq. But if you get called on it, you accuse me of being weepy.
I've never once complained about having to go to Iraq, I don't complain that I didn't make more money. I knew going in the USMC, it wasn't a get rich thing. So go cry to someone else that you chose your occupations and you didn't foresee that your electric bill was going to go up over time.

[SoonerProphet]

let me get this straight, you line of argument can be summarized thusly..."if you are not in the small minority of military service you have no room to discuss policy". Is that on track or no? Cause I would venture a guess that about 350 million folks should "stop crying" and get with the program.

[skycat]

You say potatoe, I say whores. You're not changing your mind, I'm not changing mine. Let's save the time.

Dan Quayle?

[usmc-sooner]

let me get this straight, you line of argument can be summarized thusly..."if you are not in the small minority of military service you have no room to discuss policy". Is that on track or no? Cause I would venture a guess that about 350 million folks should "stop crying" and get with the program.

no if you read what I posted I said that you have not suffered. You're not being put out any great inconveniance. You're life is still chugging along as normal. What I said is your life has not gone any major changes due to the President or the war. It's not going to change much after he is gone.
Which you countered by telling me how much you've suffered and payed because you couldn't afford to set your thermostat below 78. Which I replied that it was not a political party or a war that's to blame it's the career you've chosen.

[usmc-sooner]

also let me add. If you're not in the military or have family in the military or civilian working for the military. You haven't been put through a whole lot of inconveniance.

Life is going on pretty normally over here.

You can have all the opinions you want. To make it as simple as possible the first thing I posted is that the people who screaming and protesting the loudest or chest thumping and bragging are the people that the war has touched the least. People who complain all the time like you. You've never been sent overseas, never had to be seperated from your family, never feared for your life, stood around bored/scared for days in some crappy desert, yet you complain about it more than the guys who do have to do it.
I'm not telling you can't have an opinion. I'm not here to tell you how to think, but you can't hate George Bush until consumes you or you can hate Democrats until it comsumes you, but the bottom line is things don't change a whole lot or at all no matter who's in charge.

[Harry Beanbag]

Saying the war is causing you personal suffering because of an extra $20 a month in gas and increasing your thermostat a couple of degrees is laughable at best.

[Pricetag]

So, how many of us are really going to pony up and vote for non-party candidates when the time comes?

[Veritas]

So, how many of us are really going to pony up and vote for non-party candidates when the time comes?
I'm writing in either Ronald Reagan or Teddy Roosevelt. Those guys kicked ***.

[Harry Beanbag]

I've writing in Toby Keith.

[JohnnyMack]

also let me add. If you're not in the military or have family in the military or civilian working for the military. You haven't been put through a whole lot of inconveniance.

Life is going on pretty normally over here.

You can have all the opinions you want. To make it as simple as possible the first thing I posted is that the people who screaming and protesting the loudest or chest thumping and bragging are the people that the war has touched the least. People who complain all the time like you. You've never been sent overseas, never had to be seperated from your family, never feared for your life, stood around bored/scared for days in some crappy desert, yet you complain about it more than the guys who do have to do it.
I'm not telling you can't have an opinion. I'm not here to tell you how to think, but you can't hate George Bush until consumes you or you can hate Democrats until it comsumes you, but the bottom line is things don't change a whole lot or at all no matter who's in charge.

You're over-personalizing what is a broader policy argument.

Common sense tells us that the people who are currently serving in Iraq and/or their immediate family members are in fact suffering and/or being inconvenienced moreso than me or any other joe schmoe. I wouldn't argue that point. What I would argue is that my life and the life of every other rat racing, mortgage paying average joe has been negatively impacted by this war. It has fractured our national psyche, it has cost us too many lives and too many dollars. We have an administration that went in with a solid plan to topple Hussein, but no idea how to build a nation. An administration that acts as if it is accountable to no one, least of all you, I and the rest of the masses.

In the end, we'll leave Iraq and not long afterwards all we've worked towards will crumble. Short of maintaining a massive occupation force behind there is no other way. These people don't understand democracy, they don't get it. We can't force our ideology on them and expect it to sink in any more than Bin Laden should expect us to listen to him every time he says the only way to peace is through Allah. I've said all along that this war was about regional stability, not oil, not Hussein and certainly not about vengance for 09/11.

You and I and everyone else around us suffers everyday as lives are lost, families are destroyed, dollars are wasted and we become more and more of a rogue nation, hell bent on nation-building at all cost. George W. Bush will have to answer for this someday. To someone. I hope.

[Harry Beanbag]

An administration that acts as if it is accountable to no one, least of all you, I and the rest of the masses.


You can change administration to 99.9% of all politicians and it would be more correct.

The rest, while I don't agree with all of it, I can see your point.

[usmc-sooner]

You're over-personalizing what is a broader policy argument.

Common sense tells us that the people who are currently serving in Iraq and/or their immediate family members are in fact suffering and/or being inconvenienced moreso than me or any other joe schmoe. I wouldn't argue that point. What I would argue is that my life and the life of every other rat racing, mortgage paying average joe has been negatively impacted by this war. It has fractured our national psyche, it has cost us too many lives and too many dollars. We have an administration that went in with a solid plan to topple Hussein, but no idea how to build a nation. An administration that acts as if it is accountable to no one, least of all you, I and the rest of the masses.

In the end, we'll leave Iraq and not long afterwards all we've worked towards will crumble. Short of maintaining a massive occupation force behind there is no other way. These people don't understand democracy, they don't get it. We can't force our ideology on them and expect it to sink in any more than Bin Laden should expect us to listen to him every time he says the only way to peace is through Allah. I've said all along that this war was about regional stability, not oil, not Hussein and certainly not about vengance for 09/11.

You and I and everyone else around us suffers everyday as lives are lost, families are destroyed, dollars are wasted and we become more and more of a rogue nation, hell bent on nation-building at all cost. George W. Bush will have to answer for this someday. To someone. I hope.

doom and gloom meet drama

you aint suffering, hell wasn't to long ago you had your little ****** radio show. Unless having new business ventures is suffering. What you suffer is the stupid blind hatred of Bush. You know damn well that you are better off today not because of either party but because it's 8 years later and things haven't changed one bit.
Rogue nation and nation building are you 19? If Bush has to answer what about Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton they all had their problems with this region.

I guess you are suffering from the secret war tax also. It must be a real bitch to post stuff on message boards each day. I pray each day that you and SP's pain and suffering will end.

Maybe we can take up a donation to help buy you some groceries or find you a soup kitchen, since you're suffering so much.

[PrideTrombone]

Eight years ago we didn't have this cool message board. I blame Bush.

Yeah we did. I signed up in 99.

[JohnnyMack]

doom and gloom meet drama

you aint suffering, hell wasn't to long ago you had your little ****** radio show. Unless having new business ventures is suffering. What you suffer is the stupid blind hatred of Bush. You know damn well that you are better off today not because of either party but because it's 8 years later and things haven't changed one bit.
Rogue nation and nation building are you 19? If Bush has to answer what about Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton they all had their problems with this region.

I guess you are suffering from the secret war tax also. It must be a real bitch to post stuff on message boards each day. I pray each day that you and SP's pain and suffering will end.

Maybe we can take up a donation to help buy you some groceries or find you a soup kitchen, since you're suffering so much.

I don't mean I'm suffering financially. I mean sure it would be nice if the government (any government, not just a W led one) didn't **** away our money on Quixotian, pie in the sky quests but I realize they all have their windmills to chase, so what are ya gonna do? Actually in my line of work I benefit from a weak USD, so I guess I shouldn't bitch.

As far as my opposition to nation-building, that's something I'm just as opposed to with any leader in office who would promote that as policy. I'm much more of an isolationist than I am someone who thinks we need to be building democracy and policing the world's ills.

It's easy for you to accuse me of having a blind hatred of Bush. I could just as easily say you're one of his lemmings. But the truth is I don't have a blind hatred of Bush, but I do detest his decision to invade Iraq. Those people have been killin' each other longer than osu has been sucking at the foosball. I'm not egotistical enough to think we can change it. Not in my lifetime will it ever happen. They're angry people (primarily because they live in the middle of a hot, rocky desert) with whom reason doesn't seem to be a solution.

[Veritas]

They're angry people (primarily because they live in the middle of a hot, rocky desert) with whom reason doesn't seem to be a solution.
That and their women are super hairy. That's got to **** them off.

[sooner_born_1960]

Yeah we did. I signed up in 99.
Yeah, but not this cool message board.

[leavingthezoo]

not that I've ever said this but just to cover it,

I as a United States Marine would like to offer my deepest condolences to all the Jr. High Private School teachers of Texas for all the horrors of war that they have suffered.

No SP thank you for showing me the light, feel better.

with all do respect, USMC, and thank you for your service-- but families of servicemen "pay" on a daily basis. we wonder when we don't receive a call if it's because time doesn't allow, or something has gone wrong. we worry from the time we wake up till the time we go to sleep, and even then have fit full nights. we hear the concern in our loved ones voices, and cannot help but feel their own fears in addition to our own.

it is true that no one who has not "been there" can fully feel the impact of what it's like, nor will ever sacrifice what the men and women who have been there do and will... but i know you can see beyond yourself. i hope you can. your family feels their own share of concern, and you would be remiss to discount the burden they carry while hoping, waiting and praying for your safe return.

sure, soldiers bear the greatest burden, but it is the families and friends at home who carry them in their hearts and minds without cease. don't discount the impact war has on those not necessarily in the line of fire. if it were as simple and isolated as you describe consequence to be... there would be no debate about war.

[OklahomaTuba]

Lord help us that only those brave enough to volunteer for service & their families are the ones bearing the great burden, and that they don't have too for very much longer!

If we surrender to the jihadists, then all of us & our families will be bearing an even greater burden.

[usmc-sooner]

with all do respect, USMC, and thank you for your service-- but families of servicemen "pay" on a daily basis. we wonder when we don't receive a call if it's because time doesn't allow, or something has gone wrong. we worry from the time we wake up till the time we go to sleep, and even then have fit full nights. we hear the concern in our loved ones voices, and cannot help but feel their own fears in addition to our own.

it is true that no one who has not "been there" can fully feel the impact of what it's like, nor will ever sacrifice what the men and women who have been there do and will... but i know you can see beyond yourself. i hope you can. your family feels their own share of concern, and you would be remiss to discount the burden they carry while hoping, waiting and praying for your safe return.

sure, soldiers bear the greatest burden, but it is the families and friends at home who carry them in their hearts and minds without cease. don't discount the impact war has on those not necessarily in the line of fire. if it were as simple and isolated as you describe consequence to be... there would be no debate about war.

I specifically mentioned families of servicemen, I also mentioned civilian employees of the military, DOD. I got a little ticked when someone said they suffered cause their electric bill went up and gas for their pick up was too high.

I have no doubt being the parent, spouse, child, girlfriend of a serviceman would be the hardest of all three I mentioned above.

[leavingthezoo]

I specifically mentioned families of servicemen, I also mentioned civilian employees of the military, DOD. I got a little ticked when someone said they suffered cause their electric bill went up and gas for their pick up was too high.

I have no doubt being the parent, spouse, child, girlfriend of a serviceman would be the hardest of all three I mentioned above.

i got ya. also... those last two spek comments won't make sense unless they're read in order.

I NEGGED YOU PROFOUNDLY! ;) ;)

[Stoop Dawg]

I understand where USMC-Sooner is coming from. It must be galling to hear criticism of a war when our brave men and women have put their lives on the line, and in many cases pay the ultimate sacrifice, for that war cause.

On the other hand, our troops are fighting for the right for everyone, regardless of how informed and knowledgeable to openly express an opinion.

So, I have an opinion. It may not be popular or knowledgeable or even coherent.

1) If the consensus here is that the war in Iraq would have been started regardless of which party controlled the White House, shouldn’t that raise more than a few questions about the benefactors of this conflict?

2) Personally, I have doubts that the end result would be the same regardless of who was in the White House over the last six years. The unilateral approach of the early Bush administration did not play well in the international community. I know: international diplomacy doesn’t produce the desired and decisive action that is often needed. But, we had time on our side in this case. In hindsight the absence of weapons of mass destruction and misleading statements by the Bush administration only hurt us and helped them.

3) I do generally agree with the comments that it is better to fight the terrorists over there than to fight them here. I do disagree with the idea that we need to invade countries to do it. Bomb them, okay. Do like Mossad and assinate them. Like it or not, terrorism is here to stay and we don’t necessarily need state-sponsored terrorism, given the tech and motivations. Terrorism is cheap, particularly if they can brainwash young kids to kill themselves. In this regard, the US has been fortunate. Almost all other countries have to deal with it. In the future, we have to deal with it too. In my opinion, people dying because they lack basic health care is much more of a serious problem.

4) Regardless of the threat, our personal liberties should never be taken away. Spying on US citizens should never be allowed, unless reviewed by the impartial judge. Our checks and balances must be maintained, or the terrorists will succeed in turning us into them.

5) In economic terms, this war is a disaster. Everyone will have to pay for it – our children and grandchildren. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong. Didn’t in the early stages of the war, the Bush administration put out the idea that oil revenues would help pay for the liberation of Iraq? I wouldn’t be surprised if that is no longer a tenable proposal.

6) Servicemen cannot question the chain of command in uniform. Citizens can. The whole idea of putting our troops unnecessarily into harms way should be openly debated and not ever seen as unpatriotic.

So, I think our vote counts.

Nice post. Too bad it's virtually lost amid the other trash posted in this thread. I don't agree with every point, but I find your opinion at least rational.

Let me be the last to ever disparage our military or down-play their commitment and sacrifice in service to our great country. I have the utmost respect for those who risk their life for our country. It really doesn't matter whether you agree with the war or not, these men & women were called by their government and the responded to fulfill their duty. To them I say "Thank You".

Now, on the other hand, to say or imply that the only people who "suffer" because of the war is downright silly. I'll readily admit that I am not one who "suffers", but there are plenty who do. Ask yourself this simple question: What would our government have done with those Billions of dollars if it hadn't been spent on the war? Pay down the national debt? Stimulate our economy to stave off the inevitable recession? Address rising healthcare costs? Reform our welfare system? Reform our educational system? Build/repair roads so that we don't have bridges collapsing and killing people?Every dollar spent on the war is one less dollar spent on domestic issues.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm actually an advocate of the war in Iraq. I believe that the humanitarian issues alone justified removal of Saddam Hussein. SP and I debated this war endlessly back when it started.

To sum up: I think the war was justified. I sincerely appreciate the efforts (and suffering) of our service people and their families. And I think that the entire country has been impacted by the war in some fashion (some more than others, obviously).

[Harry Beanbag]

Ask yourself this simple question: What would our government have done with those Billions of dollars if it hadn't been spent on the war? Pay down the national debt? Stimulate our economy to stave off the inevitable recession? Address rising healthcare costs? Reform our welfare system? Reform our educational system? Build/repair roads so that we don't have bridges collapsing and killing people?Every dollar spent on the war is one less dollar spent on domestic issues.


The simple answer is nothing. The money spent on Iraq that didn't come out of the already slated defense budget would not have been spent on anything....anything useful at least.

This country's political infrastructure needs to be razed and started from scratch. Unfortunately we'll be riding it all the way into the ground and watch it burst into flames, along with the rest of the planet, before anything will change.

[Stoop Dawg]

The simple answer is nothing. The money spent on Iraq that didn't come out of the already slated defense budget would not have been spent on anything....anything useful at least.

This country's political infrastructure needs to be razed and started from scratch. Unfortunately we'll be riding it all the way into the ground and watch it burst into flames, along with the rest of the planet, before anything will change.

Well, that's a good point.

You know, I read a lot on this board about how everyone hates govt spending. I read very few posts about how we need a LARGER govt, MORE regulation, HIGHER taxes, and MORE spending. So how do we keep electing people who do just that?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Well, that's a good point.

You know, I read a lot on this board about how everyone hates govt spending. I read very few posts about how we need a LARGER govt, MORE regulation, HIGHER taxes, and MORE spending. So how do we keep electing people who do just that?The dems promise more taxes and more social spending, and roughly half the population wants that. They vote in the democrats.
The republicans that get elected promise what you say we on this board want, but too many of them DON'T DO what they say they will. The result is Big Brother, Nannystate, with a majority of the congress voting for socialism.

[Stoop Dawg]

The dems promise more taxes and more social spending, and roughly half the population wants that. They vote in the democrats.
The republicans that get elected promise what you say we on this board want, but too many of them DON'T DO what they say they will. The result is Big Brother, Nannystate, with a majority of the congress voting for socialism.

So what you're saying is that the Dems promise higher taxes and deliver it. The Reps LIE about lower taxes and then raise them. And the end result is the same.

Dude, you just trashed your own party and agreed with craw's original post. Kudos for gaining some perspective in your old age! ;)

[soonerscuba]

You know, I read a lot on this board about how everyone hates govt spending. I read very few posts about how we need a LARGER govt, MORE regulation, HIGHER taxes, and MORE spending. So how do we keep electing people who do just that?

You could take RLIMC's view... or Carl Albert's. Good Okie, and Speaker Albert once said "A good Congressman represents his district, a great one represents his nation". The vast majority of Congressmen pander chiefly to their district, and rail against spending in other districts. This has the unique effect also of making the approval ratings of individual Congressmen abnormally high and Congress as a whole abnormally low, all the time.

So the reason why spending is high is because every Congressman is essentially a whore, throwing out cash to his district so that he may continue to call himself a member of Congress. God bless America.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

So what you're saying is that the Dems promise higher taxes and deliver it. The Reps LIE about lower taxes and then raise them. And the end result is the same.

Dude, you just trashed your own party and agreed with craw's original post. Kudos for gaining some perspective in your old age! ;)You got it close, but not quite right. I said SOME republicans go against their promises. Unfortunately, enough of them to get pork passed, and social spending of all kinds. Whether they lied or just later decided to go democrat and try to buy votes with social spending, is irrelevant. The result is bad for the country.

Also, I previously left out the category of democrat that promises lower taxes and spending, but instead, inevitably "goes democrat". There are people that believe them when they promise lower taxes and spending, and vote for them. Do you know any of those voters?

[Harry Beanbag]

:mad:
You got it close, but not quite right. I said SOME republicans go against their promises. Unfortunately, enough of them to get pork passed, and social spending of all kinds. Whether they lied or just later decided to go democrat and try to buy votes with social spending, is irrevant. The result is bad for the country.

Also, I previously left out the category of democrat that promises lower taxes and spending, but instead, inevitably "goes democrat". There are people that believe them when they promise lower taxes and spending, and vote for them. Do you know any of those voters?


That's the one thing I respect about Hillary. At least she has the balls to come out and say she's going to **** everybody in the *** with taxes.

[Vaevictis]

Oh, and don't forget: The Republicans want to raise your taxes too, just not while they're in office.

That's essentially what operating on a deficit does -- it ensures higher taxes at a later date, or a delay in lowering them once there's no more interest to be paid on the debt (as it pushes out the date when the debt is paid down, and increases the interest paid).

[OklahomaTuba]

That's essentially what operating on a deficit does -- it ensures higher taxes at a later date, or a delay in lowering them once there's no more interest to be paid on the debt (as it pushes out the date when the debt is paid down, and increases the interest paid).

This would be right, if you ignore the last 25+ years of economic expansion thanks in part to lower taxes.

[Vaevictis]

This would be right, if you ignore the last 25+ years of economic expansion thanks in part to lower taxes.

This would be right, if you assume that the last 25+ years of economic expansion will continue to occur forever.

They had that same kind of thinking back in '29. We've been hit by that 2x4 before, and I guess we're going to have to get hit by it again, huh. Only this time, the government will be bankrupt too, so I guess it'll be more like a 4x6.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

This would be right, if you assume that the last 25+ years of economic expansion will continue to occur forever.

They had that same kind of thinking back in '29. We've been hit by that 2x4 before, and I guess we're going to have to get hit by it again, huh. Only this time, the government will be bankrupt too, so I guess it'll be more like a 4x6.Raising taxes and govt. spending will be like ordering some of that lumber to whack the economy.

[Vaevictis]

shrug, I'm not advocating raising government spending. I think it's more than plenty high already compared to receipts (thanks George!)

I'd rather see a draw down of expenses, a modest increase in taxes back to ~2000 levels, and a paydown of the debt.

Folks, this isn't a ****ing joke, and it's not a piddling number. FY2007 interest expense for the federal government is like $400 billion.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I'd rather see..... INCREASE in taxes back to ~2000 levels,

why, fergodssakes?Increases in taxes stifle the economy, and usually also result in less govt. revenue from taxation, due to the corresponding downsizing of the economy.

[Vaevictis]

Well ****, if short term effects on the economy are all you care about, let's cut taxes to zero, increase government spending to infinity, and let's have a ball. </sarcasm>

IMO, the 2000 tax rates were fine, and I (personally) attribute the economic "stimulation" more to the fact that the government has been on a spending spree since 2001 than any tax cuts.

[Stoop Dawg]

There are people that believe them when they promise lower taxes and spending, and vote for them. Do you know any of those voters?

So they way you explain it I have two options:

1. Vote for the person who says they will lower taxes & spending and be an idiot for getting "duped" when they do the opposite (doesn't matter which party, they both do it)

or

2. Vote for the person who says they will raise taxes & spending and be an idiot for voting for such a thing

Looks like I'm an idiot either way. I always suspected this was the case, but now it's confirmed.

[Stoop Dawg]

Oh, and debates on the economy are always craptastic.

I only took one (very basic) econ class in college, but I can tell you this for certain - there are far too many variables in our economy to point to one of them and say "this is the reason" for anything.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

So they way you explain it I have two options:

1. Vote for the person who says they will lower taxes & spending and be an idiot for getting "duped" when they do the opposite (doesn't matter which party, they both do it)

or

2. Vote for the person who says they will raise taxes & spending and be an idiot for voting for such a thing

Looks like I'm an idiot either way. I always suspected this was the case, but now it's confirmed. Point #2 is correct. On point #1, there's a POSSIBILITY the republican will be okay. (Unless he/she turns out to be a RINO) Not so much a possibility with the democrat, since their party platform is tax-and-spend.