« British Prime Minister Tony Blair Condemns Terrorist Attacks | Main | Cheney's Surprise Visit to Iraq »

September 12, 2005

Is Bush to Blame for Katrina's Aftermath?

Debate continues as to whether or not the Bush Administration is to blame for what has been called a slow evacuation and restoration of order to New Orleans after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina.

According to the Associated Press, "more than half of respondents in an Associated Press-Ipsos poll last week said [Bush] is at fault for the slow response" to Katrina's aftermath.

Critics blame Bush for leaving valuable resources - money and manpower - in Iraq, instead of moving them to New Orleans and other areas hit by Katrina. Some critics also argue race may have played a part in the slow evacuation of New Orleans after Katrina devastated the city.

Defenders of Bush say that there are more than enough troops for both Iraq and Katrina's aftermath. And according to an AP article, Bush "said Congress should consider whether the federal government should have more authority to step into disaster areas [of Katrina] without a request from the states."

What do you think? Is Bush to blame for Katrina's poor evacuation and slow recovery, or are state and local governments at fault for Katrina's sloppy evacuation and the past anarchy of New Orleans? Do you think race played an issue in the initial and later evacuations due to Katrina?

Posted by Tuck at September 12, 2005 12:09 PM

Comments

Is Bush to Blame for Katrina's Aftermath?

Yes, Tuck, he shares some of the blame.

Posted by: Henry at September 12, 2005 11:34 PM

90% of the blame belongs to the Governor and Mayor for their total incompetance. With the facts coming in now, many are calling the Mayor a mass murderer. I think they both should be fired for their gross disregard for following the plans that were put into place, which resulted in the death of hundreds.

They should also be put in jail for their corruption where they stole the money for the levees and used it for political uses. Now you may be able to argue that they are total idiots, but I think we will find total corruption in the local and state government as the core cause for this fiasco.

The mayor never evacuated the poor and the governor kept the red cross out of the stadium so that the people could not get food or water. Also the governor didn't call for the National Guard until too late, even though that is her job.

The president called for the evacuation of New Orleans two days before the storm hit. The fact that they disregarded his warnings doesn't sit well with people of this country.

It sounds like deliberate action on the part of state and local government, but an investigation will tell more.

We're getting a very clear picture of what a complete Democratic society does to create poverty and corruption. Look at the differences in Mississippi where the storm was even more damaging.

Liberalism kills !!

Posted by: Ted at September 13, 2005 10:17 AM

I thought this was a good comparison:

-------------------------
2. Clinton's Disaster Response Took Longer Than Bush's

Critics say President Bush's personal response to the Hurricane Katrina disaster was too little, too late - with an Air Force One flyover the day after New Orleans' levees broke and a trip to Baton Rouge two days later.

President Clinton, on other the other hand, got glowing reviews for responding to his administration's biggest disaster, the Oklahoma City bombing - even though he took a day longer to arrive on the scene than Bush did last week.

New Orleans' levees broke on a Tuesday - and Bush had his own boots-on-the-ground just three days later on Friday.
When the Alfred P. Murrah Building exploded on Wednesday morning, April 19, 1995, President Clinton didn't travel to the scene for four full days.

And when he finally arrived, there was no grumbling by troubled pundits about the delay. In fact, Clinton's response to Oklahoma City is remembered to this day as the turning point of his political fortunes.

Writing this week in New York Magazine, John Heilemann recalls Clinton's April 23 speech about the bombing:

"With breathtaking subtlety and nimbleness, Clinton used that act of terrorism to illustrate the dangers of the wild-eyed anti-government rhetoric then in vogue among the Gingrichian GOP - a move that set him on the road to political redemption."

The real difference, of course, was that Clinton had a sympathetic media that was just as anxious as he was to blame the disaster on right wing Republicans. Bush, on the other hand, faces a press corps that couldn't wait to use Katrina against him.

The double standard becomes even more obvious when reaction to Katrina is compared with what remains the worst law enforcement debacle in U.S. history - the Clinton administration's decision to rout the Branch Davidians from their encampment at Waco.

More children were killed in that April 19, 1993, assault than died in Oklahoma City. Yet the Clinton administration received little if any blame - and no one was forced to resign.

In fact, after then-Attorney General Janet Reno publicly accepted responsibility, she was hailed as a hero by sympathetic reporters, an irony that's likely not lost on Bush's allegedly "disgraced" ex-FEMA Director Michael Brown.
----------------------

Never tell me there isn't a double standard.

Posted by: Caine at September 13, 2005 10:58 PM

Has anyone seen any of the John Robert's hearings? If you're not familiar with him, he's the Supreme Court judge nominated by the President to replace Renquist. Right now he's going through the confirmation process.

(Sorry, Tuck, but there was no section on this, so I put it here.)

It's really quite funny watching all those rich idiots in congress trying their best to sound intelligent and stump an obvious intellectual giant in comparison to them.

Today, Teddy Kennedy was fumbling around with notes someone wrote for him, and he didn't even understand his own questions. He seemed drunk, but maybe he's always confused like that. He's like Beavis & Butt-head all rolled into one guy. Trust me, it was really funny. I was rolling with laughter. Shumer and Reid made fools of themselves yesterday.

I feel like I'm watching the 3 stooges try to outwit an Einstein. While they shuffle papers and try to come up with hard questions, the judge is busy talking rings around them. It's really quite amusing. He seems to be an extremely intelligent man, honest and forthright. He even corrected the senators when they made mistakes in their questions.

He'll probably get confirmed since every president gets that priviledge. I think he's a moderate or a moderate conservative, but it won't help the Supreme Court much since there are still the 5 out of 9 in place who are ultra-liberals working to dismantle the constitution and further take away our freedoms.

If you remember, the lastest attack on our freedom came when those same 5 ultra left wing members voted to take away people's property and sell it to the highest bidder. Hopefully that ruling will be overturned if Roberts gets in, but if it's not, we should all contact our state representatives and have that issue brought up. Don't worry about it if you don't mind having your property seized, or don't own property or a house, or if you simply don't care about our freedoms going away.

But if you do care about freedom, both conservative as well as liberal homeowners should be very concerned over this ruling.

But for now, let's enjoy the show. Watch it if you can, it's hilarious !! More fun than a TV Land sitcom. Maybe Jon Stewart will show excerpts... well, probably not. Catch it live and laugh your head off !!

Posted by: Eve at September 15, 2005 02:02 PM

Now that we know the truth, in order to save face, Blanco, the Governor of Louisiana, has changed her tune. Now she's taking full responsibility for the bungling of the Katrina situation.

Here's a short quote of the news:

-----------------

Most observers blamed the White House for the blunder - a misconception that was thoroughly dispelled by the governor's inadvertent confession.
Some say Blanco's blooper was responsible for the abrupt change of tone in her speech Wednesday night to the Louisiana legislature.

Where earlier she and her aides had openly blamed the Bush administration for bungling Katrina rescue efforts, Blanco announced: "The buck stops here, and as your governor, I take full responsibility."

Just as surprising were Blanco's words of praise for the White House: "I want the people of Louisiana to know that we have a friend and a partner in President George W. Bush. I thank you, Mr. President."

--------------------

I think that's a good thing. Her reaching out in a crisis is refreshing.

Posted by: Jane T at September 16, 2005 02:50 PM

This is about the embarrassing note that Reuters caught the president writing at the United Nations. Ellis Henican, an editor of New York's Newsday newspaper, compared the UN General Assembly to that of the third grade. Here is a funny play in which Bush asks Condi if he could use the bathroom. When you gotta go, you gotta go.

PRESIDENT BUSH TRIES TO ANSWER NATURE'S CALL AT UN

Dubya: I think I MAY NEED A BATHroom break? Is that possible?

Condi: What's with the funky capital letters? Didn't you go to Yale?

Dubya: But I spent every night in the DKE house, not the library. Remember, I'm the C minus student who got to be president. So can I?

Condi: Can you - what?

Dubya: Can I go? To the BATHroom?

Condi: Mr. President, you're the President of the United States, the leader of the free world, the most powerful man on the planet...

Dubya: So?

Condi: ...and you're asking me if you can make pee-pee?

Dubya: But I really have to!

Condi: See if you can hold it, OK?

Dubya: You want me getting kidney stones, like Rove has?

Condi: MR. President, that's not how you get kidney stones.

Dubya: But all this talking - about terrorism and poverty and who-knows-what-else. It's hard to pay attention for hours like this.

Condi: Actually, it's only been 20 minutes now. And you know I warned you...you shoulda gone before.

Dubya: Who's the guy up there now?

Condi: That's Kofi Annan. He's the secretary-general. It's like the manager of a baseball team, only it's not a baseball team. It's the UN.

Dubya: He's a good man, Kofi Annan. Maybe I'll raise my hand and ask him if I could go to the BATHroom instead.

Condi: If I were you, Mr. President, I wouldn't call any more attention to myself. Those photographers have long lenses, you know. They're pointing them at us. If you're not careful passing notes, the secretary-general just might do what your third-grade teacher did.

Dubya: What?

Condi: Call you up to the front of the room and say, "Mr. Bush, maybe you'd like to share that note with EVERYBODY!"

Dubya: I always hated when the teacher did that.

Condi: Well, just try to pay attention. It'll make the time go quicker. All the big leaders are here today.

Dubya: Yeah, yeah, but let me ask you something. Bill Clinton's not president anymore. So how come all the other leaders are still talking about him?

Condi: He's hosting his own world summit now. He said you could come.

Dubya: So you think my dad likes Bill Clinton more than he likes me?

Condi: Don't say that! He likes you plenty, even if you didn't listen to his fancy friends who warned you not to go into Iraq. Your dad understands, every Bush has to be his own president.

Dubya: Maybe so. But the way he talks to Clinton about all that policy stuff, I think he might like him better than he likes me.

Condi: Clinton's a bright guy. He has an intricate grasp of the issues. He's comfortable speaking extemporaneously. He thinks quickly on his feet. And he has that amazing way of feeling peoples' pain - well, like with Katrina, let's just say he wouldn't have done that little Gulf Coast flyover and called it a day. But don't worry, your dad still loves you.

Dubya: I just hope the next time I'm in Kennebunkport, his big buddy Bill isn't sleeping in my old room.

Condi: Maybe you should stop appointing Clinton to all those disaster-relief missions with your dad. It only encourages them.

Dubya: You're probably right. So can I go to the BATHroom now?

Condi: No.

Dubya: Let me know when. I'll bet they wouldn't make Bill Clinton hold it in.

Condi: He'd have gone before the meeting started. Maybe there's a lesson in there.

THE END

And Ted, I read your message on the other blog. Boy, that was the longest post I ever read. You're a smart young man. I'll respond to it in a few days, okay? Talk to you later.

Posted by: Henry at September 18, 2005 08:47 PM

Thanks Henry, I appreciate that.

I just read a scientific account that attributes global warming to solar activity that has increased somewhat over the past 100 or so years. In fact, global warming is now affecting Mars. Can you believe that? The polar ice caps there are shown to be melting.

So global warming may be something to be concerned about, but it clearly isn't caused by humans and it certainly can't be stopped by us either. We're just these tiny little organisms in this vast universe, and to think we affect any of it even remotely is kind of narcissistic if you asked me.

Keep learning, and let me know about any ideas that concern you.

I noticed most have left this site. I was even sad to see that little socialist girl quit coming here. Her last blog was about how she went to France and they weren't allowed to have air conditioning there and she thought that was such a good idea that maybe we should be not allowed to have it here in the US either. Sadly, she's a product of our failing public education system. In actuality, France would love to have air conditioning, but they are so backwards that their electrical grids can't handle the power draw. And I don't know where she lives, but I couldn't live without air conditioning, could you?

I guess that's why she called herself "Flaming Socialist" or something like that.

Later...

Posted by: Ted at September 21, 2005 02:22 PM

Mars has global warming? Wow I didn't know that. Well, we humans can't stop mother nature so we can't prevent hurricanes either.

Blanco and Nagin (the New Orleans mayor) just sat on their asses doing nothing while their people suffered the brunt of Katrina. That was pretty honorable of President Bush to accept responsibility but that doesn't mean we should let the Louisiana governor and the mayor of New Orleans off the hook. Blanco and Nagin screwed up big time and they both should be voted out of office for their ineptitude and stupidity.

Flaming Liberal lives in Florida and she wants to ban air conditioners? She's only 14 or 15 years old so I would cut her some slack. Hey if you think having no air conditioner here in the good old US is unthinkable, think about how American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are doing. They have to work out in the boiling desert but that's the least of their problems because they have to look out for terrorists who want to kill them.

Posted by: Henry at September 21, 2005 10:03 PM

They say that only 1 out of 10,000 people can name our Supreme Court justices, so I've come up with a simple mnemonic.

The liberal judges are: KGB SS.
That's Kennedy, Ginsberg, Bryer, Suiter & Stevens. (oddly, Suiter was supposed to be conservative, but he turned.)

The conservative ones are easy because there are only 2.
ST: Scalia & Thomas.

That's only 7. The other two spots are being filled. Roberts for Renquist, who just died recently. And another, possibly a woman, will be nominated soon (hopefully) to replace Sandra Day O'Conner.

I say we put more conservatives in to counteract the strong ultra-left leanings of the court as it stands now.

The best illustration is the liberal belief that government should take more individual freedoms from the people. That's why the Kelo vs New Haven ruling will jeopardize all owners of private property.

It's too bad the Democratic party has been taken over by the kook fringe. I blame that McCain bill that let rich radicals contribute more money than before. Since they are now owned by the George Soros' & Michael Moores' of the world, they no longer do what the people who voted for them request.

I miss the old Democratic party that was fair and tolerant and compassionate. I'm not a full fledged conservative, but I will never support the Democrats again now that they are owned by the socialist (liberal) party.

I hope the mnemonic helps. Next time someone asks if you know the Supreme Court Judges, just think: Liberals = KGB + SS, Conservatives = ST.

Posted by: Eve at September 22, 2005 11:11 AM

Yeah, I guess you're right Henry, she *is* just a kid, but it worries me that many school children aren't learning anything worth a damn and they no longer seem to be able to think logically. They know the winners of reality TV, but don't even know who the Supreme Court Justices are. I know political science is boring, but if us young people don't start paying attention, we'll wish we had one day.

That segued into Eve's posting. Thanks Eve for that mnemonic tool. I never can keep it straight. I know there are 9 and I know most are ultra-liberal/socialist, but naming them has always been troublesome. Your method will help. You know, they asked on Street Smarts how many there are and no one had any idea. I like that show, but it's scary. They did a whole show on how many states in the US and hardly anyone got it right. They even asked school teachers and they said things like "Uh, I think there's 48 states now." These are TEACHERS of our children !!! One guy said he thought there were about 55 by now. What does he think, we're creating new states every year?? Pretty funny, but, like I said, a little scary as well.

Actually, our schools would do better if the useless teachers' unions could be thrown out. They sit around and collect millions a year from the taxpayers. No wonder the money never gets to the teachers. Why do you think everyone is turning to home-schooling?

Another segue: Henry, you said you go to college there in NY. Colleges are very hostile environments for anyone going against the liberal tenets. I've read numerous stories of pro-American campus groups having death threats against them. Free speech is not a thing liberals hold dearly. (Unless it's what they believe, that is.) Most people I talk to say that they just ignore the biases in college and that way they get fairly graded. About 95% of "professors" around the country are left-wing, so those that oppose that belief don't speak out much if they don't want to get an F when they deserve an A.

Sad that it's not fair, but if we work on some of the solutions and always question what we're told, maybe everything will work out ok. Keep a positive outlook, and if you want to speak out against liberals, do it at your own risk.

Take it easy Henry and thanks a lot Eve.

Posted by: Ted at September 23, 2005 01:06 PM

Henry, I forgot to tell you. I know you don't like to be told what to read, but I'm suggesting you read "Unholy Alliance" by David Horowitz. It's not really a left vs right kind of book. He actually was one of the founders of the New Left movement of the 60's. The book is easy reading. It explains the Islamic religion and its plans for this country and our people. A must read for anyone even slightly concerned about Islamofascism and how it relates to world terrorism.

Oh, and one other thing. Do you remember when over 15,000 old people died in France last summer because of a heat wave that struck that region? Maybe not, but it happened. You see, it was really hot last summer so all the younger French went to the beach and left their old relatives to die of the heat. Seems to me that not being allowed to have air conditioning actually killed these people. Perhaps "Flaming Socialist" didn't read about that news.

Well, take care...

Posted by: Ted at September 23, 2005 01:49 PM

Did anyone see the news that the revenue created by the tax cuts a few years ago is more than enough to pay for the Katrina disaster?

Just shows that the best way to increase money for the government is to lower taxes. It works every time it's done.

One other note: I heard Hillary and others saying bad things about a Photo ID card for all voters. Even though it's free and in some cases they'll even go out to your house to make you one, some Democrats (not all) are against it. I think the ones against it are the ones who have something to hide. Remember it was Hillary who was thought to have cheated on her Senate election. I guess a voter card would stop all that voter fraud that mostly the Democrats are guilty of. Funny thing, isn't it?

Posted by: Eve at September 23, 2005 06:30 PM

Hey Henry, your bit on our troops having it rough in the desert reminded me how outraged people were to find out that the terrorists we keep in Gitmo (Guantanimo Bay) are getting gourmet meals while our troops have to eat K-rations. We treat murders of our innocent people with more care than our own people sometimes. Astonishing.

Oddly, when offered K-rations, a hurricane victim in New Orleans threw it down and refused to eat it. I guess even the poor and unfortunate are too spoiled to eat what our troops eat every day.

Keep up the support for our troops, and ignore the kooks like Phil Donahue, Moveon.org, and all those creeps in the House and Senate: Rangel, Pelosi, Boxer, Kennedy, Clinton, Reid, Byrd etc etc. Whew, I forgot how many anti-americans there were in office. I'm a little surprised I remember that many. Mind-boggling isn't it? Their negativity works on some, but I get the notion that it's not working as well as they hoped.

Posted by: Ted at September 24, 2005 12:15 PM

You got a point there on the lack of education in this country, Ted. Do you know that some young Americans actually think that the United States won its independence from Russia or even Japan? And that most of them have no clue who the Vice President of the US is?

This was even highlighted in the documentary "Supersize Me." It's about a guy who eats nothing but McDonald's for an entire month. Michael Moore should watch this documentary because look how big this guy's waistline is, he's not only a far-left radical, he is also a walking bowling ball for gosh sake. The scene in this documentary that I'm talking about is when we're shown that a couple of obese teenagers know all those McDonald's commercials word-for-word but they have no idea how to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Looks like their precious fast food is more important than their country.

This country is getting too fat. 65% of the American population is either overweight or obese. Because of our laziness and sedentary lifestyles, the Japanese could catch up to us in technological innovations. Wake up, America! Get your fat ass off that couch and exercise. And stop eating all that fast food garbage. Fewer and fewer American kids are playing sports because of all those damn video games like xbox or playstation. We should start watching what we eat and work out more otherwise the American life expectancy will start to decrease.

Posted by: Henry at September 26, 2005 04:05 PM

And Cindy Sheehan was just arrested in Washington DC. I'd say it serves her right. If I had a relative in Iraq and she called my relative's killer a "freedom fighter" I would put a big dent in her skull.

Could you believe that some of these anti-war protestors are calling the United States of America the "Fourth Reich"? Saying that terrorists HAVE THE RIGHT to kill Americans and comparing our great country to Hitler's Nazi empire should be considered treason against the United States of America. These misguided people are actually helping the terrorists rather than our troops. Typical that the left-wing "media" doesn't make a big deal out of this anti-American hatred. It's one thing to oppose the Iraq War but to call the terrorists killing our troops "freedom fighters" and showing any sypmathy for our enemies is ABSOLUTELY disgraceful and disgusting. How can any American soldier who returned from Iraq support Sheehan? Believe it or not, some American veterans from the Iraq War are defending Sheehan's actions:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/prweb/20050922/bs_prweb/prweb288010_2

But the anti-war protestors can say whatever the hell they want, even if it means dragging the very same soldiers who died for that freedom of speech through the mud. That's why the United States is the greatest country on the face of the planet.

Posted by: Henry at September 26, 2005 04:31 PM

You're welcome, Ted. I hope it helps next time someone asks you to name the members of the Supreme Court. I definitely agree that we need to be more aware of what's going on. We've been spoon-fed garbage for decades and it's time we took the trouble to find out the truth.

And no more pickin on FL you guys. She's just a little confused. I know I was confused when I was her age. Besides, she's not here to defend herself and now may never return.

Posted by: Eve at September 26, 2005 10:11 PM

Not only do we treat murderers better than our own people, how about the way we watch out for animals more than humans? Or the way we disregard unborn babies and cherish the life of a known rapist?

Posted by: Wayne at September 26, 2005 11:19 PM

Wayne, good to hear from you. I agree the double standard outrageous as well as ridiculous. If I have to pick between the life of a child and an animal, I have to choose the child. Peta doesn't feel that way at all. Funny we don't hear from Peta much anymore. I guess without the airhead hollywood nuts on their side they have no voice anymore.

I also don't like the practice of removing a baby that is ready to be born from the womb and then sticking a needle in it's brain to kill it. Abortion rights have gone way too far !! This practice is barbaric !! I'm for abortion if it's necessary and we don't even need Roe vs Wade for that.

Well, there are million issues to discuss and fix. What a mess we've let this country become. But I think we're starting to wake up to the mess. That's a start.

Henry, well said buddy. Good info. One thing I just found out was the one of the groups supporting the Anti-US Sheehan protesters is actually completely funded by a bunch of old communists. No surprise there...

Does anyone remember the name of the group? I know Moveon is there, but this new group has "Answer" in their name, I think.

Posted by: Ted at September 27, 2005 01:14 PM

According to Bill O'Reilly and the Fox News people, more revenue is going to the federal government than coming out of it due to the tax cuts. I'm not sure if I can believe that. I'm still convinced those tax cuts benefit the wealthy MUCH more than the middle class. Paying for two wars and now paying for rebuilding New Orleans and Galveston without raising taxes? That is going to explode the budget deficit and bankrupt our Treasury. When it comes to fiscal policy, President Bush is the most liberal president ever. We're going to have to pay for Dubya's fiscal irresponsibility sooner or later.

Posted by: Henry at September 27, 2005 07:57 PM

Katrina already caused more than $200 billion in damages. As if that wasn't enough, Rita ruined everything again about a month later. The US Senate approved a bill of up to $10.5 billion for the Katrina victims. The president then proposed another bill of up to $51.8 billion. This is all going to hurricane relief, plus $50 billion more for expenses in Iraq and Afghanistan. With the exception of a few fires, Galveston was spared but southeastern Texas was badly hit along with southwestern Louisiana.

The projected deficit for fiscal year 2004 was $412.6 billion. According to the CBO, the deficit is supposed to shrink under Bush's second term but it does not take into account the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and neither the damages caused by natural disasters. If I were president (I certainly like the sound of President Smith), I would repeal the tax cuts because raising taxes is the only way to pay for all these projects and reduce the deficit in the quickest way possible.

Posted by: Henry at September 27, 2005 08:59 PM

No offense, Henry, but I'll bet your major isn't in economics.

If you look at the history of our debt you'll see that every time taxes go down, revenues increase and deficits decrease. It's part of the economic supply and demand cycle.

One thing you can always depend on is the if the taxes are lowered the economy prospers. Spending increases and revenues increase. Just a fact of life. Kinda like socialism always fails every time it's tried. Even disguised as liberalism it fails.

Now if we can just get the Fair Tax passed we can bring back jobs to the US and cause an economic boom not seen since income tax was put into place.

Remember, the tax breaks were for all tax payers, despite what the leftist media says. It's hard to ignore the lies they tell, but it's getting easier.

Speaking of lying media, Dan Rather was interviewed recently and can you believe that guy still thinks the forged papers were real? I think he's been telling lies so long he can't even see reality when it's put right before his eyes. Or maybe he's brain-dead. Whatever, he's no longer influencing the well-informed.

Posted by: Ted at September 28, 2005 11:55 PM

Whoa... didn't realize I was being talked about on this blog... it's been a while. I am officially done posting on this site. With school work and tennis, and everything, I just don't have time. It was a lot of fun coming on this site, but I really need to at least take a break. As far as the comments about me being misled or ignorant, I'm not. I have nothing to prove to any of you and I am very happy with my education. I go to a school where I am in the minority, so don't think I am taking what I'm "spoonfed."
And, I must say I find it amazing some of you found a way to call me ignorant from my air conditioning comment... I guess you can find a way to twist anything ;)
Thanks to all! I enjoyed the debates (:
Have a great day.
Peace,
Natalie

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 29, 2005 03:06 PM

No offense taken, Ted, I just disagree. I'm not an expert in economics. Economists offer different answers to the same problem. President Reagan once joked that if the game Trivial Pursuit were designed for economists, it would have 100 questions and 3,000 answers. I get email from Newsmax and it said that even Alan Greenspan, the top economist in America, said that the US deficit was out of control. I think he's right.

If the Fair Tax really does take more from the rich, increase government revenue, and give to the poor without having any effect on prices just like you said in your other post, then I would support it. I don't think such a thing will ever be passed because it sounds too good to be true.

Just like you, I hate income tax because I make less everytime I get paid and the more I make, the more taxes there are. But if we remove income tax, then the federal government won't be able to make as much revenue. Besides, this country is at war right now and the government needs taxpayer money to fund it. It's not a good idea making extravagant tax cuts during wartime. Otherwise where would would the government get the money? The federal government can't just print more dollar bills because it would lead to inflation since there's more money to go around.

Talk to you later, Ted.

Posted by: Henry at September 29, 2005 07:37 PM

I agree, Ted, too many people believe that raising taxes is a good thing, when history shows that lowering them spurs economic growth and actually increases money flowing to the government, while giving the people more money to spend. I don't know how the media got people to believe that more taxes is better. It's sad so many are so uneducated in this field.

I guess it's easier to get the masses to believe tax increases increase revenues, but it's simply not the case. Anyone who doesn't believe that fact should check out our history.

The lack of economic teaching in our government controlled schools may be to blame, but generally people don't understand what makes the capitalist economic system such a success. Taxing is what destroys the economy. In fact, income tax is one of the steps to creating a socialist society according to the Marxist Manifesto.

Oh, and I'm reading "The Fair Tax" book. Did you know it's still a best seller? I tried to get it from the library, but the waiting list was close to 200 !! It's not that expensive anyway and it's so enlightening.

This new system would remove the IRS and at the same time give us all more money to spend. It actually increases government revenues, gives money back to the poor and takes more from the rich than the current system. You see, the rich pay lobbyists to give them tax breaks that the rest of us don't get. Eliminating this power will be hard, but the majority of us will gain.

Also it would bring back jobs to the US, improve our economy immensely and lower interest rates.

It's a win/win situation for everyone except the politicians and lobbyists who make money off the control they have over the taxpayers.

Read this book if you get a chance, and contact your local representatives. This is the plan we've been looking for for decades. The flat tax of the 80's worked until it got amended thousands of times. This plan can't be ruined like that and is the greatest plan I've read about in years. But it will take action by us taxpayers to get it into place. So it's up to you guys out there to help yourselves and our economy.
If you want more money to spend and want to help the poor at the same time then you've gotta support the Fair Tax.
Thanks for listening. I don't usually push ideas too much, but this one is the best I've heard in years.

Posted by: Eve at September 30, 2005 10:51 AM

Henry, just *read* the book. It's not very long. It won't hurt you to read, I promise! It's less than 20 bucks, but if you're short on funds, get it from your library. You can't argue about important issues if you have no knowledge of them. Just because a simple solution sounds too good, doesn't mean it can't work. Just getting rid of the IRS itself will save billions and billions each year for the government. You've been brainwashed - and it's true, we all have - to believe the government just can't function without the zillions we send it every week. If everyone just gave up on trying to improve things we'd really be in trouble. No politician - and Bush is included - has done much to minimalize the government. But if us taxpayers work together we can get this done. And to the benefit of all except the politicians and lobbyists, as Eve rightly says.

It's your choice Henry. Take it while you can, but don't complain later when they take 90% of your money if you stand by and do nothing. They already take over half in taxes and some items are taxed 3 and 4 times over. Simplifying it will help us all, except those who want all aspects of our life ruled by the government. Sadly, many actually want that, not realizing it is enslavement disguised. I would hope you don't want to be enslaved, but ignorance can enslave a person too.

And thanks Eve for showing such rare intelligence. So many others just put an idea down without ever reading about it. To me that's not just ignorance, that's stupidity. I've heard a lot of people say the Fair Tax won't be adopted by the politicians, so it won't work. My answer is for us to call our politicians and say we want this and not to be intimidated. Remind them that they are in office because we vote for them to have that job.

As for the deficit, I never worry about it. Technically it's actually lower now in proportion to the GNP than it was in the 90's, but who's counting? Besides, we always have debt, we never pay it off and it never changes much. That's like worrying about "global warming" which isn't caused by humans, nor can it be stopped by humans. Anyway, that's just buying worry over something that has very little affect on us and has no solution. (No solution unless we can get Bono to write off our debt like he did for the ultra-rich tyrants of Africa.)

Oh, and did you notice "Flaming Socialist" came back to say she'd never come back again? All I did was quote her own words and point out how her thinking is socialist/communist in nature. I guess she didn't care about the 15,000 French people who died without air conditioning last year. Sadly, she's a product of our failing school system, which is really just a federally funded indoctrination program for our youth. Very very sad.
But don't let ignorant people get you down. We can learn what's going on if we want to. Better be happy we can blog and debate issues right now. The EU and the UN want to take over the internet so they can block information they don't want us to hear. The Chinese already do that over there. Once they take it over, we can say goodbye to blog sites since suppressing our freedom of speech is first on the list. The European Union is already busy taking away all freedom of speech there. Remember when Hillary said the government should control the internet? She means it. I guess our freedoms are going away mighty fast. But we don't have to let them go away without a fight.

So fight for knowledge and freedom while you can.

Posted by: Ted at September 30, 2005 01:35 PM

I saw the season opener for "Smallville" last night and all I could think of was: Where the hell was FEMA while Smallville was being bombed by meteors??? What's with that?

Alas, the media kooks must be getting to me. 8^U

Posted by: Art at September 30, 2005 02:14 PM

Nice to see you again Art. I thought you weren't coming back. Nice to see that you're a Superman fan. I'm more of a Batman kind of guy.

Posted by: Henry at October 3, 2005 03:00 PM

Thanks, Ted. I'll read the Fair Tax book EVENTUALLY but I have a lot of other books and novels to read for college. So it'll have to take a backseat for now, you understand.

Posted by: Henry at October 3, 2005 03:11 PM

You can read the book, which is very small and easy to read, or you can go to http://www.fairtax.org/ (or click on my name.)

Posted by: Ted at October 5, 2005 12:06 AM

By the way, Ted, where are you from? Now that you know I'm in NY, I'm just wondering. Just to get to know you a little more.

Posted by: Henry at October 6, 2005 12:33 PM

Ted,
I'm not leaving because I feel offended by anything anyone has said. I'm leaving because I just don't have the time anymore.
I hate that you call me ignorant, and I don't believe it is fair. I am very interested in politics, and I spend a lot of my time researching and watching the news. I know the news is sometimes misleading. I'm not stupid. And, so, I take what I want from it, and believe what I think is right.
Honestly, have you nothing better to do than talk about some 14-year-old behind her back? Kind of immature, if you ask me...
Peace,
Natalie

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 7, 2005 09:07 AM

I just heard about how the UN is going to take over control of the internet. I know you mentioned it earlier, Ted, but I don't think any of us actually believed it was possible.

Let me put this in perspective:

************************
***We're letting the most corrupt organization in the world take over our internet???? ****
************************

The UN has been raping and murdering people in the Sudan, they were heavily involved in a scandal that took money from Iraqis and gave it to terrorists to attack the US, and we trust these guys????

The takeover of the internet is just another step in stifling freedoms. If we can't communicate they know we can't oppose their corruption. This is dreadful. If you have a congressman to write to, beg them to let us keep the internet controlled by the US. Let's keep freedom of speech alive a little bit longer.

They can create their own internet and link it to ours, but if they are given complete control over our internet then you can kiss goodbye any blogs like this that give freedom of speech.

I know it doesn't seem like a big deal, but think about it and act. Just like fixing the tax code and SS, stopping them from removing more of our freedoms is just as important.

Most people are too busy to help, but if we let it get too far we won't have any freedoms left at all. I just can't understand how people can say that they are just too busy to be bothered with preserving our freedoms. How stupid is that???

Posted by: Eve at October 7, 2005 10:47 AM

Eve's right. We're the ones who created the Internet so why should we relinquish control to anybody else? Iran and China already censor what their citizens can see on the World Wide Web. Just think what would happen if the UN controls the Internet, especially now that most countries in the world hate the US in spite of the fact that we liberated more people in the history of the world than all the other countries put together. The US is also the most generous country in the world since we ALWAYS donate the most to the victims of natural disasters, like the victims of the tsumani in late December of last year. People in other countries can still use the Internet freely as long as its under our control, unless their own national governments decide to censor it.

But I have an even more interesting question: Would YOU, Eve and Ted, favor withdrawing the United States from the United Nations? If the UN is so corrupt, do you think we should just pull out of the organization? The UN is corrupt, it just needs to be reformed. We shouldn't pull out, because if we do, we would be isolating ourselves from the entire world. Very few countries want to help us in Iraq now because they say that we didn't respect their views and now we're paying the price for alienating them since, of course, most of the casualties and finances in Iraq are obviously American. Even a great superpower like the US needs to work with the international community in order to get some things done. The truth is that we can't always do everything on our own without the support of our allies. When it comes to going to war, multilateralism is the best policy to unilateralism and the Iraq War proves that.

Posted by: Henry at October 10, 2005 10:55 AM

Poor President Bush. No matter what he does, his poll numbers keep falling. Even more troubling for the White House is that Bush's base (evangelical Christians, Republican men, and Southerners) is beginning to lose faith in him. Conservatives are denouncing his latest choice for the Supreme Court, Harriet Miers. Ironically, some Democrats are actually defending Miers from conservative attacks. If the president's base starts to erode, it will be much more difficult for him to carry out his agenda in the next 3 years. Even the GOP-controlled Congress is starting to defy the president such as the stem-cell research bill and the torture restrictions sponsored by John McCain. According to these websites, Americans are disappointed with the president's performance:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20051008/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_ap_poll_18

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20051008/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_poll_method_1

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20051007/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_ap_poll_5

http://www.usatoday.com/news/2005-10-07-poll-bush_x.htm

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/10/08/poll_bush_gop_base_grows_uneasy/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+National+News

If Bush doesn't get his act together, you can say hello to President Hillary Clinton in 2008, the Republicans' worst nightmare.

Posted by: Henry at October 11, 2005 12:42 AM

I think Hillary is everyone's nightmare, just many don't see how dangerous she really is. Actually if you're rich like Soros and want to control the world with socialism, probably Hillary would be a dream. Who knows? We're probably doomed anyway you look at it.

You mentioned Greenspan once, but do you know the history of the Federal Reserve? That's the little secret no one wants to talk about. Do some research. If you can't figure out what it is, let me know and I'll tell you all about it.

Oh, and you're right, Henry (and Eve too), the UN is very corrupt and run by thugs that hate freedom as much as they hate us. I know we need our allies to help sometimes, but they rarely do. Even when they are the ones in trouble. Actually England has always been a pretty good ally. I'm not sure we can count on anyone else. And I don't care if they like us at all. Besides, I think all that hatred is created by the media. Everytime I go to Europe and the UK, they love the US.

I read some stuff by a guy in Canada, who says everyone likes to pick on the US and blame them for all their troubles, but when they're in trouble they always know they can count on us to help.

It's like being the big brother that helps everyone out while getting kicked in the ass. God knows why we keep turning the other cheek...

I think we should just pull out of the UN and close our borders for a little while and see what happens. Maybe if they realize how much they need us it will make them more appreciative for what we provide. I'm talking about our allies, btw. Our enemies will always hate us.

Did you see that intercepted report from Alzahari (whatever his name is) - it confirms that Iraq was a central part of their plans, and it looks like we've seriously damaged their progress. I know they'll always be a threat, but I believe a show of force has done a world of good. Notice you don't hear good news about Iraq in the mainstream media.

Some guy in Sweden, I think, said that it's popular to hate the US, but secretly they pray we succeed in stopping terrorism. They're just too chicken to do anything about it. I think he speaks for most of Europe.

I don't think Bush cares much about polls. He'll get his judges in because all presidents do. As for his base, they're conservative and many feel he's too moderate. I'm actually glad he doesn't do everything by the polls. The last guy did that and what a mess he got us into.

Henry, you sure have been writing some inspiring stuff lately. Keep it up. I've been pretty busy lately, but I'll check back now and then.

Take care.

Posted by: Ted at October 12, 2005 10:43 PM

Taken out of context, approval ratings can be very deceiving. Bush has taken the blame for things that he isn't to blame for, and that has hurt his ratings, but I doubt he cares about such nonsense.

Just for interest's sake, here are the low points in approval ratings for the following presidents:

Johnson - 30%
Nixon - 24%
Ford - 37%
Carter - 20%
Reagan - 35%
Bush I - 29%
Clinton - 37%
Bush II - 41%

Actually when you look at it, Bush II has the highest of these low points, which would make him the most popular. Interesting, since the press wants to make him appear as such a loser. They've tried everything from forged papers to false Iraq reports to bring down this president. It's really just a smokescreen to hide the fact that the Democratic party is at its lowest approval rating of all time and it continues to plummet.

I listen to the lies the Democrats in the House and Senate tell and I wonder if everyone knows they are lying. It's almost as though they can't tell the truth even if their life depended on it. They are so used to lying it has become second nature, but mostly they are scared to death that the American public will see them as they truly are. Since they don't control the media like they used to, people are becoming more informed on the truth and it all looks bad for liberalism, which can only exist amongst the uninformed and ignorant.

All the lying from the press about the rapes and murders that didn't take place in New Orleans after Katrina has made a lot of people angry as well. The backlash against liberal bias might make an interesting change in this country.

I can see a landslide of conservatism taking over in 2006 and it may even roll over into 2008 if they can come up with a true conservative to run.

I used to be a Democrat, but their constant lying has turned me off. I used to believe the garbage they put out in the press without questioning it. Now I am more informed and I have changed my allegiance. I am no longer a blind liberal, blind to truth. I wish that revelation on all Americans.

I'm so glad you are becoming more informed Henry. You sound like a bright young man. Keep looking for truth and you will find it.

Posted by: Eve at October 13, 2005 01:17 PM

Thank you, Eve and Ted, it's enjoyable to talk about politics with my fellow countrymen. You're both very intelligent and your posts are very interesting, although I may disagree with them sometimes. We can still be friends. I learned a lot of new things too from the both of you. It's better to read a lecture from you than hear one from my boring professors. They're so dull that sometimes I fall asleep in class and yet, I still manage to get good grades.

With the way things are going now, Eve, I don't think we are going to see a landslide of conservatism in 2006. To be honest with you, I'm fed up with how the Republican majority in Congress are running our country and I would like to see some more Democrats in the Senate and House. The scandals surrounding DeLay and Rove could help the Dems in 2006. But that will only happen if the Dems start making alternative solutions to the plans of the congressional GOP because so far, all they do is whine and complain about being the minority party. I agree with you to the extent that SOME (not all) Democrats are liars but several Republicans are liars too. Polls show that Americans have an unfavorable view of the Republican Party but the Democrats have an even more unfavorable view because of their lack of connecting with more conservative voters and uniting behind a single, unifying message. For example, the Democrats cannot unite behind an anti-Iraq War message because several Dems voted for the war and they have offered no alternative solutions for ending the war. Therefore, the Dems cannot rely on anger with the Iraq War to defeat the GOP.

The current president, in my view, is doing his job the best he can but he is certainly no Ronald Reagan. The whole country loved Reagan but only half of the country likes Bush because he's a very polarizing figure. That's because the only people who give Bush high marks are Republicans while both Democrats and Independents give him low marks.

With regard to the 2008 presidential election, I would like to see either Rudy Giuliani or John McCain win the Republican nomination. Hillary Clinton looks like she'll win her party's nomination by default so I have no preferences for the Dem nomination. Giuliani was a great mayor of New York City, and I know because I live in NYC. America's Mayor provided outstanding leadership during the 9/11 attacks and he might even be a stronger leader than Bush.
John McCain is a very popular moderate and war hero. Too bad that a guy who couldn't even fulfill his Texas National Guard obligations defeated McCain, who spent 5 and a half years as a POW in North Vietnam. Unlike John Kerry, McCain never joined the anti-war movement and although he supported Bush for reelection, he is definitely not afraid to criticize the president. It is much better to have a president who was a veteran himself take us into war than some AWOL guardsman who waged a war on false pretenses. I have no doubt that McCain would be a much better president than Dubya.
If the Republican nominee is either Giuliani or McCain, they have my vote over Hillary.

Posted by: Henry at October 15, 2005 11:48 AM

I just don't get one thing: Why bother giving Saddam Hussein a trial if we already know he's guilty of massacring thousands of his own people and there's plenty of evidence for his atrocities? He sure didn't give 300,000 murdered Iraqis and Kurds a trial. It's just doesn't make sense to me. Just execute the guy or throw him in prison for the rest of his life.

Posted by: Henry at October 15, 2005 11:13 PM

I have some good news and some bad news.

The good news: it seems that the US has firmly stated that the control of the internet will not be given up to outside sources. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) was established in the 90's and will retain control for now.

And now for the bad news. Read this report:

----------------------
Confirmed: China's 'Unrestricted Warfare'

The congressionally mandated U.S.-China Security Review Commission has indicated that the Chinese military is attempting to hack into computer networks at the U.S. Defense Department as part of its "unrestricted warfare" - confirming earlier reports from NewsMax.

"It is believed that China is attempting to exploit perceived vulnerabilities to launch viruses, crash networks, collect intelligence and spread disinformation," according to the Transnational Threats Project of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).

NewsMax reported in August: "Chinese Web sites are being used to target computer networks in the U.S. Defense Department and other federal agencies ...

"Some analysts in the Pentagon believe the attacks constitute a coordinated effort by the Chinese government to spy on U.S. databases."

Our report also disclosed that the attacks have been code-named "Titan Rain" by American investigators.

The CSIS revelations confirm that the Chinese hacker ring has been dubbed "Titan Rain," and refer to a book written in 1999 by two Chinese colonels, entitled "Unrestricted Warfare," which describes "understanding and employing the principle of asymmetry correctly to allow us always to find and exploit an enemy's soft spots."

According to the CSIS, "Officials believe this signals cyber espionage against the United States."

NewsMax was the first media organization to call attention to the book "Unrestricted Warfare."

In October 2001 - just a month after the 9/11 attacks - NewsMax disclosed that security officials believed the attacks were probably based on ideas presented in "Unrestricted Warfare," which was published by the People's Liberation Army. Additionally, the Chinese press hailed the book and its authors after the Sept. 11 attacks.

The book states that an enemy can do maximum harm to a developed nation by hijacking civilian aircraft and turning them into "flying bombs." It also specifically stated that if Osama bin Lader were to bomb the World Trade Center, it would be a perfect example of the new "unrestricted warfare."

The report from the CSIS suggests that in addition to military networks, Chinese hackers could also target civilian communications systems and economic institutions such as the New York Stock Exchange.

South Korea claims its security institutions have also been attacked by hackers operating in China, the CSIS disclosed, adding: "Cyber attacks against Korean sites are up almost twofold from 2004."
----------------------

I think communist China is something to be worried about, as well as North Korea (don't forget Clinton and Carter gave them millions of our tax money to build nuclear power stations and they used it to build nuclear weapons. Just how dumb could those two be?? Duhhh!! What do you expect from the two worst presidents in our history??)

Posted by: Eve at October 16, 2005 12:40 PM

Eve,

A landslide of conservatism? Good grief ! Maybe that should happen so that the average American can see about all of the baloney spouted by the likes of Rush, Sean, and friends. The only person that I respect somewhat is Bill O'Reilly because he will point out the right-wing BS when it happens.

As far as the ratings for George Bush, which by the way, you know he is paying attention to regardless of what you say or think, are deserved. He is a lousy President doing a lousy job. I, for one, am happy that I didn't vote for him. Like many in this country, I am not happy about how things seem to be going.

You talk about the "kooky" left. Don't forget about the "hypocrite" right. I will stay clear of both of them because one is as dangerous as the other.

Posted by: JM at October 16, 2005 06:31 PM

Eve,

Democrats are no more the liars than Republicans. To compare the two parties in such simplistic terms is, well, quite simplistic. I trust a Republican politician as much as I trust a Democrat. Until one has proven himself or herself to be trustworthy, then I look at a politician with suspicion. George Bush is the pied piper of the so called conservatives in America. What he is doing is making a farce of conservatism and leading the good name of conservatism to ruin. Tom Delay is just the beginning of the stumble that will cause the Republican party grief in the future. There is a bunch of self righteous hypocritical zealots in the Republican party that need to be flushed down the toilet before I would consider voting Republican. To defend the corruption that is currently going on in either party is an indication that you are blinded by zealotism. Republican's pick our pockets for the rich while Democrats pick our pockets for the poor. They each throw a bone in our direction to make us feel like they are thinking of us. In the current state of affairs, if my pockets are going to be "picked", I'd rather see the money go to the poor.

If you were a true conservative, you would be a Libertarian, the party that truly wants limited government in American life. I guess your eyes are only half open. Your truth is what your are now being fed from the other side of the political spectrum. Check out the Libertarian party. That truth will "set you free".

Posted by: JM at October 17, 2005 11:11 AM

"Some analysts in the Pentagon believe the attacks constitute a coordinated effort by the Chinese government to spy on U.S. databases."

So what else is new? The Communists are always trying to spy on us just like we are doing.

Posted by: Henry at October 17, 2005 04:54 PM

JM,
The libetarian party will never succeed. If you want to really change something you need to do it within the 2 major parties. The 3rd parties are only spoilers and do nothing but throw a wrench into the works. Look at Perot and Nader. Both of them upset elections.

Posted by: Wayne at October 19, 2005 06:26 AM

JM, I never said I was Republican and I never compared them to Democrats. I merely said the Democrats lied all the time. In fact, if you want to know what they're doing illegally, just listen to what they accuse Republicans of. That's my objective view. Think before you accuse people falsely in the future.

I could never vote for the Dems again especially now they've been taken over by the communist left, but it doesn't automatically mean I'll be voting Republican. But Wayne makes a good point. Perot helped get Clinton in, who has now been proven to be the worst president in history (re: Able Danger). Don't worry, JM, Carter still holds the record as the most incompetent.

Speaking of incompetent, I saw Howard Dean on Letterman last week. Is that guy the biggest fool you've ever seen? What a joke. I'd be embarrassed to be a Democrat these days. To top it off, he said Gore was the most intelligent person he knew. Considering Al Gore was by far the stupidest VP in our history, I guess that makes Dean even stupider. Nonetheless, it's very entertaining watching these fools try to act intelligent !!

Oh, and Henry, I know we've got a lot of Communists trying to control this country (look at the left-wing kooks for a start), but it's just good for us to always be vigilent.

And as for Saddam, notice who are trying to defend him: Liberals !! How can anyone defend a guy who murdered millions, oppresses the poor, women, gays etc ?? Trust the libs to rally around the likes of Saddam.

Posted by: Eve at October 19, 2005 01:26 PM

Wayne,

Maybe a monkey wrench is what is needed to make the two major parties wake up and smell the coffee. I would love to see a third party candidate be successful for the presidency at least once in my lifetime.

Posted by: JM at October 20, 2005 11:31 AM

Bush is almost as incompetent as Jimmy Carter for failing to come up with a plan on keeping the peace in post-war Iraq, which could have minimized American casualties. You can't just go to war and assume everything will be alright in the end, which is exactly what this administration did. They just planned for the war itself, not its aftermath. And now US troops are dying on an almost daily basis because of it.

Posted by: Henry at October 20, 2005 03:27 PM

Eve,

Firstly, I never said anywhere in my post that you were a Republican (more appropriately Repulican't). As far as "accusations", there weren't any made about you so don't be so offended. Do you know what that word even means? Obviously not.

Get a grip in reality. I suppose Dan Quayle was another Einstein. Its ignorant statements from people who comment without any real supporting evidence that boil my blood. You seem to be of the kind that "if its said, then it must be true" as long as it comes from the people you are aligned with. How about supporting your stupid statements like "Democrats lie all the time"? How childish. You are just cheerleading, no more, no less. Rah, rah! My man is better that your man!! How about some meat to back up your writing?

Your desription of Bill Clinton as being the worst President of all time is ludicrous especially upon viewing the current President today. I guess you have blinders on because to say that this President is a good President is soooo questionable. But it must be true because you wrote it! Jeeeese!

I hope that you continue to vote Republican because the Democratic party doesn't need imbeciles (an accusation!)like you in it. If you were a policy maker in the Democrat Party, I would definitely avoid that party.

Now you can go back to your lovefest with Henry, who just happens to be a little bit too nice to people like you who feel that you can say whatever you want about someone you oppose, but don't want to hear it when you get it thrown back at you. Touche, my dear.

Posted by: JM at October 21, 2005 10:42 AM

"Lovefest." This JM guy is nuts.

Go Houston Astros

Posted by: Henry at October 22, 2005 01:16 AM

JM,
I can guarantee that you will NEVER see a 3rd party win. It is just impossible no matter how hard you wish. You know what they say? You can wish in one hand and deficate in the ohter and see which one gets filled first.

Posted by: Wayne at October 24, 2005 08:38 PM

No Henry, I am not nuts. I have been reading the posts for awhile. Actually, I used to post on this site before I ever saw you post. I read where you describe your beliefs and then I read the reactions from the other people who post here. I don't think I have ever read anything that you have posted that could be considered a personal attack.

But then I read the posts from those who obviously have different opinions from you... the Republican attack dogs. The babys who cry that the media is against them, but yet they dominate so many of the chat rooms. Everybody in the media is a liberal this and a liberal that. Bull crap. You tend to let them get away with that bullshit (that is why I use the term lovefest). It appears that you walk on egg shells in order to not rock the boat. I say give it back the way it is given.

Eve wants to attack Bill Clinton (how many years has Bill been out of office?) and turn a blind eye to the bumbling *ss that is currently our President. Bill Clinton, the worst president of all time? Get a grip lady. We are currently watching one of the worst presidents of all time take this country to the cleaners. His last day in office will be none too soon. And to hear that his brother may be interested in the presidency. I think that most Americans will indicate that they have had enough of the Bush family's vision for America.

Eve, I would rather be a liberal (of which I am not) who knows the truth than a close minded conservative who wouldn't know the truth if it bit her in the *ss. Remove the rose colored glasses and show some honesty in your posts. This president is only hurting the cause that you believe in (by turning people off of your conservative ideas). Turning a blind eye to these shortcomings won't help but diminish conservatism. As much as a house cleaning is needed within the Democrat party, the Republicans need to do the same thing.

Posted by: JM at October 25, 2005 01:14 PM

"I certainly hope that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars."
- Sen. Hutchison, R-Texas, on Rove and Libby's alleged involvement on the Plame leak case in "Meet the Press."

This woman obviously does not know anything about the American judicial system. "Perjury technicality"? What the hell does that mean? I would be embarrassed to be represented in the Senate by a person who thinks that lying under oath is just a mere triviality. Perjury is a serious crime, not something to be brushed aside as unimportant. Hutchison should be voted out of office for her total ignorance on our legal codes.

Posted by: Henry at October 25, 2005 09:53 PM

2,001 US Troops Dead
15,000 US Troops Wounded
At Least 30,000 Iraqis Dead

We should never have went into Iraq. We should have just let the sanctions work. Now our military is stretched too thin because of all these neocons (or "new convicts") in the Bush administration. Rove, Libby, and now even Cheney are under investigation in the CIA leak. Is our country being run by a bunch of crooks?

Posted by: Henry at October 26, 2005 09:43 AM

For the country's sake, I sure hope no one else is indicted or Bush's credibility will hit bottom-low.

Posted by: Henry at October 26, 2005 10:30 AM

Senator Kerry finally came up with a plan to exit Iraq. He wants to pull 20,000 troops out by Christmas and the rest next year. Only one problem. NOW he comes up with a plan AFTER the election. What an idiot. If he proposed something like this last year, he probably would have defeated Bush.

Posted by: Henry at October 27, 2005 03:04 PM

JM,
I remeber your postings here, you posted under another name as well. Henry, who's name did you use after the elction? Well this is him, the one and the same. Same old song, blame everything on Bush, defend the Democrats. Bush is no angel by any means, but at least he tries to do something to make this country better. THe democrats are the party to point out the problems, the Republicans at least try to solve them.

Name one problem the Democrats have solved. New Orleans was a Democrat, liberal safe haven and it turns out that it was a MESS! Where does social programs and welfare giveaways get us? Dependant poor people is where.

JM, get a grip, your party is full of losers. I know your not a Republican so it is safe to say your party is full of losers no matter what party you are with. This is why the Republicans keep winning and will keep winning.

Thankfully Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination, now Bush only needs to appoint a treu conservative!

Posted by: Wayne at October 27, 2005 07:06 PM

I couldn't agree with you more, Henry. There is a little history with Senator Hutchinson from Texas. She was investigated some time ago for something that I cannot remember at this time. She was never indicted. It makes me wonder if she perjured herself during that time since perjury is just some technicality in her mind. Isn't her statement ridiculous? The average person gets thrown in jail for that "technicality". This is the problem with so many of our politicians. Very few appear to be truly honest. Many of our politicians are financially well off. They can afford the best legal representation when they get themselves in trouble. Money and power talk when it comes to our legal system. It is a shame that the people that we vote into office blabber about morals when so many of them are so hypocritically immoral. There are many politicians who love to accuse others of acts that they have committed themselves. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Can we finally hold ALL politicians to the ethical standards that they preach? There is too much barking about the unethical acts that people of opposing views commit while ignoring those who commit similar acts when they come from the same political camp. They should all be held accountable for their actions. Politicians are in office to serve the people, not have the people serve them!

Posted by: JM at October 27, 2005 11:24 PM

I'm surprised at you Henry. Don't you know what's really going on?

All of these are false indictments by a crooked prosecutor who has shown clear bias towards the democrats. He was a heavy Gore contributor for one thing.

Check out the facts:

- all that you hear on the news is speculation. No one knows what's really going one, but one thing's for sure...

- no charges or evidence against Rove or Delay, just lots of indictments (you can indict anyone for anything, which is what's going on)

- the original charge was "outing" a CIA agent. She wasn't a covert agent, she hadn't been for over 9 years and it was her husband who exposed her identity long ago.
- she sent him over to try to prove the Niger Yellowcake Uranium that Saddam supposedly was trying to purchase was not true.
- He (joe wilson) actually proved that it was true that Saddam was trying to get that uranium, but since it wasn't what he was supposed to report, he never gave a report.

Bottom line, they are trying to make a case that the reasons for going to war with Iraq were false, but all that does it prove the reason was there. Also, it was Clinton who said they had WMD's back in 98 and all of the Dems agreed then, but they all knew he would never go to war because he was more concerned with his ratings than the safety of the US citizens.

Now that the covert connections with Marc Rich and his dabbling in the "Oil for Food" scandal along with the UN, France and Russia, Clinton's legacy is getting worse and worse.

So we know Clinton ignored all terrorist attacks, and purposely covered up CIA reports. He and his wife should've been indicted, but it was thought to be bad for the presidency to indict the president and first lady, so they didn't.

Instead, they create fake charges and try to take down the Bush administration for revenge. Nice bunch, those Dems.

It'd make a good book if it wasn't so dreadfully real.

Since no charges have been made against Delay and Rove, maybe now we can find out the real truth behind all this CIA crap. I can't wait. This is going to be the biggest media scandal ever.

Going into Iraq was the best thing we've done in years. Just look at all the progress and freedom we've brought there. 2000 in 3 years is less than we lose on the highways in NY city. Put into perspective it's a fantastic success.

Sometimes I'm just surprised you're not more informed Henry. Sometimes you seem to find out things and other times you seem to be in a fog. Are you reading the NY Times or something? Didn't you learn that they always lie and they have an agenda that would not please a person who likes individual freedom?

Posted by: Ted at October 28, 2005 09:59 PM

Henry, our last president committed perjury, got someone to commit perjury for him and then lied under oath about the whole thing, and all he got was disbarred and impeached. They never even indicted him for the crimes. I guess many just don't believe perjury is a big deal anymore. What a mess.

It's a shame that the Democrats use the judicial system to impose their agenda and to slander those they don't like.

Notice that none of the indictments have any crimes or evidence tied to them. Amazing isn't it? We hear someone is indicted and we automatically assume they are guilty. It's just the way we think, I suppose. It doesn't help that the biased media speculate without knowing any facts on the case either.

Don't think we missed the double standard either. When Clinton was being investigated, the press hated the prosecutor. Now that Delay is being investigated, the press loves the prosecutor. I guess I didn't really expect fairness from a biased media.

It's just sad.

A reminder for all to get flu shots soon. I know we've only lost 2000 in Iraq fighting for freedom, but the flu kills 36,000 every year in this country alone. So if you think you may need a flu shot, get one.

Have a great Holiday Season !!

Posted by: Eve at October 29, 2005 01:38 PM

Ted, it doesn't matter what party affiliation the prosecutor is. Libby lied in court, period.

Posted by: Henry at October 31, 2005 04:59 PM

Stop calling me uninformed because 2000 US troops dead and counting faster in 2 and a half years is not my idea of "fantastic success." Polls of US troops also say that their commander-in-chief has done a poor job in Iraq. Does that make our troops "uninformed" too? Polls usually don't matter but they take on a more important role in a war because you can't win a war without public support, like I said earlier.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The GOP is doing a poor job of running this country and all the Dems do is say "I'm against this" without ever saying what they are FOR. I'm glad I don't belong to any of these stupid parties.

Posted by: Henry at October 31, 2005 05:53 PM

Wayne,

You are incorrect as before. I have only used JM for my posts on this blog. You have accused me of using another handle in the past. You were incorrect then, and your are incorrect now. Is it too hard for you to believe that there are many more people like myself who hold similar beliefs? Not everyone believes the same ideological BS that you seem to adhere to. George Bush is now getting his just desserts. Surround yourself with people of questionable ethics and it will likely rub off on you.

So... please forget about the idea that I have listed under two different handles. If I knew you, I would be insulted. As it is, I just think a little bit less of you every time you accuse me of that. I don't need to hide behind another name.

Posted by: JM at November 4, 2005 02:44 PM

From Eve: " all he got was disbarred and impeached".

Dah!!!!!!!! Like that isn't some major punishment.

Yikes!

Posted by: JM at November 4, 2005 02:47 PM

JM,
You like your party are a joke. You talk about surrounding yourself with unethical people? Name 1 democrat that has shown class and ethics besides Zel Miller.

Your a waste of my time.

Posted by: Wayne at November 5, 2005 04:40 PM

From JM: "Dah!!!!!!!! Like that isn't some major punishment. "

When others go to prison for such blatant law breaking, a slap on the wrist is what that criminal got.

What a tool!!

Posted by: Pete at November 8, 2005 08:49 PM

JM, it's good to hear from a fellow Libertarian, even though you misunderstand me sometimes.

Have you contacted your local representatives about the FairTax proposition H.R. 25 ?

I hope so. It's a big Libertarian thing. We want to bolster the US economy, bring jobs back to the US, help the poor and the middle class and all this while removing the IRS.

Wouldn't that be great? I've read the book on it and I assume you have too since you're a Libertarian. This is the greatest system devised, but lobbyists hate it and politicians would prefer the current system because it gives them more control over the masses.

You know, income tax was the 2nd of 10 goals proposed by the Marxist Manifesto (#10 was public education - no wonder we're so ignorant). So let's put the Marxist stuff where it belongs - in the garbage can - and get back to a fair system that makes this country strong and lets us all pursue our individual freedoms.

GO USA !!

Posted by: Eve at November 10, 2005 10:22 AM

Sorry I didn't say hello to you before, Wayne, I was preoccupied with other people. We didn't speak in a while. I remember talking to you as "CollegeStudent" over a year ago. You used to have a website linked to your name called Operation AC. I just have one problem with what you recently said before.

"New Orleans was a Democrat, liberal safe haven and it turns out that it was a MESS! Where does social programs and welfare giveaways get us? Dependant poor people is where."

Are you saying that the people of New Orleans do not deserve government help after their city was wiped off the map by a flood? If so, that is very insensitive and you should be ashamed of yourself for saying that.

And no, I'm not JM and JM is not me. We're two separate people. He doesn’t speak for me and I don’t speak for him. There was an awful lot of conservatives/Republicans on this site that one of them might have posted under two names as well.

Posted by: Henry at November 10, 2005 06:00 PM

Henry,
I did not say the victims of the Hurricane's do not deserve help, I was saying that they should have gotten help BEFORE they really needed it. BEFORE it became a matter of life and death. They should have been in a better position in life BEFORE the disaster, and that starts with training them to have GOOD jobs. If no GOOD jobs are available than we should encourage these people start a buisness. Train them to be able to make decisions all by them selves for the betterment of themselves. Welfare and government giveouts DO NOT encourage people to better themselves.

STOP GIVING AWAY MY TAX MONEY!

And I did not say your were posting under JM, after the election you posted under another name and admitted to it later and you thought it was funny. It wasn't then and it isn't now.It's one of the reasons I stopped posting here, the other reason is this site is too slow to have a debate.

Please don't deny you posted under some other name and it wasn't Collegetudent. The name was some other whackos that stopped posting here after Kerry got his clocked clean.

Posted by: Wayne at November 15, 2005 04:31 PM

The reason everyone's getting mixed up between "JM" and "Henry" is easy to understand. (I haven't been to this site in a while, but it didn't take long to catch up.)

Here's the deal:

Sometimes "Henry" sounds intelligent, but sometimes "Henry" sounds like an idiot. (Sorry, but I call them as I see them.) I'm not sure if he is stupid or just very confused. I'll go with the last one because it makes it easier for me to understand his illogical responses that way.

For example, the last rebuttal from "Henry" to Wayne's intelligent observation of how liberalism destroyed New Orleans, is close to idiocy. It could be that "Henry" doesn't have the capacity to understand logic, and that's certainly possible. But maybe he's two seperate people or maybe he's schizophrenic. Which "Henry" are we talking with today? Who knows?? Sad either way...

Posted by: Fred at November 16, 2005 02:27 PM

I also don't want people to become too dependent on the government, Wayne, but when their house and most of their personal possessions are destroyed by a natural disaster the government should at least give enough compensation for them to start a new life.

Hey Fred, you want a perfect example of idiocy? Go look in the mirror. Calling me "Hitlery" on your part was just as stupid. From now on your name is Fred Flintstone, since you act as dumb as he is.

Posted by: Henry at November 17, 2005 01:48 PM

Liberalism had nothing to do with "destroying" New Orleans it was the slow FEMA response.

Posted by: Henry at November 17, 2005 05:57 PM

The one thing that everyone seems to forget about "training" is that not everyone has the same capabilities. Not everyone can be a doctor or professor. What do you people who consistently talk about training someone propose as "training"?

Eve, although I am not a Libertarian, I actually have a Libertarian streak in me. I would vote for a Libertarian candidate for President before I would vote for a Republican.

I realize this blog is dominated by conservatives, be they republican or not. I post here because I want to let people know that there are many others who disagree with many of the posts on this blog. Wayne, being a waste of your time is no skin off my nose. You were so pro-Bush before the election. Now you state the he is not perfect. I stated that well before the election. Who is changing their tune now? I believe that is you. America got what it wanted in 2004 and now we are paying the price. I am sorry that Mr. Bush won the election. Maybe things will change for the better, but I don't think that will happen. His first term was a good indicator of his capabilities ... nothing special.

Posted by: JM at November 17, 2005 07:21 PM

The president said that it's okay to criticize the war but it's not okay to rewrite history and say that he "lied" on the wmds. He didn't lie, he was just misinformed on bad intelligence. I don't think it should have been waged in the first place. But he should have focused more on the aftermath, like keeping the old Iraqi army together instead of disbanding it right after Baghdad fell. Support for the war is dropping because people are getting killed on a daily basis. That doesn't mean we should cut and run like some Dems say, otherwise the terrorists will think they have won. The prez is doing the right thing by not setting a timetable because that would give the wrong signal to the Iraqis and to the enemy. The troops have to remain there until the Iraqis can handle the insurgency on their own.

As for the Torture ban sponsored by McCain, it should be vetoed. Torture is the most effective way to get important information in order to prevent attacks and take out terrorist leaders. But I don't mean physical torture like hitting or slapping prisoners unless you want the ACLU or Greenpeace breathing down your neck. More like passive torture such as sleep deprivation. Funny how we treat our prisoners better than we treat our soldiers.

Posted by: Henry at November 20, 2005 05:47 PM

Fred, don't be so hard on Henry. I think he's trying real hard to understand what's going on. I admit he probably reads too much propaganda news, but it's hard to find the truth when the mainstream media is constantly bombarding you with lies.

For example, you won't hear much more about the Valerie Plame trial because it turns out there was no crime committed. Just political crap amplified by the press to make Bush look bad. You gotta hand it to them, they're experts at propaganda these days. They've been in control for 40 years and they're pretty angry that we're starting to see through their lying.

And Eve, you're right. We need to abolish the IRS, and from everything I read on the Fair Tax, that's the best solution ever. Others should read the book or go to the website and learn about it. The system may never get adopted - like fixing SS - but we should really try to get these changes in place before they get any more out of hand. All it takes is an email or fax to your Senators. Sadly we've gotten pretty lazy and no one wants to deal with these sort of problems until they get totally out of control. One place to start is Federal spending, which keeps going up every administration, and that really needs reining in.

Wayne, I'd love for debates to occur on this site, but waiting a week for your message to appear and then waiting another week for the responses is not a good way to debate. If you know other sites where blogs are faster, let us all know.

Lastly, I was reading about what really is at stake with the Iraq war, and it is shocking to most. For us to give up and go home with our tails between our legs as the Democrats want, will cause a domino effect that will bring more attacks to us and the rest of the world. We're the world's only hope left and if we pull out before it's stable we can kiss freedom goodbye forever.
The media doesn't tell us of all the great things we've done in freeing 25 million Iraqis, and we should think about what we can do to help the soldiers as well. During the summer, we sent over 4 air conditioners to the soldiers. I know there's more we can do, but getting behind our leaders is a good way to help too.
I know the Democrats just want to look good to get votes, but in reality they are sabotaging our fight for freedom and it's much more serious than most think. Since all but one Democrat voted to go to war, let's all just unite this country behind a just cause of eliminating terrorism and quit all this polical crap.

Remember this when you vote next time. Anyone who is against the efforts of completing the fight for Iraqi freedom should be voted against. Let's show the world how strong we are when united. The Democrats are so bitter towards Bush, it's hurting this country. I wish more liberals would think about what is best for our country instead of always thinking of ways to get back into power.

Well, I've said enough. I'll come out of my hole every once in a while and check on this blog, so keep posting and keep positive.

Posted by: Ted at November 20, 2005 07:05 PM

Henry, are you still upset about your misunderstanding of what I said months ago? You can reread my response back then, but all I said was that no one knew who "Henry" was because he admitted to pretending to be someone else. So I jokingly said that maybe "Henry" was really Hitlary, as in Hillary Clinton. (most people call her Hitlary these days because of her Marxist beliefs.) I didn't say "Henry" was "Hitlary" I said that perhaps it was really the crooked senator from New York who was masquerading as "Henry." I'm tired of explaining my joke. It's like there's a mental block stopping you from understanding humor.

If you still don't get it, maybe you can buy a sense of humor on ebay or somewhere else. Or maybe you need to take a lesson in reading comprehension. I still don't understand how you just don't get it. Sorry, but ignorance at that level is hard for me to understand. I try to be tolerant of cronic ignorance, but it's very difficult. I'm working on it though...

I've got proof that "Henry" just doesn't get it. Here's what "Henry" said recently:

"Liberalism had nothing to do with "destroying" New Orleans it was the slow FEMA response."

I'm sorry, but that is the stupidest statement I've heard on this blog. Ok, Ted, maybe he's just uninformed, but it's hard to believe he would write such stupidity when all the evidence shows that New Orleans was run by a corrupt liberal government that ran from their responsibilities to their people after a disaster, embezzled the money for the levees and refused help from both FEMA and the American Red Cross. For your information, FEMA is a last resort when all local help is exhausted. So FEMA was never an issue in this New Orleans mess. But it's fun to blame them when you don't know the facts. Compare other parts of the country that have been hit with disasters. New Orleans was a mess because it had become a welfare state run by pure liberalism. End of story.

So "Henry" or whoever you are, either learn to read and find out the truth, or quit showing your ignorance and stupidity on this blog. It's laughable and just shows what a government education produces these days.

And just so you don't think I'm picking on "Henry," I have to admit that every other blog by him is pretty good and shows some intelligence. That's why I think there are two Henrys. One has some insightful information, the other sounds like an idiot. Would the real "Henry" please stand up?

Oh, and JM, there used to be a lot of far left liberals on this blog, but they left when they realized that they couldn't debate against common sense and truth. I kinda miss them. It was fun listening to their nonesense. Remember the cranky old kook Abel? Remember d.jones (that's who Henry pretended to be for a while)? Then there was paul and I even miss "flaming socialist" Natalie. I guess when they can't debate on facts, they moveon.org to the democratic underground where facts don't get in the way of their beliefs.

Posted by: Fred at November 21, 2005 01:48 PM

To all finger pointers on this site,

New Orleans was not a disaster caused by FEMA. The mayor of that city started the destruction helped along by the govenor. When the gov was asked if she wanted help she said "let me think about it for 24 hours". WHAT?! 24 HOURS?! And yet everyone gives these two a pass. When the mayor was asked why they didn't use the school buses to get the people out he said "we didn't have anyone to drive them". WHAT?! DRIVE THEM YOURSELF! Don't you think it may have been worht the risk in driving them to save lives?

As far as the "training" question goes? We train monkeys to pilot rockets, we can't teach someone to pick up trash? It pays better than welfare. They can't be trained to do something? Maybe if they had to earn that welfare check they would be more apt to find a trade and get a job.

The answer is never to just give something for nothing and hope it goes away!

Posted by: Wayne at November 21, 2005 05:47 PM

What is hurting this country is NOT the so-called bitterness of the Democrats, but the ineptness of the current leadership. Bush and many of his clique are inept. There is a failure of leadership in this country. Fred, you are the one succumbing to propaganda. Bush deserves his low approval rating. It's based on his effectiveness as a leader. People are no longer giving him a blank check and are starting to hold him responsible for HIS actions. So... put the blame where it belongs.

Posted by: JM at November 21, 2005 11:21 PM

By the way, Ted, please stop being so condescending to Henry. Maybe it is you that needs a better understanding of what is going on in this country. Conservatives love to talk about how liberals (Democrats in their eyes) talk down to people and how they know what is best for everyone. You are the one talking down to Henry which is another example of typical conservative hypocrisy.

Posted by: JM at November 21, 2005 11:24 PM

Some people misunderstand me because they disagree. I understand if people don't share my views. I know some comments I made have been controversial but I absolutely don't think I am "confused."

Look Fred, you can believe liberalism brought down New Orleans if you want to, but you're wrong. So what if the mayor and the governor involved were Democrats? WHO CARES? They both didn't do their job right and if they were Republicans, the response would most likely still be slow. If you're a Dem, it doesn't necessarily mean you are liberal.

Posted by: Henry at November 23, 2005 04:25 PM

Since the GOP screwed up in Iraq, they would have screwed up the Katrina relief in New Orleans like the Dems did.

Posted by: Henry at November 23, 2005 04:44 PM

Fred,

Anybody that calls Hillary "Hitlary" because of Marxism is not very bright. Hitler wasn't a communist.

Posted by: JM at November 23, 2005 06:00 PM

Again, to all of the anti-liberals on this site, conservatives are fond of stating that liberals always talk down to everyone. Additionally, liberals always know what is best for everyone. They treat people in a condescending way. Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but it seems to me that y'all are the ones being a bit condescending on this site. Take a good long look in the mirror. You all are a big bunch of hypocrites for the most part. I wouldn't expect anything less from the Rush crowd. I was going to throw in the O'reilly name, too, but I actually agree with him sometimes, especially when he is not being one-sided. Face it, there are many people who do not follow your beliefs. You don't like that one bit, do you? It's a democracy, so get used to it.

There is nothing wrong with having conservative values. I LIKE many conservative values. Don't forget about the values of civility and respect. I would think that condescension is NOT one of those values.

Have a nice Thanksgiving and don't choke on any turkey bones!

Posted by: JM at November 23, 2005 06:13 PM

I'm glad JM is bringing humor back to this forum. He's hilarious !!

Keep it up JM, we're starving for your dry wit.

I got one:

What do liberals hate more than freedom, gays, jews, blacks and this country ??

- Themselves !!! ha ha

The truth can be funny too.

Happy Thanksgiving to all !!

Posted by: Fred at November 24, 2005 10:37 AM

Sometimes it appears that the president is oblivious to what's going on domestically or internationally. That's why he heavily relies on Cheney, a man with much more political experience, for advice. I believe Cheney is the real president while Bush is just a figurehead.

Posted by: Henry at November 26, 2005 11:26 PM

JM, you said: "Anybody that calls Hillary "Hitlary" because of Marxism is not very bright. Hitler wasn't a communist."

Well... fascism, communism, socialism, liberalism - all the same thing when it comes down to brass tacks. They're just different words for the same oppressive government rule.

If you wanna get technical: Anybody who thinks we live in a Democracy is not very bright, or just plain ignorant. We live in a Republic. Check it out if you don't believe me.

Don't feel bad, JM, many people are ignorance in history. It's a result of government education and the rewriting they do of our history books. Whether we stay ignorant is a choice we make in a free country. I hope you make the right choice and become informed. You'll be a lot less bitter if you know some facts.

And what's the "Rush crowd"? Rush is one of my favorite rock bands and I see no reason to pick on their fans, no matter how much you hate Canadians and Rock & Roll! ;-)

Posted by: Fred at November 28, 2005 01:17 PM

Ted,

I read your response from a while back and noticed that you donated air conditioners to our troops in battle.

That was very generous of you. One of the (many) reasons I moved away from Democrats and liberals (besides their constant badmouthing of our country) is that they tend to be less generous. They talk like they want to help others, but it's just talk. Before everyone gets their feelings hurt, I just want to say that it is something I have noticed: that liberals complain about problems and point fingers, but they rarely do anything about solving those problems. Just my observations, ok?

Anyhow, thanks Ted for your generosity, and any others who have helped our troops in any way, even if it's just supporting their cause for freedom. God Bless you all !!

Posted by: Eve at November 28, 2005 01:41 PM

The difference between liberals and conservatives is plain and simple.

Conservatives think you EARN the respect you are given and you must EARN your way in the world, both monetarily and respectfully.

Liberals GIVE it away without any reason, and after your were GIVEN it and you prove you don't deserve it they will GIVE it away again. As long as it is not theirs, only the taxpayers and others.

Posted by: Wayne at November 28, 2005 10:36 PM

JM,
Is communism and marxism the same thing?

Do your homework before you say something stupid. They are very different.

Posted by: Wayne at November 29, 2005 07:29 PM

Henry,

Cheney is the real president? You would be having a fit right now if I said Hilary was the real president before this administration, and she was the one we should be blaming for 9/11, wouldn't you?

Look, the president, not the vp or first lady, is the one responsible. That doesn't mean they have the power to stop things or do things they want to do. It's kind of a bad place to be isnt it? They are responsible for others actions. How would you like that job? If the president signs something into effect that fails it's his fault, if he signs something into effect that is a huge success than the credit goes to whoever came up with the bill.

Look at the McCain/Feingold bill. It didn't work, but when everyone thought it was gong to work McCain/Feingold were genus', when it failed Bush was an idiot for not vetoing it.

I would like to see some of yoiu Bush bashers be in charge of something, maybe your perspective would change a little.

Posted by: Wayne at November 30, 2005 07:26 AM

I found this in the newspaper and I want to share it with you because it's funny.

Richard Nixon Versus Dick Cheney

WHO'S THE BIGGER DICK?

Nixon:

1. Claimed to have a "secret plan" to end the war in Vietnam.
2. Orchestrated secret bombing of Cambodia.
3. Entrusted a man named Liddy to stop damaging White House leaks.
4. Stoked people's fear of communism.
5. Created the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970.
6. Refused to turn over Watergate tapes.
7. Hounded by Bob Woodward.
8. His swearing and vicious statements on tape were shocking.
9. Watergate scandal sent his approval rating to 25%.
10. After resigning the presidency, was granted a controversial pardon.
11. Said "I am not a crook."

Cheney:

1. Denies having had a "secret plan" to start the war in Iraq.
2. Orchestrates secret torture of prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, etc...
3. Entrusted a man named Libby to make damaging White House leaks.
4. Stokes people's fear of terrorism.
5. Has been trying to destroy the environment ever since.
6. Refuses to turn over energy task force documents.
7. Courted by Bob Woodward.
8. His swearing and vicious statements in public are routine.
9. Plamegate scandal has sent his approval rating to 19%.
10. After resigning from Halliburton, was granted a controversial retirement package valued at $20 million.
11. Has made no such claim.

Posted by: Henry at November 30, 2005 11:31 PM

Henry,

I'm glad you thought your last post was funny. What happened to your sense of humor? You USED to be funny, now your boderline ridiculous. What happened to the Henry that had intelligent debates? This is one of the problems with being liberal and not knowing it. Liberalism stunts your growth of humor. This is a medical fact, look at Ted Kennedy, I like to laugh AT him but never WITH him.

Posted by: Wayne at December 2, 2005 08:09 PM

"Cheney is the real president? You would be having a fit right now if I said Hilary was the real president before this administration, and she was the one we should be blaming for 9/11, wouldn't you?"

No I wouldn't have a fit. You know why? Because I wouldn't care if you called Clinton a communist or a Nazi or whatever. I used to defend him but not anymore because it's not worth it. With the exception of the Lewinsky scandal and his inept foreign policy, I thought Clinton was an "okay" president because of the economic boom of the 1990s.

I understand that being president is not a walk in the park. Handling a devastating hurricane while fighting a seemingly neverending war at the same time is the toughest job in the world. Cheney seems to have too much influence that it's as if he's pulling Dubya's strings. Just look at all those political cartoons showing the president as a puppet.

Well, Marxism is based on the political and economic theories of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. According to this doctrine, class struggle is needed to create historical change and that capitalism will eventually be replaced by communism. Since Marx is the founder of communism, some people would assume that Marxism and communism are the same thing. Just like when some conservatives erroneously believe that liberalism and communism are the same thing. Yes, both liberalism and communism believe in a bigger and stronger government. But liberals and communists are fundamentally different in economic terms. Here's why - Liberals also believe in capitalism and a free market society like conservatives do. The liberals just believe that government should become more involved with helping poorer people through welfare programs. Communists, on the other hand, do NOT believe in capitalism and a free market society like liberals and conservatives do. Communists believe that EVERYTHING, from salaries to leisure activities, should be controlled by the government. So you see, both communism and liberalism are two DIFFERENT ideologies of the left-wing. Just like conservatism and fascism are two different ideologies of the right-wing. If you studied political science like I did, you will know this stuff.

Posted by: Henry at December 2, 2005 09:11 PM

"Well... fascism, communism, socialism, liberalism - all the same thing when it comes down to brass tacks."

Actually Fred, they have some differences. I just explained the fundamental difference between liberalism and communism. Fascism is a radical ideology from the right-wing that glorifies war while communism doesn't. Communism and socialism are both radical ideologies from the left-wing but they also have some differences. Communists believe that change can only be brought about by a violent revolution such as the Russian Revolution of 1917 while socialists take a more peaceful approach to achieve their goals. Communists believe that the proletariat, or the poorest working class, should own the means of production. Socialists believe democratic means should be used to distribute wealth evenly throughout a society. Although socialist countries may be democracies, socialism requires a high degree of central planning to achieve economic equality. Communist countries, unlike socialist countries, cannot be democracies and are usually dictatorships because there is strong government control in every walk of life.

Liberals, although they believe that government should be bigger and be more responsible for welfare programs and education and health, agree that there should be a far smaller role for the government in domestic affairs than socialists, fascists, and communists. Unlike fascists, communists, and socialists, the liberals embrace capitalism and free markets like I said in my previous post.

And Fred, don't you dare call me "ignorant" or "stupid" if you don't believe what I just said because it's all true. If you don't believe it then fine that's your decision. All this information came from political science textbooks and my professors. So do not even THINK of challenging me on this information unless you also studied political science in college.

Posted by: Henry at December 2, 2005 10:14 PM

The funniest thing about Henry's little joke he posted is that none of the statements are true (except 5 & 11 under Nixon.) I guess the joke's on Henry again. Funny guy!! What a goof !

Continue to show your ignorance, Henry, so we can continue to laugh at you. I enjoy it!!

Posted by: Fred at December 5, 2005 12:36 PM

Sadly, the constant lies told by Democrats about our President has created a situation that will help in Saddam's defense. It's very possible they will be using the lies told by Durbin, Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, Reid, Byrd, Murtha and others in Saddam's defense. We all know they were lying, but in a court of law these lies may help get Saddam off of mass murder.

If we weren't sure before, we now know absolutely whose side the Democrats are on and it's not the U.S.

They constantly lie and they want us to suddenly believe them when they say they are patriotic? If we had an honest mainstream media, these idiots would be shown for the liars they are. They hate this country and everything it stands for. They want Saddam back in power, his rape-rooms back in full swing as well as his tortures and killings.

Unfortunately, most of the Democrats currently in office are total weasles, and only want power, and they will sell this country down the river to get it.

Make sure you realize this fact when it comes time to vote.

Posted by: Eve at December 5, 2005 01:01 PM

Wayne,

I am not going to argue over your assertion that Communism and Marxism are not the same. You need to do your homework. For you to say they are significantly different is uninformed. It is like saying that Spanish spoken in Columbia is not Spanish because it is not the same Spanish that is spoken in Spain. Marxism and communism are nearly one in the same.

Posted by: JM at December 5, 2005 02:43 PM

Sorry, Fred, but Rush is also one of my favorite rock bands. Don't assume anything.

Posted by: JM at December 5, 2005 02:47 PM

Wayne & Eve,

Conservatives are just sooo good. Those bad, bad liberals! They are sooo lazy. They don't believe in hard work; or recognition and reward for that matter! They are stingy and they can't part with a dime! Yeah, right.

Enough said.

Posted by: JM at December 5, 2005 02:50 PM

Fred, you're the one who's ignorant. You equate liberalism and communism although they are very different. To see why they're different just read my posts. You are just an ultra-conservative redneck and a right-wing bomb-thrower.

Posted by: Henry at December 5, 2005 04:53 PM

Just by calling me ignorant and saying that nothing uner my Nixon/Cheney post proves that this Fred guy does not know a lot about American history unless it's about badmouthing liberalism or democrats.

If you people don't like my posts making fun of the draft-dodging knuckleheads in the Bush admistration then that's too bad. Late-night comedians like Letterman and Leno make fun of Bush or Cheney all the time.

Posted by: Henry at December 5, 2005 05:05 PM

JM,
Communism does not beleive in a free market.

Marxism does.

How can you say they are one in the same?

Like I said, do your homework before you say something STUPID!

Posted by: Wayne at December 5, 2005 07:17 PM

Henry,

I never said communism and liberalism are the same, we all know liberalism is much, much worse!

Posted by: Wayne at December 5, 2005 07:18 PM

Did anyone see Kerry saying that the troops he voted to go to war are terrorizing women & children in the middle of the night?

We know it's a lie, but what a totally irresponsible thing to say. If I were still a Democrat I'd be ashamed to align myself with such filth.

Posted by: Caine at December 5, 2005 09:16 PM

Eve,
Your generalizations about Democrats are to be put bluntly, ridiculous. There seems to be an awful lot of lying by Republicans these days.

To be fair, many politicians, both Democrats and Republicans lie at times.

Why do you have to write in such general terms? You say this and that, but rarely support what you say with hard evidence.

I suspect that you are a recent convert to Christian fundamentalism. The te