In one paragraph you have not only told me more than I ever wanted to know.
Posted By: AR on 2005-10-01
In Reply to: If anyone is dividing America it is Bennett by his remarks and Bush - gt
You have outlined and described in perfect detail the problem with why your arguments can never be recognized as anything but dividing. Gt, believe me, this is not all about you, which it always seems to end up being about in your posts. The fact that you refuse, not fail, but refuse to accept anything, any explanation, any single example of the image you project as well as your close-minedness, is illustrated in every post that you make.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
The last paragraph of
this article is just tooooooo good. I would LOVE to see the Bush supporters actually really "go to Iraq," and for free!!!!
|
Sacrifice? Count Me Out
If You Supported the War, Pay For It
|
by Ted Rall |
|
If America is truly on a war footing," Thom Shanker asks in the New York Times, "why is so little sacrifice asked of the nation at large?" Military recruiters are coming up short of volunteers, yet neither party is pushing for a draft. No one is proposing a tax increase to cover the $60 billion annual cost of the Iraq and Afghan wars. There are no World War II-style war bond drives, no victory gardens, not even gas rationing. Back here in the fatherland, only "support our troops" car ribbons indicate that we're at war--and they aren't even bumper stickers, they're magnetic. Apparently Americans aren't even willing to sacrifice the finish on their automobiles to promote the cause.
"Nobody in America is asked to sacrifice, except us," the paper quotes an officer who just returned from a year in rose-petal-paved Iraq. "[Symbolic signs of support are] just not enough," grumbles a brigadier general. "There has to be more," he demands. "The absence of a call for broader national sacrifice in a time of war has become a near constant topic of discussion among officers and enlisted personnel," the general claims.
Northwestern University professor Charles Moskos says: "The political leaders are afraid to ask the public for any real sacrifice, which doesn't speak too highly of the citizenry."
To which I say: Screw that. It's not my duty to suffer for this pointless war. I've been against it all along, and you can stick your victory garden where the desert sun can't penetrate.
I was among hundreds of thousands of Americans who marched against invading Iraq in early 2003. Tens of millions cheered us on. The largest mass protest movement in history (so designated by the Guinness Book of World Records) brought together pacifists, humanists and people like me. We knew Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. We didn't believe that the same White House that propped up dictatorships in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia--that had, when it suited them, supported Saddam--could possibly be interested in liberating the people of Iraq. When we scrutinized coverage of the CIA's prewar analyses, we found that there wasn't any. There were only reports dating back to 1998, ancient history in the intelligence business. We absolutely didn't trust Dick "cakewalk" Cheney's breezy predictions.
Bush and Cheney ignored our concerns. Instead of building a solid case and bipartisan political consensus, they bullied and lied to Congress and the UN to scam us into this unwinnable war. Who can blame them? They work for ExxonMobil and Halliburton, not the American people. But they, not us, broke Iraq. It can't be fixed, it's not our fault and it's not our problem. There's no reason to relinquish our creature comforts to back their grubby little oil grab.
The most galling aspect of this fiasco is that it was entirely predictable. I know; I predicted it. Here's my column written back in July 2002:
"Most experts expect Iraq to disintegrate into civil war after an overthrow of Saddam's oppressive Ba'ath Party," I wrote. "Opinion of the United States is now at an all-time low among Muslims around the world. Going after Iraq will make matters worse. Why give radical anti-American Islamists even more political ammunition with which to recruit suicide bombers and attract the financial donations that fund their assaults?"
I'm no genius, but even I could see that this war was doomed eight months before the invasion:
"Do the Kurds deserve a homeland? Sure. Would Iraq be better off without Saddam? Probably. But if we're smart, we won't be the ones to blow over this particular house of cards. We have too much to lose and too little to gain in the mess that would certainly ensue."
Did I call that one or what?
David Hendrickson, a scholar at Colorado College, tells the Times: "Bush understands that the support of the public for war--especially the war in Iraq--is conditioned on demanding little of the public." Of course, Bush himself hasn't given up a second of vacation or a single donated dollar, much less one of his hard-partying daughters, to the "war effort." Sacrifice is a hard sell down here among the citizenry when we don't see it starting where it should start, among our leaders.
I'm already sacrificing too much for a war I always believed was stupid and wrong. I'm paying three dollars a gallon for buck-fifty gas and walking through gauntlets of over-armed National Guardboys at airports and bus stations. I'm in greater danger than ever before of getting blown up by a pissed-off fanatic. And I dread the giant tax hike we'll eventually need to pay off Bush's deficit. But these aren't enough sacrifices for Bush and his vainglorious generals, who are planning "a Civilian Reserve, a sort of Peace Corps for professionals. . . a program to seek commitments from bankers, lawyers, doctors, engineers, electricians, plumbers and solid-waste disposal experts to deploy to conflict zones for months at a time on reconstruction assignments, to relieve pressure on the military."
If you voted for Bush, here's your chance to plant your butt where your ridiculous car magnet is, smack dab in the middle of the Sunni Triangle. Good luck.
© 2005 Ted Rall
### |
|
Might we see the whole paragraph?
context, you know, to make a valid decision?
The last paragraph.
Now I know Emanuel is chief of staff and why obama picked him, makes sense.
I agree with the last paragraph, as well.
This is definitely a campaign against the First Amendment, and I believe Bush will do whatever he can to silence people who either disagree with him or who catch him in lies (a full-time job in and of itself).
Bob Geiger - see 2nd paragraph
The last paragraph is why I posted it.
I am not at all convinced that the issue of abortion is a liberal or conservative stance. I think it tends to be tied to conservative because of its religious roots, but even that is debatable. Women throughout history regardless of religion have been having abortions. I believe it simply to be your own belief that really should not be attached to a political process.
As war is always a political process, the comparison isn't really fair is it? and I really, really hope that you are not referring to the war on Iraq because there is just too much refuting evidence to continue to believe we were justified in invading Iraq in the guise that we were defending ourselves.
How can you be pro-choice in the voice of war knowing that the very nature of it kills more people than abortion ever could? Just the war in Iraq alone has probably killed more people than the abortions in the United States in the past 100 years.
Makes no sense to me.
Ho hum, lost me after second paragraph
x
Your last sentence of the third paragraph was just as...sm
uncalled for, I believe, and untrue.
I like this paragraph in your post....
'For the most part I will find people who live in other countries and are observing what is going on here to be a lot more credible because they do not have an agenda.'
Right, and they are more objective as they are far away from it all.
you should forward that last paragraph
to the White House where they seem to think terrorists can be rational and reasoned with and will play nice with us.
I agree with the assessment in the last paragraph.sm
They will use kiddie porn and so-called domestic terrorism to limit our use of the Internet. Everything is greatly exaggerated to induce fear, and then you will allow them to slice up more of your liberties.
Yes, and regarding that final paragraph re: Iran
Seymour Hersh has yet to get it wrong, no matter how much the King George and his men attack.
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060821fa_fact
Here's your answer, 1st paragraph, 2nd line.
...Parade Magazine ASKED the President-elect, who is also a devoted family man, to get personal and tell us what he wants for his children.
He didn't take out an ad in the newspaper. He simply answered a simple question posed to him by a reporter on assignment. If you had taken the time to read more carefully and weren't in such a hurry to slam the man, you might have noticed that.
There was nothing superficial about his response. In fact, the only superficial thing around here is your post.
That would be great but one paragraph has me a bit leary.
"The announcement comes less than a month after the world's largest maker of microprocessors used in personal computers said it would close plants in Southeast Asia and scale back U.S. operations under a restructuring that affects as many as 6,000 employees."
What do they know? Are they afraid O is going to put extra taxes on businesses that do business overseas (which I hope), or are they being smart? Sorry if my sarcasm shows, but this will still affect 6,000 jobs in the U.S.? Why? Need to do some digging here.
The paragraph about early retirement
That's where DH is. Forced to retire because of no work (road construction). The stimulus money went to 2 cities in my state. The rest of the state got nothing towards road construction or very little.
We didn't get last year's stimulus check because we owed taxes and they put the money towards that. Now he's getting screwed out of the $250 because he wasn't retired when this happened. Never fails.
Remember that cartoon of the guy always under the grey cloud? That's us. 
Your last paragraph is absolutely correct.
The UN is definitely weak. It could be because of some of the countries that belong to it have the same ideas as Iran and NK.
I wonder when the UN is going to pay up on their lease for the NY building they occupy. Probably never because they think they are above reproach.
Once again you wasted a whole paragraph telling me how stupid I am SM
without a SINGLE FACT! I give up with you. You are just too much (or too little). Whateva!
Your 2nd paragraph is complete and utter nonsense. sm
You wrote: 'Besides, a lot of atheists who try to disprove that God ever existed will usually come to the conclusion that there is too much evidence to prove that He does exist. It usually scares the you know what out of them and they become converts.'
And you know this how? I would say show me the evidence to back up this ridiculous claim, but I already know you have none. It's your opinion/religious propaganda, and it's blantantly false. You also have it backwards. You're implying people start out being athiest, then convert to religion. It's the other way around, when religious or secular people start questioning all the improbable/impossible things the bible is overflowing with, in addition to all of its inconsistenties and outright contradictions.
Forgive me if I doubt that you're an expert on athiests, and forgive me if I doubt your critical thinking skills, because religion frowns upon that - you're not supposed to question god or think for yourself, just obey his commands, or should I say, various human interpretations of his commands...
If there was indeed
'too much evidence to prove that He does exist' then everyone would believe in him. How could anyone deny it? They couldn't. But that's just it, there is no evidence to prove it, whereas there actually IS scientific evidence to the contrary, that you apparently are unaware of or haven't investigated.
Instead, you're willing to believe something based only on 'faith.' In every other area of your life where you'd want or even *demand* facts, proof, or concrete evidence before believing something so important, with religion (some) people are all too willing to blindly accept it on faith.
BTW, an athiest doesn't have to DISprove god (you can't prove a negative, anyway), you have to prove that he *does* exist, and you can't. And wouldn't you think if he really existed, he would prove it to the entire world's satisfaction anyway and put an end to the debate and all the relious wars, conflict, genocide, misery, suffering, etc? He'd rather we kill each over it? I think not. It makes no sense.
You also wrote: 'You can say all you want, but you just can't argue with a completely changed life'
Yes, I can argue it. You changed your life because *you* wanted to change it. You! Not some mystical, magical, invisible being in the sky who cares about your every thought and action. People change their lives for the better every day, without religion. IMO, if you hadn't found religion, you would've kept looking until you found something else that worked for you, and it probably would've been a lot healthier than the brainwashing, closed-minded, divisive phenomenon that is religion.
a spokesman for M/P issued the last paragraph so not sure how reliable
that would be. Odd how they added it at the end but did not say if it was a fact. It was supposed to be an investigative article. There is no way of knowing if that is fact, it is only what the McCain people say is true.
Cannot trust anyone it seems.
oops - one paragraph made NO sense of mine..sm
That's not to say that they are not entitled to feel what they feel and they are entitled to their opinions/voice..even though I just reread my post and it could be interpreted that way (and sorry for that) -
(above is the corrected paragraph - sorry *lol*)
This paragraph is in my post...I guess you forgot to read it...nm
Actualy, my cut-and-past job didn't miss the first paragraph
but appreciate your selective reading. Nice name, BTW.
I never said I wanted the
government to take care of everything and everybody. I want the government to be responsible to its citizens. They work for us. Expecting elderly retirees to get a job or go to college is ridiculous. These people deserve better. I am not complaining about my life. I am reiterating to you what I see here in the Sunshine State. It is all about money all the time. Many people I know will be able to regroup and hold their lives together but I don't understand why the collapse of the middle class is just all right with you. That is my point. No need to go into the pull yourself up by your bootstraps argument. We will never see eye to eye on that. This is about our country being in debt out the wazoo, borrowing money from China to fight a war no one wants in Iraq and middle class people being downsized into poverty. It is not about being lazy or having choices. It is about the sad sorry state of our union.
Yep, just like the DNC wanted you to...
to move the cLintons on their way out. The DNC did not want Hillary from the get-go, and the media helped them accomplish it. And here you are rewarding them by electing the perps. LOL. sigh. Poor Hillary...pilloried by her own.
Thank you - that was all I wanted to know (sm)
sad how many people don't know the answer and just want to dismiss it without even knowing though.
Just wanted to add
I in no way mean to indicate that everyone receiving any type of public aid spends the whole day watching soaps and eating bon bons. Just that a large portion of them (at least in my area) do just that and have lived off it for years as opposed to using it as a temporary crutch while they try to get back on their feet.
Yep, I know....just wanted to be sure all...
of the information was out there and that what Bush did is vastly different than what Obama is proposing. And apparently it is working because they are lining up for the ice cream and defending him right down the line...lol.
Just wanted to say.................. sm
Merry Christmas!
That's not what I wanted to see.
DH has been talking about moving there for a couple years. He loves Canada.
I hate the cold. Think I'm going to show this to him? Nah.
I just wanted to say thanks.
This is the first time that a discussion on same sex marriage has been a good discussion without personal attacks, etc. Thanks for sharing your point of view with me.
I wanted to, but DH said no.
We have 50 tomato plants in containers, 25 pepper plants (green, hot, hotter, and hotter then he!!), 10 potato plant containers (x6 cuttings in each), and 10 containers of cukes. The only thing we planted in the ground was beans, onions, and radishes. All doing fantastic. Already have a hot pepper and some tomatoes and this weather sucks this year, only 60 damp, dreary, rainy all week...again. Surprised the plants are doing so well.
We also have about 5 tomato plants coming up in the ground from last year.
I was wondering how your garden was doing. Thanks for letting me know.
Well, call me what you want, but I wanted to know.
I say use God's name when you're speaking the truth. If it's truth point it out to me.
What I wanted to know to start with...
is how can I know that Democrats/liberals/the left, WHOEVER, will keep this country safe, when half of them deny there is a threat and the other half have no idea how to deal with it? What I said it was not political, I meant it. Both sides should be trying to protect this country, but frankly I only see one who seems to understand the threat. As I have said numerous times, I am not a registered Repbulican. I am not thrilled with any party in this country right now, but I have to register as SOMETHING to vote, so I am registered independent. Yes, I am conservative, I have conservative moral values and I believe if we had stuck closer to moral values we would have a lot fewer issues these days, but I digress. My concern is, Dem, that I don't think your party and many of its members grasp what a real threat radical Muslims are, and if you don't perceive the threat you don't take steps to fight it, and that is the reason I referred to Clinton, because in all honesty I do not think he perceived the threat. I do not want to think that he did and ignored it. And my point is, I don't think your party to this day perceives the enormity of the threat, and yes, that scares me. This is not rhetoric. This is the way I, me, personally, feel and has nothing to do with left or right Dems or Republicans, other than the Republicans do seem to have a better grasp on the threat than the Dems do. What I would like to see is America united against the threat, with politics out of it. That is what I would REALLY like to see.
Yes I did, and I never said I wanted free...
healthcare for myself. I want free or more affordable cost healthcare for American children. My children are already covered. My husband has worked for the same company for over 12 years, and he has decent insurance. You are impossible to argue with because you refuse to admit that we can afford $333 MILLION PER DAY FOR A WAR IN IRAQ, AND WE CAN AFFORD $19 MILLION PER DAY FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH CARE. How are your taxes going to be raised to 70% of your income for the health care? Have they been raised that high for the war? NO, so your argument is not valid.
Just wanted to say I agree with you. sm
Thanks for saying it. I think it bears repeating: We are animals too (sorry, can't say I care what it does or doesn't say about that in the Bible), the human race is highly overrated LOL, and yeah, what about population control?!
Humans are already using up 30% more of the Earth's resources each year than the Earth can replace (according to a report by Anderson Cooper I saw some months back), and that's at the current worldwide population, which is only expected to increase. What ARE we going to do when we run out of space, and food, water, trees...?
If we're not animals and we're "above" them, we should be smarter about the Earth and all the creatures on it than we have been, and I just don't see the evidence for that.
someone wanted to see SP interview?
well sunday night on fox, greta vansusteren will interview her. greta is a v. good interviewer too, (with good questions, listens to the answers, etc, if you are not familiar with her).
THe way he was smirking....I would not have wanted to...
look at him either. Not very Presidential. lol.
When did I say I wanted to live in
a Socialist society. I don't. Neither do I want an unstable person with a fiery temper with his hand on the nuke button.
I think he meant he wanted it available to everyone -
he never said he would require you to buy what the government offered - that was more Hillary's plan. He just says he wants it available if you don't have insurance.
They wanted Bush to do that and he said no because
it would lower the value of our dollar.
If China wanted to do that...(sm)
they would have already done it when the economic crisis hit. We already owe them tons of money. I think they would make out better collecting interest off us than spending their resources trying to "control" us, which would eventually lead to yet another war. What I think should be in the bill is help for those who need it immediately (the ones who have already lost jobs and extending state funds to make budgets) and infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure, green job advancement. This can't be outsourced, it generates revenue, it provides jobs, and its needed. The more people we put back to work or keep at work, the better chance we have of paying these bills off through taxable income.
I know it looks like an enormous amount of money to be going into debt for (and it is), but at this point I don't think we have any choice. If you want to talk national security, a depression would leave us much more vulnerable than being in debt. Being vulnerable is not an option at this point.
Whoever wanted what.., the fact..
is that from 1995 to 2001, the Republicans were in control of Congress with a Democratic president, and from 2001 to only 2 or 3 years ago, there was both a Republican president and a Republican congress. So, I think it's pretty obvious what party to point a finger at for the economic mess we are in now, not to mention the other problems. Also, the majority of the bad loans that turned sour were not made to simple homeowners, but speculators and 2nd home buyers. How many people do you know that are losing their actual home? And how many do you know that are losing a 2nd home or investment properties? Compare the figures and you will see. Personally, I don't know of anyone personally losing their actual home. But I know of a dozen or so personally who are losing their investment properties.
Maybe she wanted an Ipod? LOL...sm
http://mediamatters.org/items/200904020002
Can you possibly be more trivial?
It is about what the PEOPLE want - and they wanted this
Finally the legislators vote what the people want!!!
I wanted actually to know your thoughts. Not an article. nm
?
Yeah, you're right...but if he really wanted ...
publicity he could have had Britney Spears' guy design him a set and he could have announced it from there.
For people who wanted me banned ....
you certainly want to continue to engage me.
There is media bias. They want Obama elected. They did it to Hillary too, just not to this degree.
How is this coming out swinging? How is this different from posting pro Obama items?
Are you really this intolerant?
McNasty wanted to suspend the RNC, too., sm
because of the hurricane. Guess he's going to be The Suspender! There's more to this than meets the eye. He's running scared, poor old man.
Poster below is correct: He needs to learn how to multitask--that's what the presidency is all about.
Personally, I'm looking forward to the Biden/Palin debate. Since she compares herself to a pitbull, hunts helpless animals from a helicopter, stuck "her" 3-day-old infant under her desk so she could work, I hope he rips her a new one! She ain't no lady and certainly does not have my respect.
Have you ever thought maybe she wanted a baby
My cousin at 16 wanted a baby. Her parents tried talking her out of it. Explained what her life would be like. Told her about safe sex, birth control, etc. She still got pregnant and had a beautiful baby and she's a good mother. My other cousin (her sister) wanted a baby. Again my aunt and uncle talked to her. At 17 she had her baby and she is a wonderful mother.
So think people....it is possible her daughter wants a baby. Especially if all of her friends are having babies.
If you really wanted to you would have put Clinton on the ticket.
nm
What do you mean? I thought that was what Bush wanted to do.
nm
|
