Have to eat my words

[Alaska Darin]

Apparently, we lived in a utopian society prior to 2000.

Who knew?

I certainly missed the memo.

[molson_golden2002]

Yeah, all the messes facing America are Bush's doing. There's no piss poor decision making currently affecting us from the nearly 5 decades the Democrats had almost total control of the Legislative. You parrots are at least consistant. Stupid, but consistant.

Poor Dar Dar and his knee jerk reactions to criticisms of Bush. He calls me stupid when he misrepresents my very simple statement. Typical. Have to create a strawman to knock it down, doesn't he? America may have had problems without Bush, but this clown and all his supporters--a vast mass of ignorance, hate and passion--has certaintly increased the problems by several factors. Those tax cuts and spending increases sure hit the spot! The Iraq War--Mission Accomplished! The Israeli settlements? I believe Bush probably has the same view as many of the right wing idiots on this board do, hey, we stole land from the Indians, let Israel do the same thing! BTW, keep the subsidies coming to build the illegal settlements! Energy independence? Ya right, let's just rely more on imports and pretend there isn't a problem. The market will take care of everything. Stupid indeed Dar Dar, stupid indeed

[Alaska Darin]

Poor Dar Dar and his knee jerk reactions to criticisms of Bush. He calls me stupid when he misrepresents my very simple statement. Typical. Have to create a strawman to knock it down, doesn't he?

It has nothing to do with your criticism of President Bush. It has to do with the blind support you throw to people who're doing the very same things. The reason America continues to spiral downward is people like you, regardless of which side of the aisle you support.

America may have had problems without Bush, but this clown and all his supporters--a vast mass of ignorance, hate and passion--has certaintly increased the problems by several factors. Those tax cuts and spending increases sure hit the spot! The Iraq War--Mission Accomplished! The Israeli settlements? I believe Bush probably has the same view as many of the right wing idiots on this board do, hey, we stole land from the Indians, let Israel do the same thing! BTW, keep the subsidies coming to build the illegal settlements! Energy independence? Ya right, let's just rely more on imports and pretend there isn't a problem. The market will take care of everything. Stupid indeed Dar Dar, stupid indeed

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack! Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack! You are such a parrot. What exactly did your party accomplish on any of these issues over their decades of leadership? You partisans act as though each of these things is some new issue that's facing the country for the first time and that because the other party is in charge we can somehow forget all the mistakes that led up to the current situation. The fact is, each is a perpetuation of terrible policy and the movement away from the very piece of paper this country was founded upon - brought to you by BOTH major political parties and people like you who regurgitate the things your masters tell you.

 

Tell us again about the Electoral College.

[molson_golden2002]

It has nothing to do with your criticism of President Bush. It has to do with the blind support you throw to people who're doing the very same things. The reason America continues to spiral downward is people like you, regardless of which side of the aisle you support.

 

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack! Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack! You are such a parrot. What exactly did your party accomplish on any of these issues over their decades of leadership? You partisans act as though each of these things is some new issue that's facing the country for the first time and that because the other party is in charge we can somehow forget all the mistakes that led up to the current situation. The fact is, each is a perpetuation of terrible policy and the movement away from the very piece of paper this country was founded upon - brought to you by BOTH major political parties and people like you who regurgitate the things your masters tell you.

 

Tell us again about the Electoral College.

You are a scream. You really are. And so transparent. What you are doing is so see through I can't believe you even try it. Well, maybe I'm not surprised. Also surprising is that no one has called you on it--or maybe they have before I arrived. If the liberals do something wrong, they are horrible. If Bush does something wrong its both political parties to blame. You want it both ways. You ask what MY party accomplished on these issues, and I'll answer this way. Pre-Reagan both parties made major strides on conservation, but after he came along that was cast away, and yes, with some Democratic help, hello John Dingle of Detroit. On Israel Bush stands alone in his blind support of Israel. Carter made progress, Bush 1 serioulsy tried, Clinton tried, but this Bush is a complete lap dog to the right wing Israelis. And in a way its funny in the results. Give em enough rope as the saying goes, serves them right and hopefully they will wake up. Iraq is all Bush's fvck up. Pure and simple.

[/dev/null]

Pre-Reagan both parties made major strides on conservation, but after he came along that was cast away

 

When in doubt, blame Reagan for something

If that fails, call someone a Nazi

[molson_golden2002]

When in doubt, blame Reagan for something

If that fails, call someone a Nazi

Reagan is beyod reproach, eh? So many call him a 'Great' President. I wish someone would explain that to me

 

Speaking of calling people nazis,

 

Yad Vashem Council Chair slams settlers for abusing Palestinians

 

By Reuters and Haaretz Service

 

The head of the council of the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial on Saturday assailed Jewish settlers who harass Palestinians in the West Bank city of Hebron, saying the abuse recalled the anti-Semitism of pre-World War Two Europe.

 

A Yad Vashem spokeswoman told Haaretz that Yad Vashem Council Chairman Yosef (Tommy) Lapid's comments do not reflect the memorial center's position.

 

Lapid's unusually fierce and public attack was prompted by television footage showing a Hebron settler woman hissing "whore" at her Palestinian neighbor and settler children lobbing rocks at Arab homes.

 

 

 

 

Advertisement

 

Lapid, a Holocaust survivor who lost his father to the Nazi genocide, said in a weekly commentary on Israel Radio that the acts of some Hebron settlers reminded him of persecution endured by Jews in his native Yugoslavia on the eve of World War Two.

 

"It was not crematoria or pogroms that made our life in the diaspora bitter before they began to kill us, but persecution, harassment, stone-throwing, damage to livelihood, intimidation, spitting and scorn," Lapid said.

 

"I was afraid to go to school, because of the little anti-Semites who used to lay in ambush on the way and beat us up. How is that different from a Palestinian child in Hebron?"

 

Hebron has been a frequent flashpoint of more than six years of Israeli-Palestinian fighting. Some 400 settlers live there, under heavy military guard, among 150,000 Palestinians.

 

Hebron settlers were not immediately available to respond to Lapid's criticism, but Israel Radio broadcast earlier comments by the community's spokesman, Noam Arnon, in which he played down the televised harassments as "fringe incidents."

 

"In six years, 37 Jews have been murdered in Hebron, and now they're preoccupied with curses?" Arnon said.

 

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert ordered a cabinet-level probe last week into Palestinian allegations that abuse by Hebron settlers is commonplace and routinely ignored by Israel.

 

Deputy Defence Minister Ephraim Sneh said he hoped for a military crackdown against the settler "provocateurs", but Palestinian officials called for comprehensive action.

 

"If they are serious about coexistence, the Israelis must take practical steps on the hundreds of daily violations against Palestinians in the old city," Hebron Governor Arif Jabari said.

 

 

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/815603.html

 

But Carter is an antisemite?

[Alaska Darin]

You are a scream. You really are. And so transparent. What you are doing is so see through I can't believe you even try it. Well, maybe I'm not surprised. Also surprising is that no one has called you on it--or maybe they have before I arrived. If the liberals do something wrong, they are horrible. If Bush does something wrong its both political parties to blame. You want it both ways. You ask what MY party accomplished on these issues, and I'll answer this way. Pre-Reagan both parties made major strides on conservation, but after he came along that was cast away, and yes, with some Democratic help, hello John Dingle of Detroit. On Israel Bush stands alone in his blind support of Israel. Carter made progress, Bush 1 serioulsy tried, Clinton tried, but this Bush is a complete lap dog to the right wing Israelis. And in a way its funny in the results. Give em enough rope as the saying goes, serves them right and hopefully they will wake up. Iraq is all Bush's fvck up. Pure and simple.

And you are the very definition of why Lenin coined the term "Useful idiot."

[erynthered]

You are a scream. You really are. And so transparent. What you are doing is so see through I can't believe you even try it. Well, maybe I'm not surprised. Also surprising is that no one has called you on it--or maybe they have before I arrived. If the liberals do something wrong, they are horrible. If Bush does something wrong its both political parties to blame. You want it both ways. You ask what MY party accomplished on these issues, and I'll answer this way. Pre-Reagan both parties made major strides on conservation, but after he came along that was cast away, and yes, with some Democratic help, hello John Dingle of Detroit. On Israel Bush stands alone in his blind support of Israel. Carter made progress, Bush 1 serioulsy tried, Clinton tried, but this Bush is a complete lap dog to the right wing Israelis. And in a way its funny in the results. Give em enough rope as the saying goes, serves them right and hopefully they will wake up. Iraq is all Bush's fvck up. Pure and simple.

 

 

" Look Ma!, another Jew hater"

[molson_golden2002]

And you are the very definition of why Lenin coined the term "Useful idiot."

LOL, ya. You Libertarians are funny. Is that what you are? You do realize that Libertarianism is pie in the sky bull sh-- made for useful idiots like yourselves. As a governing philosophy its about as hairbrained as communism

[Alaska Darin]

LOL, ya. You Libertarians are funny. Is that what you are?

Why do you big party lovers feel the need to try and pidgeon hole everyone? I'm a registered independant. No party affiliation whatsoever. My belief system is far too complex to fit under any single party. Does some of it fit the Libertarian ideal? Sure it does. Does any of it have any Liberal component to it? Not really, when it gets down to the fundamentals. Mostly, I'm a Constitutionalist - something neither your party or the other has cared about since FDR raped Liberty over 70 years ago.

 

Thanks for parroting my historical reference. It's like you're a parody of yourself.

You do realize that Libertarianism is pie in the sky bull sh-- made for useful idiots like yourselves. As a governing philosophy its about as hairbrained as communism

Which is somehow different than the big government liberalism you're beholden to? You know, despite the overwhelming historical evidence that the absolute power you seek to give some faceless entity will corrupt it absolutely.

 

But tell me some more about how little I know about history and how smart you and the rest of the Liberals are.

[molson_golden2002]

Mostly, I'm a Constitutionalist - something neither your party or the other has cared about since FDR raped Liberty over 70 years ago.

 

Which is somehow different than the big government liberalism you're beholden to? You know, despite the overwhelming historical evidence that the absolute power you seek to give some faceless entity will corrupt it absolutely.

 

But tell me some more about how little I know about history and how smart you and the rest of the Liberals are.

This ought to be interesting. So tell me what a "Constitutionalist" believes. Just be specific. What New Deal programs are 'raping our liberty'? Please tell.

[Alaska Darin]

This ought to be interesting. So tell me what a "Constitutionalist" believes. Just be specific.

Do you honestly have to ask? Read the Constitution. If it's not specifically included, the Federal Government ought not be doing it. That covers just about everything you Liberals love, which are causing the demise of this country right under your ignorant noses.

 

What New Deal programs are 'raping our liberty'? Please tell.

Read Jim Powell's book on the subject. That pretty much covers it.

[PastaJoe]

Do you honestly have to ask? Read the Constitution. If it's not specifically included, the Federal Government ought not be doing it. That covers just about everything you Liberals love, which are causing the demise of this country right under your ignorant noses.

Read Jim Powell's book on the subject. That pretty much covers it.

 

Yeah, it's always those pinko liberals that want to control personal choice. Where does it ban abortion, drug use, same-sex marriage, or restrict what we can watch on network television to name a couple? Those are issues that self-proclaimed conservatives want to control.

[Chilly]

Yeah, it's always those pinko liberals that want to control personal choice. Where does it ban abortion, drug use, same-sex marriage, or restrict what we can watch on network television to name a couple? Those are issues that self-proclaimed conservatives want to control.

 

And thus AD's point that he's a constitutionalist, lol.

[molson_golden2002]

Do you honestly have to ask? Read the Constitution. If it's not specifically included, the Federal Government ought not be doing it. That covers just about everything you Liberals love, which are causing the demise of this country right under your ignorant noses.

Read Jim Powell's book on the subject. That pretty much covers it.

Chuckle, sorry but that's a debate that took place long ago and your side lost. I guess you are a Lincoln hater, too? Imposed the federal will on those nice old southerners he did. Tyrant! Here is why you are wrong about the "It's not in the Constitution" argument. Alexander Hamilton--you know, the guy who wrote many of the Federalist papers--was for a loose interpretation of the Constitution, as were many other Founding Fathers. Hell, even Jefferson was against the strict interpretation when it suited him. The Supreme Court has upheld the expansive powers under the 'necessary and proper clause' and the interstate commerce clause since John Marshall was on the court. So many of the things that have made us a great nation have come about because the government took the lead on making them happen and provided the funds. The Erie Canal, for instance, was a government [NY State]project and it enriched the nation many times over in the riches it gave to the nation. Buffalo wouldn't be here without it. Several questions:

 

Do you think the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is wrong? [it ended Jim Crow in public facilities]

 

Would you abolish the Food and Drug Administration? That's not in the Constitution

 

FDIC? When is the last time we had a run on a bank?

 

Redistribution of wealth? Is it ok to collect more money from rich people than average Americans?

 

Would you simply abolish Medicare?

 

 

Read Jim Powell's book on the subject. That pretty much covers it.

 

Actually, was wondering what you thought. Let me guess, he says the New Deal made the depression worse, or something? And again, I have accused you of preaching pie in the sky bull crude and that still stands. Dismanteling the entire apperatus of the Federal regulatory arm, its tax gathering system and the services it provides would be a recipe for anarchy. You are not much different than the communist at the other extreme of the political spectrum.

[Alaska Darin]

Chuckle, sorry but that's a debate that took place long ago and your side lost. I guess you are a Lincoln hater, too? Imposed the federal will on those nice old southerners he did. Tyrant! Here is why you are wrong about the "It's not in the Constitution" argument. Alexander Hamilton--you know, the guy who wrote many of the Federalist papers--was for a loose interpretation of the Constitution, as were many other Founding Fathers. Hell, even Jefferson was against the strict interpretation when it suited him. The Supreme Court has upheld the expansive powers under the 'necessary and proper clause' and the interstate commerce clause since John Marshall was on the court.

For every example you give, I can give contrary examples. At the end of the day, today's government is entirely too much like the one the American Revolution was fought against.

So many of the things that have made us a great nation have come about because the government took the lead on making them happen and provided the funds. The Erie Canal, for instance, was a government [NY State]project and it enriched the nation many times over in the riches it gave to the nation. Buffalo wouldn't be here without it. Several questions:

Again, why do you liberals always cite infrastructure examples, which are clearly Constitutional? The things that have made this nation great have little to do with government "leadership."

Do you think the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is wrong? [it ended Jim Crow in public facilities]

If the Constitution was actually being followed, the Jim Crow act wouldn't be necessary. Just as an amendment for/against Same Sex marriage wouldn't be.

Would you abolish the Food and Drug Administration? That's not in the Constitution

Absolutely.

FDIC? When is the last time we had a run on a bank?

Is that the measure of effectiveness? Are you kidding? Do you honestly think if large banks were allowed to fail that the Fed wouldn't happily just continue to print even more baseless currency, as they do today?

 

But thanks for naming an entity that receives no public funding.

Redistribution of wealth? Is it ok to collect more money from rich people than average Americans?

No. The taxation level in this country is criminal.

Would you simply abolish Medicare?

Yes. And within a generation it's quite likely that health care costs would drop exponentially and the same percentage of people would be covered. No matter how much money is thrown the government's way, virtually the same percentage of citizens go without - regardless of endeavor, while the cost of the endeavor climbs at a rate far higher than inflation. The numbers don't lie.

Actually, was wondering what you thought. Let me guess, he says the New Deal made the depression worse, or something? And again, I have accused you of preaching pie in the sky bull crude and that still stands. Dismanteling the entire apperatus of the Federal regulatory arm, its tax gathering system and the services it provides would be a recipe for anarchy. You are not much different than the communist at the other extreme of the political spectrum.

Read the book. I could care less what yet another lemming thinks about my politics. You've done nothing here other than regurgitate party speak or basically admit you have nothing more than cursory knowledge of subjects. You'll just have to forgive me for not giving a crap in your direction.

[molson_golden2002]

1 For every example you give, I can give contrary examples. At the end of the day, today's government is entirely too much like the one the American Revolution was fought against.

 

2 Again, why do you liberals always cite infrastructure examples, which are clearly Constitutional? The things that have made this nation great have little to do with government "leadership."

 

3 If the Constitution was actually being followed, the Jim Crow act wouldn't be necessary. Just as an amendment for/against Same Sex marriage wouldn't be.

 

4 Absolutely.

 

5 Is that the measure of effectiveness? Are you kidding? Do you honestly think if large banks were allowed to fail that the Fed wouldn't happily just continue to print even more baseless currency, as they do today?

 

6 No. The taxation level in this country is criminal.

 

7 Yes. And within a generation it's quite likely that health care costs would drop exponentially. No matter how much money is thrown the government's way, virtually the same percentage of citizens go without - regardless of endeavor, while the cost of the endeavor climbs at a rate far higher than inflation. The numbers don't lie.

 

.

1 Do it then. No, the colonists couldn't vote, we can.

 

2 No, look at the Whig party, they were for a loose interpretation of government to build infrastructure the Small government, strict Constitutionalists were against it. The government built it and it worked great. Also, the government pioneered the internet, radar--huge impact--and the space program which led to many, many spin offs. The government is a positive good.

 

3 The Civil Rights Act of 1964 told private businesses they had to serve blacks. Without the law Blacks wouldn't be able to stay in hotels, eat at restaurants, etc. So abolish that law?

 

4 Great, back to the days of poisoned food and drugs that "cure" anything

 

5 That isn't the point. FDIC helps the economy by instilling confidence in the banks. Banks make the capitalist world go round ya know

 

6 Yup, we are being starved to death by taxation, even though we have the highest standard of living in world history. Yup, good point there

 

7 Will you personally go around and kick the old ladies out of nursing homes who are there on medicade? What about the sick kid getting cancer treatment on Medicade? Health care won't get any cheaper if the government pulls the plug on it, just fewer people will get treatment, that's all.

[JimBob2232]

1 Do it then. No, the colonists couldn't vote, we can.

 

2 No, look at the Whig party, they were for a loose interpretation of government to build infrastructure the Small government, strict Constitutionalists were against it. The government built it and it worked great. Also, the government pioneered the internet, radar--huge impact--and the space program which led to many, many spin offs. The government is a positive good.

 

3 The Civil Rights Act of 1964 told private businesses they had to serve blacks. Without the law Blacks wouldn't be able to stay in hotels, eat at restaurants, etc. So abolish that law?

 

4 Great, back to the days of poisoned food and drugs that "cure" anything

 

5 That isn't the point. FDIC helps the economy by instilling confidence in the banks. Banks make the capitalist world go round ya know

 

6 Yup, we are being starved to death by taxation, even though we have the highest standard of living in world history. Yup, good point there

 

7 Will you personally go around and kick the old ladies out of nursing homes who are there on medicade? What about the sick kid getting cancer treatment on Medicade? Health care won't get any cheaper if the government pulls the plug on it, just fewer people will get treatment, that's all.

Yeah, I agree with AD on alot of issues, but I cant make a case for abolishing the FDA. Reducing its role, sure, but eliminating it seems absurd to me. There are certain roles of government which i think are necessary (though these are FAR FAR fewer than what we currently have). For a constitutional reference, I feel it falls under "providing for the general welfare of the United States"

 

The FDIC was created after the great depression, when many banks went under, thus exacerbating the problem. I dont know that this is a) still necessary, b) Cost-effective c) couldnt be handled by private organizations or d) a good idea to eliminate it. I need to research the cost/benefits of the FDIC before making a real opinion, but on its surface, I would have to think this is minimal cost for the protection it affords the banking industry.

 

Medicare, and lets throw all health care in this pile is a racket. Insurance is expensive because Research and Development costs are high and people want to pay $3 for prescription drugs and doctors visits. Insurance is insurance. Insurance against the tragic happening and you not being able to afford the repairs. Insurance is for when your house burns down, not when you have to replace a window. Insurance is for when your car gets totaled, not when you find a dent in the drivers door. Insurance is for when you need a kidney removed, not for when you need an annual physical. This is one (big) reason insurance is so darn high. The government has no role in subsidising health care, because THAT DOESNT LOWER THE COST OF HEALTH CARE. We need to look into things that actually reduce the cost of healthcare.

 

Go ahead, appeal the civil rights law. Does that make it legal to treat blacks poorly, bar them from hotels, etc.? No. Would it change the way people act? No. We have grown up since then as a country. The biggest reason racism still exists today is because we talk about it. We say we are all equal, then we keep trying to put everyone into neat little groups. He is a liberal. He is a conservative. He is white. He is black. He is Jewish. Get over it.

[Alaska Darin]

Yeah, I agree with AD on alot of issues, but I cant make a case for abolishing the FDA. Reducing its role, sure, but eliminating it seems absurd to me. There are certain roles of government which i think are necessary (though these are FAR FAR fewer than what we currently have). For a constitutional reference, I feel it falls under "providing for the general welfare of the United States"

 

The FDIC was created after the great depression, when many banks went under, thus exacerbating the problem. I dont know that this is a) still necessary, b) Cost-effective c) couldnt be handled by private organizations or d) a good idea to eliminate it. I need to research the cost/benefits of the FDIC before making a real opinion, but on its surface, I would have to think this is minimal cost for the protection it affords the banking industry.

 

Medicare, and lets throw all health care in this pile is a racket. Insurance is expensive because Research and Development costs are high and people want to pay $3 for prescription drugs and doctors visits. Insurance is insurance. Insurance against the tragic happening and you not being able to afford the repairs. Insurance is for when your house burns down, not when you have to replace a window. Insurance is for when your car gets totaled, not when you find a dent in the drivers door. Insurance is for when you need a kidney removed, not for when you need an annual physical. This is one (big) reason insurance is so darn high. The government has no role in subsidising health care, because THAT DOESNT LOWER THE COST OF HEALTH CARE. We need to look into things that actually reduce the cost of healthcare.

 

Go ahead, appeal the civil rights law. Does that make it legal to treat blacks poorly, bar them from hotels, etc.? No. Would it change the way people act? No. We have grown up since then as a country. The biggest reason racism still exists today is because we talk about it. We say we are all equal, then we keep trying to put everyone into neat little groups. He is a liberal. He is a conservative. He is white. He is black. He is Jewish. Get over it.

May I suggest reading a few books from the alternative point of view? You got Medicare right (it's a racket). The FDA is no different. There's plenty of information out there on how many lives have been lost waiting on drug approval, keeping Vioxx on the shelf while killing Ephedra (look up the stats on those two and figure out which one shoulda got the axe), the sheer economic impact of that process, the fact that there is truly no long term testing. The FDA essentially gives us cigarette warning labels while making Enron look like a responsible company. Whoo hoo.

[JimBob2232]

May I suggest reading a few books from the alternative point of view? You got Medicare right (it's a racket). The FDA is no different. There's plenty of information out there on how many lives have been lost waiting on drug approval, keeping Vioxx on the shelf while killing Ephedra (look up the stats on those two and figure out which one shoulda got the axe), the sheer economic impact of that process, the fact that there is truly no long term testing. The FDA essentially gives us cigarette warning labels while making Enron look like a responsible company. Whoo hoo.

 

I dont believe for a minute that the FDA is not bloated and couldnt stand for a revamping...but I think eliminating it entirely is a disasterous idea. You claim they kept vioxx on the shelf an killed ephedra, and then you claim that vioxx should have gotten the cut. Yet without an FDA, they BOTH would have been on the market, along with many other drugs with even worse (or at least more widespread) side effects. Im not going to make the case for keeping either on the shelf, because im not a medical expert, and because I am not familiar too much with the drugs, but clearly there is a good reason to have an oversight body for food and drugs.

 

I'm open to any alternative points of view. They just need to be well constructed and thought out. If I can punch a hole in it the size of texas, its a waste of my time. Any books you reccomend?