Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Wow another angry rant by a SORE LOSER!

Posted By: Kathy Pudenda on 2009-06-26
In Reply to: Well sista.... then you would be wrong! - SM

You LOST.  The Good Guys Won.  Get OVER IT! You'll feel better when you begin to confront your angry, hurt feelings and realize how much America repudiated your TREASON and your HATE. 


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

    Wow you are an angry SORE LOSER! LOL
    Take your ball and go on home!  LOL
    It's over, and she will not be a sore loser sm

    Naturally her supporters are disappointed and some are over the top with it.  Hillary will not be a sore loser and, on the contrary, she will support Obama and encouage her supporters to as well, watch and see. I'm not a supporter of hers either.  It was a hard fought contest, that is what democracy is about. She fought the fight, lost, and will do everything that she can to support Obama and unify the party.


    Take my word for it.


    SORE LOSER! TRAITOR!

    All of America stood in line to vote your REPUBLICANS OUT OF OFFICE.  Now, you lost.  Take your ball and go home.  And sulk over there.  You are on time out! 


    Your SORE LOSER rants are truly, truly sad.

    The rants of a 5-year-old who didn't win.  And who didn't win HANDILY!  Crying, angst-ridden, moaning and gnashing of teeth.  All, sad, truly sad...  Look, put your big-girl panties on and listen to this:  YOU LOST.  THE GOOD GUYS WON.  GET THE BLEEEEEEP OVER IT!  You are making a spectacle of yourself, children!!


    GROW UP SORE LOSER!

    Please, put on those big-girl panties, stop crying, get that stiff upper lip and GROW THE BLEEEEEP UP!!  YOU LOST.  AMERICA WON! 


    Someone is a sore loser OBAMA IS CLASSY nm
    nm
    You are such a sore loser already. Don't give up on McCain BWAHHHAHAHA
    XXXXX LMAO
    Ah yes, another intelligent, adult comment from a SORE LOSER!

    LOL!  YOU LOST.  AMERICA WON!  Grow up and if you can't grow up, LEAVE! 


    AMERICA AND OUR PRESIDENT--LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!


    Calls for *maturity* from a childish SORE LOSER??
    Pot meet kettle.  SNORT.  LOL!
    Ignorant and proud of it. Loser.
    0
    Pub regime - loser game
    The dems don't have a large enough majority to override a presidential veto.
    They don't have enough votes in the senate to override a filibuster. Therefore, the pubs can kill their legislation, STILL.
    I guess this makes you a stupid loser
    It was pointed out to me I was just a stupid loser and a racist just because I wrote Barack Hussein Obama. Sarah is more experienced than Obama, can you wrap your hands around that? Anyone drawing attention to the fact she has boobs is trying to cause trouble or fear that she looks like a brilliant woman. How small minded you are. Did you even graduate high school? I won't be looking for your reply. I'm busy planning a victory party for McCain.
    It has always been customary for the nominee to help the loser get their debts paid - this is not a
    x
    You RR's are sore losers nm
    nm
    sometimes people are sore losers
    it happens.  i cant say that I would be happy and nice if O was doing bad.  But he isnt!  He is gonna win!!!!!!!
    How can we be sore losers - nobody has won or lost yet.
    Shouldn't count your chickens. Remember Bush/Gore and Bush/Kerry and if your old enough Nixon/Kennedy.

    As they say "It's not over til the fat lady sings" (and I'm the fat lady. HA HA HA)
    They are just incredibly SORE LOSERS
    .
    Because this board is only for sore losers now
    We have nothing to defend.

    They, on the other hand, have large axes to grind and since there are no more Obama supporters left who come to this poison pen palace, they just have a field day with each other.

    It is a sad display of narrow-minded ignorance and I thank GOD I am not a Republican!

    Just don't post here anymore, Amanda. It has become a refuge for the sick and twisted minds to support each other. Nothing more than that.
    Nice rant....however...
    look up perjury. Perjury is a lying UNDER OATH. A felony. Just plain old lying....like people do every day...just plain old lying. Just in case you did not know...when a President is sworn in he puts the hand on the Bible and swears to uphold the laws of the United States of America. Whoops!! So he not only perjured himself..he broke his oath. But no big deal...right? OF course not. You love generalities don't you? Liars like Bush and his ilk...I could say the same thing about Billary...liars and their ilk. They have both been caught in so many...as I am sure every other politician on the face of the earth.

    Some of these posters remind me of the cliques in junior high who made fun of the fat kids or the kids in glasses, yada yada...same bullies, all grown up.

    Sigh.
    Geez.... RANT ON!
    W
    Not to hijack your rant, but there
    the Bush administration used as a pretext to declaring war. We went to war and into debt and lives were lost over a lie made up to fulfill a plan that was devised prior to 9/11.

    And btw, gay marriage will not harm your marriage in any way, unless your DW/DH is having an affair on the side and decides to make an honest man/woman out of the other person.
    Uh....I don't think I posted a RANT like you just did...
    you might want to take a page from your own book and seek therapy. And if you really read closely...I was not blaming Obama for anything...LOL. I was saying those who were posting about Sanford were trying to take the conversation away from Obama. Geeeezzzzz, just figures. I knowwww you are in love with the Prez. I know you think he can do no wrong. With all he has done that you fail to recognize that is pretty much obvious. Your tolerant and open mind is showing again....NOT.
    The truth usually does touch a sore spot
    --
    Thank you for another vote democrat or die rant...
    PUMA is not just comprised of women. Obviously you are not getting all the news. THere are some po'ed men out there too. Talk about a hand-picked celebrity...you make this too easy! Nobody knew who Obama was until his speech at the last DNC convention. That was when Howard Dean trotted him out, the heir apparent, the only way they could beat Hillary Clinton...a rock star African American candidate. Orchestrated to do just that...dispossess Hillary Clinton and remove the Clintons once and for all. In case you hadn't noticed it, Howard Dean despises the Clintons. And the media jumped right on the bandwagon, doing everything in their power to thwart Hillary Clinton and pursue their love fest with Obama...because...and you on the inside can't see the forest for the trees...you are buying it hook, line, and sinker. And not only that, you are HELPING them. It is an amazing thing to watch.

    Republicans smug? OMG. Pot kettle BIG time.

    Uh....Obama said..."oh and by the way he's black." He did play the race card...but then so did BILL CLINTON. Geez.

    No, he has not gambled away his experience card...because YOU keep bringing it up, which only brings your #1's lack of experience to the top and keeps everyone thinking about it.

    THANK YOU! lol
    nobody cares about your pro mccain rant
    loser
    Changing the subject to the tax rant
    nm
    Rant away if it makes you feel better.
    You've gotton so many things wrong, it's laugable.

    First of all, saying "people like you" once again shows your lack of understanding of the situation. I do not protest outside of abortion clinics. Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't.

    Much like you don't want religion in your politics, I don't want somebody's stinking LACK of morals in MY politics. Gay marriage. Late-term abortion. Did you ever stop to think that THAT might be offense to others? No. Because people like you are so busy beating your chests like gorillas and proclaiming how liberal and open-minded you lot are. When all the while you're trying to stomp on anyone and everyone who has the audicity to display a little faith in God.

    As far as "running all over the world" - you're just running your mouth instead of your brain. I go to Russia twice a year. Russia is not "all over the world" but I suppose I can blame the public school system who apparently didn't let you in on that little secret.

    And "that perfect little baby" once again shows your inabilty to comprehend the situation. You have no idea about the conditions I've seen in Russian orphanages. They are little more than warehouses for children, so that particular high horse of yours is lame as well. Why don't YOU go advocate for the foster kids in America? Better yet, don't. It wouldn't be fair to the kids.

    If you had any capacity for learning, you would have rememberd that I have a WHOLE HOUSEFUL of adopted children. All are special needs, all are from the foster care system right here in the good 'ol USA. So your comment "children here are just too much of a pain in the a$$ for you" is offensive and, once again, totally off base.

    I have never rambled about how wonderful I am. Nor have I said how $hitty anyone else is, though in your case I will make an exception. If you think I'm boasting it's because you have an inferiority complex.

    I'm sorry if you want me to cry and pat you on your little head and feel sorry for you and how hard the abortion was on YOU. I'm sure there are plenty of P.C. posters who will crowd all around you and applaud your courageous decision to kill an infant instead of doing the right, albeit more difficult, thing and leaving your abusive husband and caring for yourself and your child. Too bad you didn't have the support system of a good Christian church to help you make a better decision. I don't have any patience for people who martyr themselves and then want everyone to throw them a big pity party.
    Sorry to burst your rant bubble, but...
    There are Christmas parades, Easter parades, and Christian cruises, so why shouldn't there be gay pride parades and gay cruises?

    I won't respond to the rest of your rant because, frankly, it made me dizzy just reading parts of it!
    Feel better after your self-righteous rant?
    The Palestinians are terrorits, who thrive on chaos and bloodshed.

    If it makes you feel all giddy to root for the savages, go ahead. You've clearly closed your mind off to the truth. Just like they wanted you to.

    Nice to know even monsters can find support from folks like you.

    It must really burn you, though, that Israel is kicking the holy h3ll out of your little bunch of Arab buddies.

    So what do you think about the warnings that Palestinans are going to resort to suicide bombers (since they clearly can't hit squat with their rockets)?

    Who do you think they're going to strap those little puppies to, anyway? It won't be the "soldiers." No sir. They're targeting their recruitment at women and boys. Yeah, that's real gallant.

    Back to the Stone Age! Shouldn't take long now.
    Man's IRS rant hits a nerve. sm
    An article on a letter to the Editor of a newspaper making its rounds on the Internet.

    http://www.suntimes.com/business/1467702,w-dear-irs-texas-barnett-taxes030909.article

    Here is Mr. Barnett's letter:

    Taxed to excess
    Dear IRS,
    I am sorry to inform you that I will not be able to pay taxes owed April 15, but all is not lost.
    I have paid these taxes: accounts receivable tax, building permit tax, CDL tax, cigarette tax, corporate income tax, dog licence tax, federal income tax, unemployment tax, gasoline tax, hunting licence tax, fishing licence tax, waterfowl stamp tax, inheritance tax, inventory tax, liquor tax, luxury tax, medicare tax, city, school and county property tax (up 33 percent last 4 years), real estate tax, social security tax, road usage tax, toll road tax, state and city sales tax, recreational vehicle tax, state franchise tax, state unemployment tax, telephone federal excise tax, telephone federal state and local surcharge tax, telephone minimum usage surcharge tax, telephone state and local tax, utility tax, vehicle licence registration tax, capitol gains tax, lease severance tax, oil and gas assessment tax, Colorado property tax, Texas, Colorado, Wyoming, Oklahoma and New Mexico sales tax, and many more that I can’t recall but I have run out of space and money.
    When you do not receive my check April 15, just know that it is an honest mistake. Please treat me the same way you treated Congressmen Charles Rangle, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and ex-Congressman Tom Dashelle and, of course, your boss Timothy Geithner. No penalties and no interest.
    P.S. I will make at least a partial payment as soon as I get my stimulus check.
    Ed Barnett
    Wichita Falls


    This is just unfathomable to me (caution - rant enclosed)
    I said once I'd never post on this board again, but this isn't a political issue, it reaches across the board. This just blows me away. 60 days' punishment for stealing this child's innocence and scarring her forever - it's just so far beyond appalling that I can't even think of a word that fits. I have to wonder if this guy would have been off the streets longer if he'd stolen a purse. Heaven forbid if he'd tortured a dog the way he tortured this child - they'd have probably thrown away the key! If he'd only gotten 60 days for it, you can bet PETA would have been all over it, but who is there for this little girl?Anyway, I have fired off a letter to Vermont's governor, for all the good it will probably do, and I am also sending prayers for this poor child.
    Free is your rant, not Obama's proposal.
    to put a fox in charge of the chicken coop? The economy is a wreck and cannot be fixed by those who refuse to even discuss the issue.
    Outsourcing/China (warning - rant)

    Hubby was telling me last night that China's economy is now tanking because ours is.  Factory workers over there were showing up for work only to find their business had closed because of lack of orders from the U.S.  India may be next.  You never know.  I don't see it happening with MT but like I said, you just don't know.  Did you see their work days?  6 days a week and something like 12 or 14 hours a day?


    I hear lip service from Nobama/Maobama about cutting taxes to bring our businesses back but don't see him acting on it.  He's a one-termer.  Carter got us in a heap of trouble which Reagan (I know union employees aren't fond of him) had to get us out of.  All Nobama is doing is having construction/building jobs sprout up here and there.  And where does the money come from to pay for his multi-trillion dollar spending?  You got it - us.  Those jobs will eventually fizzle out, our country will be poorer and those people will once again be unemployed.. 


    Dems coined the phrase Voodoo Economics for Reagan's Trickle Down Economics.  Whether or not you liked the man, he did a world of good for this country.  He did cut capital gains taxes and cut taxes for the rich.  Trickle down 101:  You cut taxes for the rich, they can afford to hire more employees, more often than not, at better wages.  Unemployment is down.  People go out and spend more money because they are employed and can afford to.  During Reagan's terms in office, he cut taxes immensely yet the government took in more money.  People would much rather spend their money the way they want than have the government take it and spend it.  


    Folks, we work for our government.  Our government should be working for us.  We should not live in fear of the IRS.  I attended a TEA party on April 15 and will attend more such events.  We should have a government for the people, of the people and by the people.  The protest was very peaceful and guess what?  Not a bit of litter was left to be found when it ended, like the disgrace that was left after the inauguration in Washington, DC. 


    We are getting so far away from a constitutional government, it's not funny.  Actually, my opinion is that we are currently a socialist government.  You know the next step after socialism?  Communism. 


    I read the most recent list of who they consider a terrorist.  Hoarding food?  Um, yep.  Better buy it now in case a depression hits.  Glad I have a breadmaker.  Wouldn't want to have to spend $50 on a loaf of bread.  Buying lots of ammo?  Sure, but then again, we do competition shooting.  Guns?  Yeah, we have our share, but variety is the spice of life (Hubby bought me a Macarov but I didn't care for the way it operated (too hard to load the mag), especially after the slide came back and sliced my thumb open 5 times, bad lacerations - my fault, was handling it wrong, so I got a Glock).  My husband is an Iraqi war vet.  That makes us both domestic terrorists.  Yet neither one of us even has the heart to even discipline our dogs.  We're both very gentle people.  Of course if someone broke into our home, we would defened ourselves. 


    I'm sorry for the rant but I just don't see Nobama caring much about outsourcing.  I really really really hope I am wrong and what he is doing for our country is the right thing but I truly resent being labeled a domestic terrorist because I see us headed for a depression and am stocking up on food, and my husband happened to be in the military during the Gulf war. 


    Thanks for listening. 


    I totally agree, gloating winners, sore losers and
    sore Shelly
    You are losing it gt, starting to scream and rant. Best rest now. nm

    I have no clue why you added this Bush rant to my post...
    George Bush did not single-handedly send troops to war. There is that little ol thing called Congress who have to vote to allow him to go to war, he can't just do it on his own. And guess what...they DID. Democrats and Republicans alike. I just don't understand why some Americans don't understand THAT. Blame it on George Bush, like he was King or something. He did not do it alone. And you are right, I will NEVER accept that ANY soldier died for no reason. How arrogant of anyone to even suggest such a thing. Our men and women in uniform go where they are sent and they do their duty. Shame on ANY American who would publically say those brave young men and women died in vain, I don't care what their politics are. To me, that reeks.

    I also do not know why it is so easy for some Americans to totally ignore the many reasons we went into Iraq. Have you ever actually read the Iraq resolution passed by Congress? I seriously doubt it. Hussein was in violation of so many UN resolutions it would take a ream of paper to list them. And he did finance and harbor terrorists. One of the perps of the Achille Lauro hijacking lived out his miserable life there being given free medical care and a free ride by the Hussein government. Zarqawi had his little terrorist training camp up in Northern Iraq for a year before we went in. One of Hussein's higher ups met with Mohammed Atta a couple of months before 9-11. What do you think they were talking about? The weather?

    I don't believe I even mentioned the President in my post. I believe we went into Iraq for a good reason, we had been hit and we had to hit back harder. We did so in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have not had another major attack since that happened. Wonder why that is...????

    My point is, the President is not singly responsible for the war in Iraq. The Congress is just as responsible. So when you start to lay blame and malign the names of good men and women who died for something they believed in, even if you don't....you should spread the blame evenly. Get off the Hate Bush train and back into reality.
    I didn't rant, honey, just gave my opinion........sm
    I did try to explain it to you, very nicely. You and others just won't listen.


    I don't mind, really I don't. Makes it so much easier for McCain to win.


    It ain't over till the fat lady sings......


    Let's chat again on Nov 5, shall we?
    No sale.....sounds like a rush limpball rant
    x
    Stupid question....I got Rick Santelli on a rant with this link.....
    did I do something wrong? LOL.
    She did rant when Bush was prez. Now everything is blue skies with a big pot'o'change
    at the end of the rainbow!
    nope, y'all are sore democrat winners. Obamas are proven bigots and
    they'll show their true colors again soon, not to worry.
    angry?
    Anger, me?  Not at all.  Firm in my beliefs, you bet.  Thinking the necon dinosaurs are fools, you bet.  Attacking neocons, not unless they attack me.  I give as good as I get. 
    she does seem angry.....
    x
    What are you so angry about
    WHAT is their fault?  What exactly has happened so far?  Or are you just talking about what COULD happen or MIGHT happen because we are trying to fix the economy?  Obama is doing what he said and YES it is our patriotic duty to get this country back on track.  You want to yell and scream because that is your right to have a voice.  You want to vote because it is your right to choose who is in charge.  BUT, you don't want to help when the going gets tough?  What?  It's no longer your business or responsiblity?  HA!   It's kinda like marriage, in sickness and in health.  We are ill right now.....stick it out and ride out the storm. 
    What I am angry about
    Being labeled horrible names because I am not a democrat. I'm neither a republican either. You say "we" are trying to fix the economy. Are you in congress doing anything about it. No, I'm sorry but you talk as though you are right their with the congress trying to "fix" things. I'm mad that people are blaming every single thing on republicans, when we've had a democratic congress the past two years. I'm angry that nobody is saying squat about B. Franks, H. Reid, N. Pelosi and others who have gotten us into this mess (along with B. Clinton forcing banks to give loans to people who couldn't afford it). Democrats and republicans have both been at fault for what has happened. But I'm sick and tired (and please no wise-@ss remarks) of people blaming every single thing on only republicans and that the democrats are absolutely perfect and have never done anything wrong. And you blatently misstated what I said. I said I'm tired of being told "it's my patriotic duty to pay more taxes". I didn't say anything about getting the country back on track. It would be nice if your trying to make a point to at least repeat what I said. I never said I don't want to help. What I said was I don't want to have to put my bills and food and other items I need on credit so that way the gvt can take more money from me and give it to the illegals who are perfectly able to earn money themselves but they prefer not to because the democrats have offered them a free ride.

    I'm barely surviving here. I'm sinking fast. I don't do squat here except work. I'm sticking it out. But don't sit there and blame every single republican while you excuse every single democrat for the poor behavior and decisions they make.


    This make me so angry!

    As Karl Rove himself said, Wilson's wife was "fair game."


    I've said before that it's not only Valerie Plame who he endangered, but everyone who has worked with her during her work with WMDs.  We're in the middle of a WAR, but this "good ol' boy" administration doesn't care what they do or don't do in that respect.  They don't care whose lives they endanger.  They don't THANK these people for their service and for putting their lives in danger to try to make this country a better place. No, instead they see a man who has dared to disagree with King George, and they target his wife for potential danger, to get even with her husband for disagreeing with Almighty George Dumbya Bush.  They act like a redneck version of the Mafia. The CIA deserve more respect than this administration gives it, but this administration doesn't think much of respect.  Bush blatantly doesn't care who in the world respects us, and he offers no respect to anyone else in this world.  He is perfect, and he makes no mistakes, and if you don't believe me, just ask him or one of his aids or one of his flunkies on this board.  They'll all tell you how perfect he is.


    I've seen Larry Johnson on different programs, and the views he expressed in this letter absolutely reflect what he said on TV.  How in the world could any CIA source trust the CIA to protect his or her identity when the president of this country makes it clear that everything is "fair" in this good ol' boy Mafia-type game played in Washington.


    Rove definitely should have his security clearance yanked.  He clearly doesn't deserve it.  Neither does Bush.


    Angry old bitty
    and....I have always know you are an angry ancient old fart who needs to step back and leave the progressive positive moving forward community alone..Take your ancient backward ideas and stuff em where the sun does not shine..
    Why are Americans so angry?

    Why Are Americans So Angry?


    by Ron Paul
    by Ron Paul






    SaveSave  EmailEmail  Printer-friendlyPrinter-friendly  ViewView  


    Before the U.S. House of Representatives, June 29, 2006


    I have been involved in politics for over 30 years and have never seen the American people so angry. It’s not unusual to sense a modest amount of outrage, but it seems the anger today is unusually intense and quite possibly worse than ever. It’s not easily explained, but I have some thoughts on this matter. Generally, anger and frustration among people are related to economic conditions; bread and butter issues. Yet today, according to government statistics, things are going well. We have low unemployment, low inflation, more homeowners than ever before, and abundant leisure with abundant luxuries. Even the poor have cell phones, televisions, and computers. Public school is free, and anyone can get free medical care at any emergency room in the country. Almost all taxes are paid by the top 50% of income earners. The lower 50% pay essentially no income taxes, yet general dissatisfaction and anger are commonplace. The old slogan “It’s the economy, stupid,” just doesn’t seem to explain things.


    Some say it’s the war, yet we’ve lived with war throughout the 20th century. The bigger they were the more we pulled together. And the current war, by comparison, has fewer American casualties than the rest. So it can’t just be the war itself.


    People complain about corruption, but what’s new about government corruption? In the 19th century we had railroad scandals; in the 20th century we endured the Teapot Dome scandal, Watergate, Koreagate, and many others without too much anger and resentment. Yet today it seems anger is pervasive and worse than we’ve experienced in the past.


    Could it be that war, vague yet persistent economic uncertainty, corruption, and the immigration problem all contribute to the anger we feel in America? Perhaps, but it’s almost as though people aren’t exactly sure why they are so uneasy. They only know that they’ve had it and aren’t going to put up with it anymore.


    High gasoline prices make a lot of people angry, though there is little understanding of how deficits, inflation, and war in the Middle East all contribute to these higher prices.


    Generally speaking, there are two controlling forces that determine the nature of government: the people’s concern for their economic self-interests; and the philosophy of those who hold positions of power and influence in any particular government. Under Soviet Communism the workers believed their economic best interests were being served, while a few dedicated theoreticians placed themselves in positions of power. Likewise, the intellectual leaders of the American Revolution were few, but rallied the colonists to risk all to overthrow a tyrannical king.


    Since there’s never a perfect understanding between these two forces the people and the philosophical leaders and because the motivations of the intellectual leaders vary greatly, any transition from one system of government to another is unpredictable. The communist takeover by Lenin was violent and costly; the demise of communism and the acceptance of a relatively open system in the former Soviet Union occurred in a miraculous manner. Both systems had intellectual underpinnings.


    In the United States over the last century we have witnessed the coming and going of various intellectual influences by proponents of the free market, Keynesian welfarism, varieties of socialism, and supply-side economics. In foreign policy we’ve seen a transition from the founder’s vision of non-intervention in the affairs of others to internationalism, unilateral nation building, and policing the world. We now have in place a policy, driven by determined neo-conservatives, to promote American “goodness” and democracy throughout the world by military force – with particular emphasis on remaking the Middle East.


    We all know that ideas do have consequences. Bad ideas, even when supported naďvely by the people, will have bad results. Could it be the people sense, in a profound way, that the policies of recent decades are unworkable – and thus they have instinctively lost confidence in their government leaders? This certainly happened in the final years of the Soviet system. Though not fully understood, this sense of frustration may well be the source of anger we hear expressed on a daily basis by so many.


    No matter how noble the motivations of political leaders are, when they achieve positions of power the power itself inevitably becomes their driving force. Government officials too often yield to the temptations and corrupting influences of power.


    But there are many others who are not bashful about using government power to do “good.” They truly believe they can make the economy fair through a redistributive tax and spending system; make the people moral by regulating personal behavior and choices; and remake the world in our image using armies. They argue that the use of force to achieve good is legitimate and proper for government – always speaking of the noble goals while ignoring the inevitable failures and evils caused by coercion.


    Not only do they justify government force, they believe they have a moral obligation to do so.


    Once we concede government has this “legitimate” function and can be manipulated by a majority vote, the various special interests move in quickly. They gain control to direct government largesse for their own benefit. Too often it is corporate interests who learn how to manipulate every contract, regulation, and tax policy. Likewise, promoters of the “progressive” agenda, always hostile to property rights, compete for government power through safety, health, and environmental initiatives. Both groups resort to using government power – and abuse this power – in an effort to serve their narrow interests. In the meantime, constitutional limits on power and its mandate to protect liberty are totally forgotten.


    Since the use of power to achieve political ends is accepted, pervasive, and ever expanding, popular support for various programs is achieved by creating fear. Sometimes the fear is concocted out of thin air, but usually it’s created by wildly exaggerating a problem or incident that does not warrant the proposed government “solution.” Often government caused the problem in the first place. The irony, of course, is that government action rarely solves any problem, but rather worsens existing problems or creates altogether new ones.


    Fear is generated to garner popular support for the proposed government action, even when some liberty has to be sacrificed. This leads to a society that is systemically driven toward fear – fear that gives the monstrous government more and more authority and control over our lives and property.


    Fear is constantly generated by politicians to rally the support of the people.


    Environmentalists go back and forth, from warning about a coming ice age to arguing the grave dangers of global warming.


    It is said that without an economic safety net – for everyone, from cradle to grave – people would starve and many would become homeless.


    It is said that without government health care, the poor would not receive treatment. Medical care would be available only to the rich.


    Without government insuring pensions, all private pensions would be threatened.


    Without federal assistance, there would be no funds for public education, and the quality of our public schools would diminish – ignoring recent history to the contrary.


    It is argued that without government surveillance of every American, even without search warrants, security cannot be achieved. The sacrifice of some liberty is required for security of our citizens, they claim.


    We are constantly told that the next terrorist attack could come at any moment. Rather than questioning why we might be attacked, this atmosphere of fear instead prompts giving up liberty and privacy. 9/11 has been conveniently used to generate the fear necessary to expand both our foreign intervention and domestic surveillance.


    Fear of nuclear power is used to assure shortages and highly expensive energy.


    In all instances where fear is generated and used to expand government control, it’s safe to say the problems behind the fears were not caused by the free market economy, or too much privacy, or excessive liberty.


    It’s easy to generate fear, fear that too often becomes excessive, unrealistic, and difficult to curb. This is important: It leads to even more demands for government action than the perpetrators of the fear actually anticipated.


    Once people look to government to alleviate their fears and make them safe, expectations exceed reality. FEMA originally had a small role, but its current mission is to centrally manage every natural disaster that befalls us. This mission was exposed as a fraud during last year’s hurricanes; incompetence and corruption are now FEMA’s legacy. This generates anger among those who have to pay the bills, and among those who didn’t receive the handouts promised to them quickly enough.


    Generating exaggerated fear to justify and promote attacks on private property is commonplace. It serves to inflame resentment between the producers in society and the so-called victims, whose demands grow exponentially.


    The economic impossibility of this system guarantees that the harder government tries to satisfy the unlimited demands, the worse the problems become. We won’t be able to pay the bills forever, and eventually our ability to borrow and print new money must end. This dependency on government will guarantee anger when the money runs out. Today we’re still able to borrow and inflate, but budgets are getting tighter and people sense serious problems lurking in the future. This fear is legitimate. No easy solution to our fiscal problems is readily apparent, and this ignites anger and apprehension.


    Disenchantment is directed at the politicians and their false promises, made in order to secure reelection and exert power that so many of them enjoy.


    It is, however, in foreign affairs that governments have most abused fear to generate support for an agenda that under normal circumstances would have been rejected. For decades our administrations have targeted one supposed “Hitler” after another to gain support for military action against a particular country. Today we have three choices termed the axis of evil: Iran, Iraq or North Korea.


    We recently witnessed how unfounded fear was generated concerning Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction to justify our first pre-emptive war. It is now universally known the fear was based on falsehoods. And yet the war goes on; the death and destruction continue.


    This is not a new phenomenon. General Douglas MacArthur understood the political use of fear when he made this famous statement:



    “Always there has been some terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it.”


    We should be ever vigilant when we hear the fear mongers preparing us for the next military conflict our young men and women will be expected to fight. We’re being told of the great danger posed by Ahmadinejad in Iran and Kim Jung Il in North Korea. Even Russia and China bashing is in vogue again. And we’re still not able to trade with or travel to Cuba. A constant enemy is required to expand the state. More and more news stories blame Iran for the bad results in Iraq. Does this mean Iran is next on the hit list?


    The world is much too dangerous, we’re told, and therefore we must be prepared to fight at a moment’s notice regardless of the cost. If the public could not be manipulated by politicians’ efforts to instill needless fear, fewer wars would be fought and far fewer lives would be lost.



    Fear and Anger over Iraq


    Though the American people are fed up for a lot of legitimate reasons, almost all polls show the mess in Iraq leads the list of why the anger is so intense.


    Short wars, with well-defined victories, are tolerated by the American people even when they are misled as to the reasons for the war. Wars entered into without a proper declaration tend to be politically motivated and not for national security reasons. These wars, by their very nature, are prolonged, costly, and usually require a new administration to finally end them. This certainly was true with the Korean and Vietnam wars. The lack of a quick military success, the loss of life and limb, and the huge economic costs of lengthy wars precipitate anger. This is overwhelmingly true when the war propaganda that stirred up illegitimate fears is exposed as a fraud. Most soon come to realize the promise of guns and butter is an illusion. They come to understand that inflation, a weak economy, and a prolonged war without real success are the reality.


    The anger over the Iraq war is multifaceted. Some are angry believing they were lied to in order to gain their support at the beginning. Others are angry that the forty billion dollars we spend every year on intelligence gathering failed to provide good information. Proponents of the war too often are unable to admit the truth. They become frustrated with the progress of the war and then turn on those wanting to change course, angrily denouncing them as unpatriotic and un-American.


    Those accused are quick to respond to the insulting charges made by those who want to fight on forever without regard to casualties. Proponents of the war do not hesitate to challenge the manhood of war critics, accusing them of wanting to cut and run. Some war supporters ducked military service themselves while others fought and died, only adding to the anger of those who have seen battle up close and question our campaign in Iraq.


    When people see a $600 million embassy being built in Baghdad, while funding for services here in the United States is hard to obtain, they become angry. They can’t understand why the money is being spent, especially when they are told by our government that we have no intention of remaining permanently in Iraq.


    The bickering and anger will not subside soon, since victory in Iraq is not on the horizon and a change in policy is not likely to occur.


    The neoconservative instigators of the war are angry at everyone: at the people who want to get out of Iraq; and especially at those prosecuting the war for not bombing more aggressively, sending more troops, and expanding the war into Iran.


    As our country becomes poorer due to the cost of the war, anger surely will escalate. Some of it will be justified.


    It seems bizarre that it’s so unthinkable to change course if the current policy is failing. Our leaders are like a physician who makes a wrong diagnosis and prescribes the wrong medicine, but because of his ego can’t tell the patient he made a mistake. Instead he hopes the patient will get better on his own. But instead of improving, the patient gets worse from the medication wrongly prescribed. This would be abhorrent behavior in medicine, but tragically it is commonplace in politics.


    If the truth is admitted, it would appear that the lives lost and the money spent have been in vain. Instead, more casualties must be sustained to prove a false premise. If the truth is admitted, imagine the anger of all the families that already have suffered such a burden. That burden is softened when the families and the wounded are told their great sacrifice was worthy, and required to preserve our freedoms and our Constitution.


    But no one is allowed to ask the obvious. How have the 2,500 plus deaths, and the 18,500 wounded, made us more free? What in the world does Iraq have to do with protecting our civil liberties here at home? What national security threat prompted American’s first pre-emptive war? How does our unilateral enforcement of UN resolutions enhance our freedoms?


    These questions aren’t permitted. They are not politically correct. I agree that the truth hurts, and the questions are terribly hurtful to the families that have suffered so much. What a horrible thought it would be to find out the cause for which we fight is not quite so noble.


    I don’t believe those who hide from the truth and refuse to face the reality of the war do so deliberately. The pain is too great. Deep down, psychologically, many are incapable of admitting such a costly and emotionally damaging error. They instead become even greater and more determined supporters of the failed policy.


    I would concede that there are some – especially the die-hard neoconservatives, who believe it is our moral duty to spread American goodness through force and remake the Middle East – who neither suffer regrets nor are bothered by the casualties. They continue to argue for more war without remorse, as long as they themselves do not have to fight. Criticism is reserved for the wimps who want to “cut and run.”


    Due to the psychological need to persist with the failed policy, the war proponents must remain in denial of many facts staring them in the face.


    They refuse to accept that the real reason for our invasion and occupation of Iraq was not related to terrorism.


    They deny that our military is weaker as a consequence of this war.


    They won’t admit that our invasion has served the interests of Osama Bin Laden. They continue to blame our image problems around the world on a few bad apples.


    They won’t admit that our invasion has served the interests of Iran’s radical regime.


    The cost in lives lost and dollars spent is glossed over, and the deficit spirals up without concern.


    They ridicule those who point out that our relationships with our allies have been significantly damaged.


    We have provided a tremendous incentive for Russia and China, and others like Iran, to organize through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. They entertain future challenges to our plans to dominate South East Asia, the Middle East, and all its oil.


    Radicalizing the Middle East will in the long term jeopardize Israel’s security, and increase the odds of this war spreading.


    War supporters cannot see that for every Iraqi killed, another family turns on us – regardless of who did the killing. We are and will continue to be blamed for every wrong done in Iraq: all deaths, illness, water problems, food shortages, and electricity outages.


    As long as our political leaders persist in these denials, the war won’t end. The problem is that this is the source of the anger, because the American people are not in denial and want a change in policy.


    Policy changes in wartime are difficult, for it is almost impossible for the administration to change course since so much emotional energy has been invested in the effort. That’s why Eisenhower ended the Korean War, and not Truman. That’s why Nixon ended the Vietnam War, and not LBJ. Even in the case of Vietnam the end was too slow and costly, as more then 30,000 military deaths came after Nixon’s election in 1968. It makes a lot more sense to avoid unnecessary wars than to overcome the politics involved in stopping them once started. I personally am convinced that many of our wars could be prevented by paying stricter attention to the method whereby our troops are committed to battle. I also am convinced that when Congress does not declare war, victory is unlikely.


    The most important thing Congress can do to prevent needless and foolish wars is for every member to take seriously his or her oath to obey the Constitution. Wars should be entered into only after great deliberation and caution. Wars that are declared by Congress should reflect the support of the people, and the goal should be a quick and successful resolution.


    Our undeclared wars over the past 65 years have dragged on without precise victories. We fight to spread American values, to enforce UN resolutions, and to slay supposed Hitlers. We forget that we once spread American values by persuasion and setting an example – not by bombs and preemptive invasions. Nowhere in the Constitution are we permitted to go to war on behalf of the United Nations at the sacrifice of our national sovereignty. We repeatedly use military force against former allies, thugs we helped empower – like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden – even when they pose no danger to us.


    The 2002 resolution allowing the president to decide when and if to invade Iraq is an embarrassment. The Constitution authorizes only Congress to declare war. Our refusal to declare war transferred power to the president illegally, without a constitutional amendment. Congress did this with a simple resolution, passed by majority vote. This means Congress reneged on its responsibility as a separate branch of government, and should be held accountable for the bad policy in Iraq that the majority of Americans are now upset about. Congress is every bit as much at fault as the president.


    Constitutional questions aside, the American people should have demanded more answers from their government before they supported the invasion and occupation of a foreign country.


    Some of the strongest supporters of the war declare that we are a Christian nation, yet use their religious beliefs to justify the war. They claim it is our Christian duty to remake the Middle East and attack the Muslim infidels. Evidently I have been reading from a different Bible. I remember something about “Blessed are the peacemakers.”


    My beliefs aside, Christian teaching of nearly a thousand years reinforces the concept of “Just War Theory.” This Christian theory emphasizes six criteria needed to justify Christian participation in war. Briefly the six points are as follows:



    1. War should be fought only in self-defense;
    2. War should be undertaken only as a last resort;
    3. A decision to enter war should be made only by a legitimate authority;
    4. All military responses must be proportional to the threat;
    5. There must be a reasonable chance of success; and
    6. A public declaration notifying all parties concerned is required.

    The war in Iraq fails to meet almost all of these requirements. This discrepancy has generated anger and division within the Christian community.


    Some are angry because the war is being fought out of Christian duty, yet does not have uniform support from all Christians. Others are angry because they see Christianity as a religion as peace and forgiveness, not war and annihilation of enemies.


    Constitutional and moral restraints on war should be strictly followed. It is understandable when kings, dictators, and tyrants take their people into war, since it serves their selfish interests – and those sent to fight have no say in the matter. It is more difficult to understand why democracies and democratic legislative bodies, which have a say over the issue of war, so readily submit to the executive branch of government. The determined effort of the authors of our Constitution to firmly place the power to declare war in the legislative branch has been ignored in the decades following WWII.


    Many members have confided in me that they are quite comfortable with this arrangement. They flatly do not expect, in this modern age, to formally declare war ever again. Yet no one predicts there will be fewer wars fought. It is instead assumed they will be ordered by the executive branch or the United Nations – a rather sad commentary.


    What about the practical arguments against war, since no one seems interested in exerting constitutional or moral restraints? Why do we continue to fight prolonged, political wars when the practical results are so bad? Our undeclared wars since 1945 have been very costly, to put it mildly. We have suffered over one hundred thousand military deaths, and even more serious casualties. Tens of thousands have suffered from serious war-related illnesses. Sadly, we as a nation express essentially no concern for the millions of civilian casualties in the countries where we fought.


    The cost of war since 1945, and our military presence in over 100 countries, exceeds two trillion dollars in today’s dollars. The cost in higher taxes, debt, and persistent inflation is immeasurable. Likewise, the economic opportunities lost by diverting trillions of dollars into war is impossible to measure, but it is huge. Yet our presidents persist in picking fights with countries that pose no threat to us, refusing to participate in true diplomacy to resolve differences. Congress over the decades has never resisted the political pressures to send our troops abroad on missions that defy imagination.


    When the people object to a new adventure, the propaganda machine goes into action to make sure critics are seen as unpatriotic Americans or even traitors.


    The military-industrial complex we were warned about has been transformed into a military-media-industrial-government complex that is capable of silencing the dissenters and cheerleading for war. It’s only after years of failure that people are able to overcome the propaganda for war and pressure their representatives in Congress to stop the needless killing. Many times the economic costs of war stir people to demand an end. This time around the war might be brought to a halt by our actual inability to pay the bills due to a dollar crisis. A dollar crisis will make borrowing 2.5 billion dollars per day from foreign powers like China and Japan virtually impossible, at least at affordable interest rates.


    That’s when we will be forced to reassess the spending spree, both at home and abroad.


    The solution to this mess is not complicated; but the changes needed are nearly impossible for political reasons. Sound free market economics, sound money, and a sensible foreign policy would all result from strict adherence to the Constitution. If the people desired it, and Congress was filled with responsible members, a smooth although challenging transition could be achieved. Since this is unlikely, we can only hope that the rule of law and the goal of liberty can be reestablished without chaos.


    We must move quickly toward a more traditional American foreign policy of peace, friendship, and trade with all nations; entangling alliances with none. We must reject the notion that we can or should make the world safe for democracy. We must forget about being the world’s policeman. We should disengage from the unworkable and unforgiving task of nation building. We must reject the notion that our military should be used to protect natural resources, private investments, or serve the interest of any foreign government or the United Nations. Our military should be designed for one purpose: defending our national security. It’s time to come home now, before financial conditions or military weakness dictates it.


    The major obstacle to a sensible foreign policy is the fiction about what patriotism means. Today patriotism has come to mean blind support for the government and its policies. In earlier times patriotism meant having the willingness and courage to challenge government policies regardless of popular perceptions.


    Today we constantly hear innuendos and direct insults aimed at those who dare to challenge current foreign policy, no matter how flawed that policy may be. I would suggest it takes more courage to admit the truth, to admit mistakes, than to attack others as unpatriotic for disagreeing with the war in Iraq.


    Remember, the original American patriots challenged the abuses of King George, and wrote and carried out the Declaration of Independence.


    Yes Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of anger in this country. Much of it is justified; some of it is totally unnecessary and misdirected. The only thing that can lessen this anger is an informed public, a better understanding of economic principles, a rejection of foreign intervention, and a strict adherence to the constitutional rule of law. This will be difficult to achieve, but it’s not impossible and well worth the effort.





    July 1, 2006













    Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.


    What I understand is that your are angry.
    I feel your pain for lives lost. I have my own brother whohas served 4 tours and a brother-in-law has served 3 tours so far. Fortunately, we still have them, but they will never be the same. And they will be the first ones in line to protect these children if they can. But not all soldiers are built the same are they? Otherwise, there would be no war crimes.

    I wonder if you would feel the same if they were your children in the camps? Reverse the scenario. You are dead, your husband is dead, your 12-year-old has turned into a rebel. Highly understandable how that could happen isn't it? How would you like your child to be regarded in such a fashion as your words of "educating them to be more than the animals that they are"?

    I would rather be a bleeding heart than such a cold dead person where those words could ever be acceptable.
    Not a bit angry....lol Thanks for the compliment, tho.
    nm
    bitter and angry
    'Bitter and angry'... TRANSLATION:  As a black woman she is not subservient or meek, does not do the 'buck and shuffle' or says 'yes'm and give you teeth and gums to make her 'acceptable' or even tolerable.  Bitter and angry...seems as if you are the one with the bitterness and anger to make such a narrow minded bigoted comment about a black woman who happens to be married to a black man who has the GALL to run for the highest office in this land...(LOL)everyone says this election is not about race but that is a flat out lie.  Question:  if the two parties who were running for this office white, would there be such a fuss?  I think not. Truthfully, in past elections the majority of either party were caucasian and that particular issue was not an issue when we voted for whoever we believed could do the job to the best of their ability.  This election has shown that IT IS ABOUT RACE because it DEFINITELY was made an issue by the racist bigoted media, by individuals such as Pat Buchanan and Bill O'Reilly (who some truly believe is their Messiah).  God gave us free will when he created us, and one of the freedoms we were given was to think for ourselves.  I am a black woman and I will convey to everyone on this board that NO ONE thinks for ME, and because I AM black it is assumed that I will vote for Obama - if that is not bigoted I don't know what is.  I will tell you this though - one thing I have learned from this election is that racism in this country is alive and well and has reared its ugly head, and a lot of things that people feel in their hearts regarding minorities are NOT being hidden because the comfort level to say such ugly and bigoted racist things seems not to be a problem.  I have never seen such ugliness and hatred on this board as long as I have been participating.  It's past sad, it really is