From Jim Gilliam's blog archives
A New Democrat

March 24, 2003 7:00 PM

I have never voted. I'm not even registered. It's not apathy, but more a silent protest against a hopelessly corrupt two party system. I don't believe in our political process, and rather than tacitly supporting it through participation, I have refused to participate.

Not anymore.

Our country is facing a crisis at the behest of a neo-conservative President leading us into fascism and global war. I can't sit by and let this happen. I'm terrified at the thought that 10 years from now when things are even worse that I didn't do everything I could to stop it. We must get rid of Bush and send a message to the world that this neo-conservative dogma is not what America stands for.

This President is a result of several decades of concerted effort by the far right to wrest control of the Republican Party. Thom Hartmann explains how we got here, and as a response, calls for a progressive takeover of the Democratic Party.

Thom, you can count me in.

The nature of our electoral system, or "winner take all" election process leaves us no choice. We're stuck with two parties, so the only way to seize power is to mold the platform of one of the parties into something worth fighting for. If ever there were a time when the Democratic Party needed such an infusion of new ideas, it is now.

There are only a few Democratic presidential candidates that are against the war. All seem unelectable, except one: Howard Dean. He electrified the California Democratic Convention last week, lambasting Bush's agenda. He's essentially a real live version of President Bartlett from the West Wing. Most importantly, he represents a substantial difference from Bush, and a substantial difference from the other Democratic challengers. He can be the leader for a new Democratic Party. Here is his platform, and a few recent speeches.

I'm ending my silent protest, and registering tomorrow, a new Democrat for Dean.

More from the archive in Bush, Howard Dean, Me, Politics, Progressive, Protest.

A New Democrat (03.24.2003)

Next Entry: Weeping at the Doorstep of Change (03.25.2003)
Previous Entry: Out of 300 million, Bush is the best you've got? (03.24.2003)

Read the 152 comments.

maggie:

Jim -
I doubt that you remember me, but we met for about thirty seconds at the April Dean Meetup. You gave me the URL for you blog because I had asked if I could quote you on another blog.

Well after reading your new democrat post I went out and registered as a Democrat. I have been registered as "decline to state" for as long as I can remember, but I just can't take it anymore.

Thanks very much for the post and the links. You're making a difference.
Cheers!
Maggie

Thu Apr 24 2003 4:26 PM


Beth:

I'm in too. Tired of watching this country get sucked down the toilet which is George Bush's utter and complete failure as President. Howard Dean is the man, the only man I can see in the race, who can turn things around. Bring on 2004!

Sat Jul 19 2003 5:43 AM


duane t. reynolds:

like you said,a"hopelessly corrupt two party system",it seems quite contradictory to peg both parties as "hopelessly corrupt"then turn right around and advocate blind allegiance to one of the two.maybe you should run for office the way you doublespeak,but unless your' vote counts in the electorial collage,you're just wasting your' time as i've just wasted 15 minuetes of mine reading and writing on you're site, PUNK!!!

Sun Jan 11 2004 4:39 PM


Jim Gilliam:

How is a progressive takeover and attempting to infuse new ideas into the Democratic party considered "blind allegiance"?

Sun Jan 11 2004 4:43 PM


"bigj":

Been reading thru your web pages. Interesting. I also have a website (above) which you can check out if you want. I support no political party, left or right, & tow nobodys party line. Any cause which seems worthy will get my support.
The only group I ever had membership in is the "Canadian Auto Workers", CAW.
"Power corrupts & absolute power corrupts absolutely" therefore nobody & no entity should be entrusted with any type of concentration of power. So I say "all power to the people"; & that means political & military power.

Mon Jan 12 2004 12:17 PM


Lora Barnes:

I can't for the life of me understand why a seemingly intelligent person could be so dumb. I think what you have done is nothing but a pack of lies that you have dreamed up. I am very proud of our President, nothing like our former president who did nothing. I have a friend in Iraq and he says the children absolutely love the soldiers and the people have more than they have ever had. You are showing the Bathe party images of what is going on...not the truth.

Thu Jan 15 2004 5:21 PM


Peter Aronson, MD:

In 1992 I voted against George H W Bush and voted for an unknown named Bill Clinton. That for a doctor who takes care of a 40% Medicaid patient population in a teaching hospital was the worst mistake of my professional life. In 1995 and 1997 the Clinton administration's \\\hcfa mandated that attentings in teaching hospitals (except for primarycare physicians directly supervise of perform the critical part of every Medicare and patient workup or be criminally liable. That for me, a dermatologist was teh enitre history and physical. To finish clinic les than 3 hours late daily , the reident's often had to stand there and watc h the whole time. What sort of doctors were we turning out then? At the time for patient care (as opposed to teaching and researc) I was paid a whopping $180.00/week. Dr. Dean wants to place all uninsured on Medicaid. In Michigan, our medical center is the ONLY one that sees more than 10% Medicaid and we lose 25-50 cents on every one. Dr. Dean would bankrupt the Detroit Medical Center and every caregiver that is mandated to see significant poor in the country.. The lesser of two evils is still evil. I will vote for a real Libertarian in 2004 as I did in 1996 and 2000.

Sun Jan 18 2004 3:25 PM


Don:

You are making no difference. One person out of millions...it does nothing. I'm a republican, however not registered, and I'm proud of it. You ultra-liberals are brainwashing everyone. It's sad really...

Tue Jan 20 2004 6:34 AM


Bill Becker:

It is time for Jim to pull his head out of the sand, learn that you have to protect where you live, be a compassionate man and realize there is wars worth fighting to get evil men who kill 400,000 Iraqis, xxk Kuwaitis, xxk Iranians, ...

When do you say when Jim?
Who is holding your nuts Jim

Thu Jan 22 2004 8:39 PM


Jim Gilliam:

If this is such a just war, why did the President have to lie about why he wanted to fight it?

Did he not think we could handle it? Americans wouldn't want to liberate a people from the tyrannical grip of a brutal dictator? Only if we felt threatened would we support such a just cause? The ends were so worthy they justified the means.

Or maybe he knew he would have to answer the question -- why this evil man, and why now? He wasn't committing genocide or holding hostages at the moment. He was even letting us inspect his country for weapons he previously agreed to not have.

Americans live in a republic, which means the citizens are ultimately responsible for governing themselves. One cannot govern oneself while being lied to by the people we entrusted to make decisions for us. Democracy is based on truth. Without a foundation of truth, our representatives can tell us whatever they want to justify whatever they want to do. That's not democracy, that's tyranny.

There are few things more honorable or patriotic than fighting to free your country from tyranny. If I lived in Iraq I would have been fighting against tyranny there. But I don't, I live in America, so I fight here.

Thu Jan 22 2004 9:34 PM


Wolverine:

I'm and independent. Always have been. I was drafted in 1965 and did my time in Service...spell that NAM. I didn't like it and I wouldn't want to go to war again, but I would if I was asked to do so by my country...an unlikely scenario for someone my age.

You, on the other hand, have chosen not to vote, not to get involved...until now. What changed your mind, other than your obvious hatred for Bush? Where have you been? You say you choose to fight in America, but if it came to a REAL fight, I sincerely doubt that you'd be there to help. Fighting for what you believe in takes more than proclaiming your "patriotism" on a holier-than-thou website. Personally, I don't think you've got the spine for a fight, in fact, I'd be surprised if you have a spine, at all.

The Democrats are toast; Dean and the rest of them are jokes. With opponents like that, the Republicans will be in office for the next 20 years. I'm afraid you're gonna have to live through four more years of Dubbya. You and others like you had better hope he doesn't decide to bring back the Draft because that yould mean you'd all have to show your TRUE colors.

Thu Jan 29 2004 1:43 PM


Jim Gilliam:

Just so the facts are out there -- I support the draft, and have gone on record saying I wouldn't pull any shenanigans to get out of it.

I don't think it's fair that a disproportionate number of poor people are forced to fight unjust wars, while the rich and powerful skate by. We just might have fewer unjust wars if everyone's sons and daughters were at risk.

Thu Jan 29 2004 1:54 PM


Brit from London:

Tony Blair and the Labour Party....sorry New Labour Party are against a full and independent review of the reasons for going to war. Most of the Democrat candidates - even Kerry - seem to support such a review.

What do Democrats have to say to Labour supporters over here and why arent you folk getting your message across better?!

Thu Jan 29 2004 6:06 PM


Andrea:

Wow, Jim, what have you been up to since Alaska?! I came back to your homepage today to discover all of this, DVD and everything (I'll buy one!)!

Mon Feb 2 2004 3:41 AM


Andrea:

Now a little bit more seriously: I think this webpage and your effort to open people's eyes is GREAT. You know, over here in Europe, we might otherwise get the impression that ALL OF YOU US Americans supported Mr. Bush and his policy.
I am glad and proud to know one who thinks differently and who does not support a war which was fought for the wrong reasons (and there are not many right reasons for a war). And I think EVERY person who speaks up to say they don^t agree, makes a difference.

Sometimes, rarely, it is right to move into another country and to interfere. As a German I wouldn't have wanted to be brought up under Hitler's regime and I am grateful that the USA moved in and gave us a very good political system (which, by the way, allows fpor more than two parties). Yet, in the meantime, it seems that the values you tought us then, like freedom of speech, are being trampled on in the USA. How come that those actors and actresses who spoke their minds against the war are not welcome at the "Oscar nominations" anymore?
I sincerely hope that things like that are not the beginning of the end...

And...the USA did NOT move into Iraque to free people of their dictator nor because of any weapons (but don't these reasons sound so wounderful and heroic?) - to any well-informed person who does not just believe the propaganda, that much is clear.

Mon Feb 2 2004 4:06 AM


cool person:

George Bush is the greatest president president alive!!! any time he helped the US more than any other president would. Put your feet in the area of Pres. Bush and you will see what hes going through and how much he has helped us out.

Wed Feb 4 2004 1:03 PM


Brad:

Glad you supporting a loser like Dean and not a winner like George W. Bush. We don't need hopeless liberals running this country, giving everything away to people who don't want to work for it. Spend and tax democrats are a thing of the past.

Wed Feb 11 2004 10:49 AM


Jim Gilliam:

Long live the spend and tax-cut republicans!

Wed Feb 11 2004 10:52 AM


paz:

let me just say this, so you can stop wondering why democrats, and intelligent people like yourself, dont manage to keep Bush out of office: FOR GOD'S SAKE JUST SETTLE ONCE IN YOUR LIFE I'm entirely serious, and you can lambast me for it... If you think there is no difference between the Bush administration and the Clinton administration, then forget about ever winning in your life. Go ahead, vote for Nader like so many naive people did, or really show us all and dont vote! That sends the powerful message that you COULDNT CARE LESS whether Rove, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Bush are in office next year... in fact, if you can name that many shudder-inducing characters in any Democratic administration in history, I'll gladly retract my words. I am sorry your precious Dean didnt get the nomination, but does that mean that Bush is now better than Kerry!? If your goal is REALLY the removal of Bush and his entire administration, then you need to seriously reconsider who you support -- not five weeks ago -- but right here, right now.

Wed Feb 11 2004 2:30 PM


Jim Gilliam:

You don't get it do you? Dean *was* settling.

He's a moderate that got labeled a liberal. Meanwhile, Kerry's the real liberal who somehow has managed to convince a whole lot of Democrats he can beat Bush.

I sure hope they're right, cause unless Edwards pulls a Seabiscuit, I'm gonna have to get a classic Massachusetts Liberal elected in November.

Wed Feb 11 2004 2:39 PM


paz:

my point is not that kerry is the 'real deal' and that he can easily beat bush.. my point is that he has (so far of course) been chosen by the voters in democratic primaries as the man who will challenge bush. You can look at those voters as listless idiots who follow the whims of a republican media, and discount his overwhelming success and deans failure with voters. Or you can think carefully 'is kerry still better than bush?' if the answer to that is yes, than the path is cleaer: you have to go through with your mission statement of removing bush and support the poor liberal.

Wed Feb 11 2004 2:47 PM


Jim Gilliam:

And I will, of course, support the nominee... while the primary game is over for Dean, it isn't over for Edwards just yet.

Wed Feb 11 2004 3:33 PM


Rodger:

Jim,

I find the views on this website both intriguing and frightening. On one hand you say you don't want us to be involved in a war and yet, we have been attacked! Do we take the liberal stance and stand by and wait to be slaughtered? Or, do we do as we have always done in the past and stand up for what is right, even though Americans may pay the ultimate price? I have to laugh as you sit behind your PC and type up letters criticizing people who have access to more information than you can even comprehend and have made educated decisions based on that information. You mock our current process and you have the balls to say you have never even voted??? Men and women have died for the opportunity to have the right to vote and you don’t agree with the process so instead of trying to do something about it you have sat by idly and done nothing. Why don’t you do something and do a little research? Where was Kerry during the Vietnam War? Where was Clinton – oh yea, right…. Take a look at the world around you today – if we had a democrat in the White House, we’d be sitting back asking telling people that we are not violent and that America just wants everyone to get along. Well in case you haven’t heard, there are religious extremists that believe until every American is dead, they will not rest! What is your proposed solution for this? Do you think the Iraqi people are sad to see Sadam ousted? Only the ones who benefited from his heinous reign. The thousands of families who lived in poverty and lost loved ones were more than grateful.

In terms of the economy, take a solid look at the figures in early 2000 – you will see that the recession which we are now recovering from, started when the last President was in office. Clinton tried to take credit for the economy when he took office even though he was riding a high tide when he assumed the office. By the time he left, the economy was spiraling downward. When Bush took office, the economy was already approaching a recession and the attacks on our country did nothing but send it down faster. We probably could have prevented this if the democrats would have taken some action back when another true patriot gave some solid advice. Do you remember this?

It was 1987 and Lt.Col. Oliver North was testifying at the Iran-Contra hearings during the Reagan Administration. There was Ollie in front of God and country getting the third degree, but what he said was stunning! He was being drilled by a senator; "Did you not recently spend close to $60,000 for a home security system?" Ollie replied, "Yes, I did, Sir." The senator continued, trying to get a laugh out of the audience "Isn't that just a little excessive?" "No, sir," continued Ollie. "No? And why not?" the senator asked. "Because the lives of my family and I were threatened, sir." "Threatened? By whom?" the senator questioned. "By a terrorist, sir" Ollie answered. "Terrorist? What terrorist could possibly scare you that much?" "His name is Osama bin Laden, sir" Ollie replied.

At this point the senator tried to repeat the name, but couldn't pronounce it, which most people back then probably couldn't. A couple of people laughed at the attempt. Then the senator continued. Why are you so afraid of this man?" the senator asked. "Because, sir, he is the most evil person alive that I know of", Ollie answered. "And what do you recommend we do about him?" asked the senator. "Well, sir, if it was up to me, I would recommend that an assassin team be formed to eliminate him and his men from the face of the earth." The senator disagreed with this approach, and that was all that was shown of the clip. By the way, that senator was Al Gore.

Also, terrorist pilot Mohammad Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to release so-called "political prisoners."

However, the Israelis would not release any with blood on their hands, the American President at the time, Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State, Warren Christopher "insisted" that all prisoners be released. Thus Mohammad Atta was freed and eventually thanked the US by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center. This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first identified. It was censored in the US from all later reports.

Before you go off half cocked and jump on the liberal band wagon speading lies and half-truths, take a look in the mirror and do some soul searching. What kind of country do you want to live in? I personally would like to know that the leaders of this country truly do have the safety of my family and friends in mind.

Thu Feb 12 2004 12:38 PM


Jim Gilliam:

Why do people come here and assume I support the Democratic party and love Bill Clinton?

I detest both of them. Luckily, I don't have to deal with Bill Clinton, but unfortunately, I do have to deal with the Democratic party.

Yes, I know Bush didn't start the recession...all he did was add massive amounts of debt that my generation will be forced to deal with so he could give tax cuts to rich people and claim it stimulated an economy that has lost over 2 million jobs.

Yes, I know Clinton is responsible for not dealing with the terrorist threat when he should have. Very few people recognized the threat for what it was. Unfortunately, Bush (and just about everyone else) swung the pendulum the other way by exaggerating the threat it poses.

How to win the war on terror? Friends, lots of friends. Not sure if you've noticed, but our intelligence sucks pretty bad. Starting with the Carter administration, and continuning through Clinton our human intelligence capability has suffered immensely, forcing us to rely even more on foreign governments to track terrorists. Too bad this administration squandered the enormous outpouring of good will from the international community after 9/11. Makes it harder to catch those terrorists. Meanwhile, we're inspiring a whole new generation with our hamfisted approach to foreign policy.

And fundamentally, Roger, I'd much rather live in a free country than a safe one. Everyone knows the Ben Franklin quote: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Republicans used to believe that. Hell, this country used to believe that.

Thu Feb 12 2004 1:02 PM


Rodger:

Jim,
Your thoughts are filled with contradictions. You acknowledge that Bush did not start the recession but that he added massive amounts of debt that your generation will be forced to deal with. I’m assuming we’re from the same generation and in terms of the national debt, that number has gone up slightly the last few years due to a decrease in receipts which was mostly due to the recession. Projected budget totals for the next few years reveal a budget surplus by FY 2005. A deficit is nothing new to this country – it has been around for several generations. You mention tax cuts for rich people – the rich people and the ones who pay the taxes. What do you consider Rich? Someone who makes 30k/year? 50k/year? 100k/year? Do you propose we give tax cuts to those who don’t pay taxes? That makes no sense. Things that are worthwhile require time – no one said things were going to get turned around over night. The current administration put a plan in place that has turned the economy around and we are headed in the right direction. The stock market recently closed at a 2 ˝ year high. Interest rates are near all time lows, housing starts are up higher than at any point in history, and in the area of job growth we are starting to see improvements.
Do you really believe the terrorist threat is exaggerated? Not counting the thousands who have already died in the US in recent years, let’s look at the big picture. Terrorism across the globe is occurring because those governments have not done what the US is doing – bombings at nightclubs, hotels, banks, government buildings etc. We’ve got problems on our own soil with idiots like Timothy McVeigh and now the new kid on the block, Ryan Anderson giving information to Al Qaeda. How many potential terrorist incidents has our government already stopped with the stepped up security? No one knows for sure, but I do know that since 9/11 there have been very few small scale terrorist incidents and no large scale incidents here in the US. Is this because the terrorists are finished with the US and will attack softer targets? No. It’s because the US intelligence community is doing their job and gathering critical information to stop these threats. Where do you draw the line on terrorism? We know that Iraq had WMD’s. The former ruling party killed hundreds of thousands of their own people using these weapons – we have found hundreds of mass graves to prove this. What happened to the WMD’s that weren’t used? Shipped to Jordan? Who knows, but until there was an imminent threat to invade those weapons probably remained in Iraq in the hands of a terrorist.
How do you suggest we make friends to win the war on terror? Right now with terrorists killing anyone who is friendly with the US, who wants to be friends with us? If we get rid of the terrorists, we’re going to have lots of friends. With our recent success in Iraq, confidence has increased in our ability to gather useful intelligence.
In terms of living in a free country, America is choking on its freedoms. Our freedoms fill the air with perversion, profanity and sexual malaise. Leaders like Clinton who outright lie and deceive America for their own personal gain should not be leading our country. While some things are obviously not meant for public when it comes to national security, we need a leader who is focused on the issues at hand. We don’t some playboy living in the White House looking to have a good time and make a name for himself. You say you’d rather live in a free country than a safe one – it sounds like you should be living in Afghanistan with Osama – he is free to do whatever he wants… in his cave. I’m familiar with the Franklin quote and if you look at it carefully you will see that it says they that “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." What vital freedoms are you giving up? Life? Liberty? The pursuit of happiness? Americans have more freedom than any other country in the world. We are not giving up any essential liberties to obtain a little safety. We may be slightly inconvenienced in some cases to obtain a great deal of safety but far be it to say that your vital freedoms are being compromised to provide you little safety.
Jim, I’m curious as to where you stand on other issues – abortion, the death penalty, human rights, right to bear arms, etc. It’s interesting to see how people typically categorize their choices and while you don’t call yourself a Dem, you seem to have those tendencies.

Fri Feb 13 2004 5:47 AM


Jim Gilliam:

Rodger,

I do call myself a Democrat, but it doesn't mean I like the party or agree with everything it does. I like to think for myself.

As for the rest of your comments, I don't like getting into arguments about Republican talking points with people, it's just a waste of time. I've got other things to do.

Fri Feb 13 2004 9:33 AM


paz:

"america is choking on its freedoms" -- nice. finally a republican who can speak his mind about how this country's freedom needs to be curtailed... Of course, its not the official governmental (or party) stance, where they say freedom is important. If freedom is really the problem, wouldn't it be best for you to go to a more totatilarian state? Or is the goal to stay here and work hard until America achieves that?

...oh yeah and "Leaders like _____ who outright lie and deceive America for their own personal gain should not be leading our country"... I can agree with that, but why dont we wait a bit and see how history looks at our good friend Mr. Bush before we fill in that blank.

Fri Feb 13 2004 12:35 PM


Andrew:

Standing up for truth amidst a culture of lies? Thats about the biggest joke I've ever heard in my life. I suppose I should feel safer now that Jim Gilliam is fighting for my rights. All I see here is another site which acts as though it knows all the facts and has its attacks on a society which you clearly participate in Jim. The "truth" is anyone can sit here and argue all they want about different topics but no one wants to actually go out and fight for them. If you actually cared about the thousands which lost their jobs or the innocent people dieing in Iraq why not go out and help those people? Until you do that I don't see how you could act as though you defend them.

Mon Feb 16 2004 6:19 PM


Justralph:

Dean Electable? Ha..ha...ha...ha....!!!

You Liberals are hysterical......

Thu Feb 19 2004 1:45 PM


AnomalousTango:

Jim,

I read some of your stuff here. Don't be disheartened by criticism.

It is natural for human opinions to be reactive and polarized.

It is only someone who can view his own thoughts and emotions objectively, as not being a part of their actual self, or a valuable aspect of their idendity, that stands a chance of rising above this quite natural result of metabolic underpinnings, that are themselves based upon dynamic polarization (such as the movement of a charge across a synapse - or the contraction of a muscle causing its opposing muscle to lengthen.

While the seeming opposition of the so called Conservative and Liberal political views seems without doubt to be of irrefutabe and obvious, even life and death, importance to those involved in this "debate" -- There are those who also look upon this mortal arena -- not with disinterest -- but with the clear understanding that this seeming, ever so important division, is a red herring.

It's sort of like, "Let's you and him fight," (while I slip around the back and burgle you both). The old divide and conquer.

As long as a person's thoughts do not lead to action, the power elite know that this persons thoughts are of no real consequence.

It is a rarity -- however -- that the person themself realizes this.

Sat Feb 21 2004 9:05 PM


Gandolpho:

Interesting stuff, though I tend to disagree. That was too soft; I completely disagree. Nonetheless, you are expressing and defending your views which is what it is really all about. I'd prefer to see more people challenge you on the issues vice personal attacks so don't be so quick to discount the "talking points" and debate the issue as well. One could counter your rhetoric is Democrat talking points. The most important thing I can say though is--someone take the toad away from AnomalousTango before he licks it again! What was he saying?

Mon Feb 23 2004 3:25 PM


njguardsman:

“How to win the war on terror? Friends, lots of friends. Not sure if you've noticed, but our intelligence sucks pretty bad. Starting with the Carter administration, and continuning through Clinton our human intelligence capability has suffered immensely, forcing us to rely even more on foreign governments to track terrorists. Too bad this administration squandered the enormous outpouring of good will from the international community after 9/11. Makes it harder to catch those terrorists. Meanwhile, we're inspiring a whole new generation with our hamfisted approach to foreign policy.”
“And fundamentally, Roger, I'd much rather live in a free country than a safe one. Everyone knows the Ben Franklin quote: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Mr. Gilliam
The way “we” win the war is we give our Military & Intel what they need to do what we need them to do, not gut defense, not change the coach in the middle of the game (elections), not give aid and comfort to the enemy by accusing our President with lies just because he’s not who you voted for, not backing some one who voted against almost every weapon system we have (B1, B2, Patriot Missile, Trident sub, F15, F16, M1 Abrams tank) just because he served in the Navy!
Where were our “friends” when we bombed an aspirin factory in Iraq, or Kosovo, what about Somalia, how about Haiti ten years ago? Were you as hard on Mr. Clinton as you are now on President Bush???
Do you want to have the responsibility of your safety put on the altar of the UN?
Why are you (libs, Dems, Progressives whatever you call yourselves now) so worried about not being liked by the rest of the world? News flash – we will never be “liked” by them, the only deal with us when the S*** hits the fan. We don’t have to be liked BUT we do have to be respected and Bush has gone a long way in getting that back. It’s about time we had some one with a pair in the White House

Since you’re so fond of quotes, I have one for you:
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants” Thomas “TJ” Jefferson

Thu Feb 26 2004 9:08 AM


KennyFromSouthPark:

Jim, in case it helps. I think, in general, a democracy does not really work because only the leaders are privy to the most critical information, regarding economic data, military intelligence, and resources, etc... I think in a way it is wishful thinking to believe that voters are actually making a difference in steering the country in the right direction. The same could be argued about the electoral college. What seems to be clear in every election that I have been alive to witness over the past several decades is some sort of emotional element and a thing with swing voters..as well as a fundamental human element of likeability/charisma [witness the events of Arnie in California]...usually critical near the very last few months before the election...determines who is actually elected. People are generally too preoccupied with their own lives to worry about all the governmental issues and take them seriously enough to be extremely well-informed, while our elected representatives do a questionable job anyways or even ignore their constituency. The bottom line is that each individual is really in a way simply trying to push their own perceived and in some cases brainwashed agenda...something that they would feel comfortable with or think would help them economically, emotionally, or socially when they make their single vote.

Even if you or a reasonable number of voters were well-informed, it is doubtful that the majority will have been as well-informed as you to have made a good decision for or against a candidate. In general, I would say that we are all in some ways blind to the real truths. Each party seems to do an incredibly good job in suppressing the complete story. Money continues to play a huge element in influencing politics and we, unfortunately and indeed, all Republicans, Democrats, Independents, etc...tend to be pawns...pawns to the media, pawns to the suppression of knowledge/information, pawns to giant corporate influence, pawns to special interest groups, pawns to the church, pawns to peer pressure, etc...who all in some way distort the truth by not presenting or considering everything in a balanced light. Further, in some cases, the candidates make outright lies and unachievable but emotionally/economically-rewarding promises/claims during pre-election times, to hinge the voter. I think it is ridiculous for anyone to really claim one way or another whether John Kerry would be a bad president or even a good one. Even though I would think he may appear to have the experience and character to be a great President and on the surface may appear miles more intelligent, tactful, and leader-like than Bush, one really cannot say unless he is given the job and put to the test...to face whatever challenges lay ahead. It is even arguable that he may be more balanced and controlled and presidential, as he has demonstrated tactfully in the debates. It is arguable that this is a good quality to have in a leader, as it renders stability and confidence. Indeed, Republicans would argue that Bush showed himself both in strong form during the past 4-years, even despite nearly everyone on the planet claiming he is/was an outright moron before the election (and perhaps may be still is). We just really do not know until that elected leader is put in office, but we speculate unfairly anyways and we base our decisions on past performance, in a capacity that was anything but the same position or level of power. We also cannot really know the true grit of a president when the machinery behind him, consists of a prior father who served as president and several of the accompanying staff. In the end, it doesn't matter as long as we have good overall leadership and the president doesn't do anything grossly wrong.

In general, no one person in our government really has that much power anyways, and we slowly move inch-by-inch, year-after-year towards some special interest's and political party's agenda...a sort of tug-of-war, in which the two party system in a way keeps things in check but at the same time hinders real advanced and desirable progress.

I think the important thing is that people get out there, continue to debate, think about things and vote because may be one day if an actual majority of the public became fully educated (and was open-minded to begin with) and had equal and unbiased access to all the information and all the different views, our government could actually function more in the spirit of a democracy....but this is really just an ideal...I think it is an ideal that people get too passionate about because in general no form of government really works all that effectively from a majority rule....[everyone has seen this level of ineffectiveness from grade school on up and even at work]...especially with a majority that is by and large ignorant. This is just the truth.

Further, it is foolish for anyone to believe that good policy is policy that is based on popularity. That is simply untrue. One could claim that good policy weighs-in all the relevant information and resources and moves only after a thorough discussion towards an end for the benefit of the majority of the country. It is arguable whether George W. Bush excercised good policy-making skills during his soon ending term as president. In some ways, people can say he simply avoided good-policy making skills and made unilateral decisions...in some ways like a tyrant...but in others ways perhaps as necessary in order to get a job done, despite basically breaking the law for the sake of a claimed or real? insecurity. I think this raises a fundamental question about governments...about whether they are more popular when they are doing what they are supposed to, which is being inherently inefficient or whether they are more popular when they are actually moving in a progressive direction [perhaps to an unknowing awful state] or in some cases more popular when they are actually taking huge leaps backwards (which may be the case with Dubbed-Out-Dubbya). From this realization, one can see why so many people have gotten disenchanted with the governmental process...and continue to not care or educate/inform themselves about the issues and worst case simply not vote. Speaking of which, I forsee and fear that many voters including the young will be uninterested this year.

I think one of the very key things that is critical to a successful government is distribution of un-biased, complete information, debate, and discussion. It is essential that people express opposing views and no one view gains too much popularity or influence, because otherwise, down the line, some little guy is going to get crushed and that little guy might be you or me, which for Kenny's sake, "Sucks!"

What Dubbed-Out-Dubbya did the past year borders on extreme danger for a democracy...pushing it to the frontier of tyranny. However, his position may be defendable but it seems that very few if any past presidents may have made a decision so brash, ignorant, and swift as Dubious-Dubbya...that so nearly or completely breached our system of government and/or the international law of civilized nations. Again, his action may be defendable but at the same time appears dubious and out-right frightening if one accepts or believes that other interests from Bush, Sr.'s vengeance and legacy from the Gulf War, to the elected Bush Oil Corporation's apriori interests, his alleged involvement in the Savings & Loan scandal which economically crushed the Southwest and other chunks of the country in the mid-80's (and only now is back to where it should be), the placement of cabinet members and a vice-president with significant prior, unknown, or future oil interests, the huge money from these corporations and other wealthy entrepreuners' that supported his campaign, etc...may conceivable had desired this action all along. I'll be the first to admit that I don't know all the facts and I would argue with anyone here if they too know all the facts...ALL of them...to really know whether or not there was a hidden self-serving agenda. To be fair, you have to entertain the possibility because it seems so crystal clear with all the evidence, as Dean unabrashedly was pointing out in his own state of Vermont back in 2000-2001. I think it would also be unfair to claim that Democrats also haven't gotten kick-backs or benefitted from being in power, one of the most egregious actions was that from Hillary Rodsxcking Clinton. It also continues to amaze me how Dubbed-Out-Dubbya continues to make shallow decisions, which speciously appears self-serving for his campaign. I suppose the truth lies in that all politicians do this to an extent.

In some ways, it is really amazing that any of us spend our times writing these blogs or even care. But, I suppose, we cannot stop caring and we cannot stop trying to put a trench shovel in the gulley of corrupt political leaders or special interests, who seek every opportunity with the help of special interests to promote themselves and suppress the complete truth and use us as pawns (in war, in education, in taxes etc...) and in some cases outright take away our liberties (sanctity of marriage vs. homosexual rights to equality; Roe vs. Wade; Patriot Act vs. Right to Privacy). I suppose that is why we take this time out because in our hearts we really do love this country and do care whether or not it goes to the crappers or gets invaded or that our tax dollars are misspent or not distributed equally and fairly. It would be wistful thinking to hope more people cared enough also to learn more for themselves, to think independently and to get out the vote and to "stick-it!" to the bleeding hearts of the corrupted politicians.

In the end, it is probably safer to elect a president, who is well-balanced, with true grit, honesty, experience, and sound intelligence...and pray that the checks and balances keep that president from doing anything too crazy...someone who can restore the pride of the meaning of "United States of America"...at one point, not too long ago...a nation that was admired, respected, and emulated by many, instead of mocked at, laughed at, despised, and given disdain from our past very dear allies. Unfortunately, I think the only way to restore this is by a changing of the guard, as a president regarded as a monkey and a child serves little towards this capacity. Unfortunately, it would be nice if we had better candidates but that's reality...I think a reality that will happen this year to restore the leadership integrity of this nation, even if nothing ultimately gets done in a house divided. Potentially worse scenarious would be Kerry picking a dismal V-P akin to Liebermann or Cheney having a heart-attack after Dubbya dubs his mind-out finalemente.

P.S. I'll be the first person to admit that I am ignorant, but at least I'm here and I'm trying....I hope at least one person can appreciate my "W"-puns, which is arguably original.

Fri Mar 5 2004 3:17 PM


Jim Gilliam:

KennyFromSouthPark, you're rad. The world could use a few more reasonable, open-minded people like yourself.

Fri Mar 5 2004 3:56 PM


kate:

I support President Bush and will continue to be a female republican for the rest of my life. I will fight so that my kids will never have to live in the America of Hate and envy in which we now live in because of jelous hateful uneducated and thankless liberals. You are exactly what you are mad at- ABB?? get educated, get involved and wake up. Wake up and realize that this free country we live in is free because of the many soldiers who have defended our country... (YES.. THAT MEANT WAR!) I will continue to pray for our country and democrats alike... Support freedom, support values, support morals, support peace, support hard work, SUPPORT BUSH.

Mon Mar 8 2004 12:04 PM


Bob:

Why is everyone so intent on fighting terrorism in the first place? It almost seems like we think we're going to defeat evil or something... Maybe, just maybe, we should listen to these people (the terrorists) and take their concerns seriously. The media keeps telling us (and we keep believing it) that the terrorist groups are a wild bunch of maniacs (who amazingly organized themselves into efficient and intelligent groups that repeatedly outwit all of the West's mighty intelligence and military resources). Maybe they're just really really really pissed off that the United States (and our ideas of economics, politics, religion, and values) is taking over the world and ignoring the desires and values of other groups who don't think like we do.

The one thing that can defeat hate is its opposite - love. Hey! That's a Christian idea! Aren't we a Christian nation?? Maybe we should start acting like it.

Mon Mar 8 2004 5:54 PM


njguardsman:

Kenny
You know I was going to take each one of your points and give you my counter points but it all comes down to this:

You spout the leftist liberal points that every other lib does: People don’t know what they’re doing, Bush is an idiot, tax cuts for the rich, blah blah blah

The plain facts are: Bush inherited the recession from “Slick Willy” and the tax cuts lessened the severity & duration of the recession which was made worse by 911. I got a check from the government (and I’m not “rich”). Since 911 there has been NO NEW TERRORIST ATTACKS ON AMERICAN SOIL thanks to the policies, tactics implemented by George W. Bush and his administration (Evan though the French & Germans were being paid off by Iraq in the form of oil, by the way they also sold [against UN sanctions] surveillance equipment to Iraq that was installed on current generation [Russian] MIG fighters [also against UN sanctions]).

Russia, France & Germany these are our “allies” (please don’t make me puke) and people like you want to put OUR safety in their hands (UN)?!?!?!?

I have this question to ask:
When it all comes down who do you want to keep you and your family safe when the worlds terrorist want to destroy our way of life?

Oh and by the way the score is: made fun of GWB – 4, made fun of HRC – 1 guess I know where your loyalties are.

Mr Gilliam
You havent answered my question yet.

Tue Mar 9 2004 4:37 AM


Sally:

I've been reading over your website for about 20 min now and I can't believe what I'm reading. I'm a canadian citizen and I don't necessarly like the party which is running but just because my neighbor does, It doesn't mean I will yell and scream at him. No wonder you american's are so angry all the time. look at ur president.

Fri Mar 12 2004 8:36 AM


njguardsman:

Bob
NEWS FLASH – Terrorists ARE evil, we learned that on 911, Spain realized that on 11 MARCH 2004, Who’s going to be next??? These people ARE religious zealots who believe GOD is telling them to kill those who don’t believe as they do. They cannot be reasoned, or negotiated with and will not stop, we should have taken them more seriously B4 911!
Remember we are in a war for our way of life and we do not force that way of life on anyone who does not want it, That’s the difference between them and “U.S.”
Without security nothing else matters, not the economy, stocks, jobs – nothing.
Do you think the Christians just sat there in the lion’s den or did they try to get out? When Christians were thrown in the coliseum to fight gladiators do you think they just LET themselves be killed because they were “Christians”?

Sat Mar 13 2004 7:05 AM


fussbudget:

Bob: Yeah, gotta love those terrorists - love will make it all better.

Free clue: these towel-headed radicals are determined to blow civilization back to the Stone Age and will gladly die in the process. So, while you're loving them, I'll be cranking out the reloads, itching to speed their trip to Paradise.

Sat Mar 13 2004 7:49 AM


njguardsman:

Thank you Spain!!!
Because of your elections YOU have just empowered/emboldened terrorist around the world! They have been vindicated in their bombings killing their people and killing innocents and are now able to dictate national policy via TNT.

Tue Mar 16 2004 7:17 AM


mike:

Jim, obvoiusly with your twisted and preposterous viewpoints, you have caused more objections other than agreements... the demo idiots will not govern this country for a LONG time because they are not competent. with the demo's it's like listening to a bunch of whiney high school kids... i can't wait to look at your site in november... i can see it now... you and the whiney demos will say Bush's victory over Kerry was set up... lets wait and see from you idiots.

Sat Mar 20 2004 5:53 AM


Shareef:

Mike, I think Jim is proof that the political tides are changing. We Dem's are getting those people who are so damn mad at Bush to finally say enough is enough and do something about it.

Sat Mar 20 2004 5:57 PM


njguardsman:

Shareef,
More to the point, Jim shows the desperation in the Democrat party because they know that for them to succeed, for them to get back power (which is all they REALLY want) America has to take the plunge back into: high inflation, high unemployment, another terrorist attack, stock market going down. What must it be like to want all these things to happen?!?!?!?

Wed Mar 24 2004 11:12 AM


Shareef:

Wait a second are you saying this is the only way dems would get elected? It seems like the only reason we lost the 2000 election was because of a few hanging chads. I remember the economy at the time and, unemployment was low, stock market was high. The only reason the country took a slide to the right was because of the first terrorist attack.

Also you are using fuzzy logic....
(With the maybe possible exception of terrorist attacks) All that you have mention are effects of having Bush in office, that is 100% different than wanting that stuff to happen...

I'm going to assume that you are Republican so let me ask you this:
Would you rather keep a president in office who has gone aganist Republican values such as: lowering the role and size of govertment (the only 21,000 jobs created in Feb were govt. jobs), state rights vs Fed rights (gay marrage, hell even when bush ran for office he said this was a state rights issue), competitive markets (haliburton, economy, stock market).

Wed Mar 24 2004 12:37 PM


njguardsman:

Shareef,
NO, you lost the election because you lost the election, even though you (the Dems) didn’t want to count votes coming in from overseas (military) and Gore would have won if he didn’t count only certain counties in Florida, the system worked the way it was supposed to. The terrorist attack happened nine months AFTER Bush took office.
OK, maybe you don’t want that stuff to happen BUT it would go a long way in helping your cause do don’t say it wont be good for you (Dems).
I am NOT 100% in step w/ the President, I have issues with him signing the largest entitlement in American history, letting illegal aliens work w/out fear of deportation, not securing the borders, if you look on Mr. Gilliam’s marriage sight you’ll see my position. The Halliburton Company has been used by successive administrations for contract work so what’s the big deal about it now? President Clinton actually gave them a job even though they were out bid by another company.

Wed Mar 24 2004 1:37 PM


shareef:

The point that I tried gettint across that it doesn't take "high inflation, high unemployment, another terrorist attack, stock market going down" for a dem to get elected and the proof is with Gore losing by a fraction of the vote.

True about haliburton and clintion but were not talking about the occasional polictial favor we are talking about a giant blank check to a company that they have a vested intrest in. Conflicts of intrest = Bad for the country

Wed Mar 24 2004 2:43 PM


njguardsman:

Shareef,
Don’t get me started on political favors, do you remember Clinton’s dealings with Tyson Chicken or what about Hillery turning 1000.00 into 100,000.00 you guys(Dems) have had the upper hand for forty years ending (for the most part) with the Contract with America in 94.

What are you guys running on??? Unemployment is lower now then in all the 1990s, we have had the best economic growth in twenty(20) years, people have more money in their pockets (thanks to Bush’s tax cuts) YES job creation is slow but it’s coming, so unless something “BAD” happens I ask again what can a Democrat run on in 2004?????

OH and by the way there were reports of people on your side wishing 911 would have happened while Clinton was President.

Wed Mar 24 2004 8:07 PM


Sarah:

I was working in the WTC on 9/11. It has been a maddening experience to watch Busch try and manipulate the nation in to believing that Iraq and 9/11 are the same thing. Your documentary has given me hope. It was so clear and it explained so well how the Busch adminitration has manipulating people on such a gross level. I plan on buying several copies and sending them to everyone I know. Thank you creating this. It trully gives me hope that maybe this nation will actually be able accoutable for their horrible mistakes.

Tue Mar 30 2004 7:42 AM


njguardsman:

Sarah,

Please tell me how President BUSH manipulates the nation? And please tell me what horrible mistakes the nation is responsible for??? It is a good thing that we have a man like him in the White House at this time in history.

Tue Mar 30 2004 10:22 AM


njguardsman:

Sarah,

What could "we" have possibly done to warrant the death of 3000 people that all they're guilty of is going to work that day???

What did you do to cause this? I'll answer for you NOTHING!!!

This was an attack on our way of life by people who fear and hate us and what this country stands for...FREEDOM

They don’t believe in educating women, we do, they think theirs is the only religion, we celebrate all religions and even those who DONT believe.

Tue Mar 30 2004 11:07 AM


Arnold:

Come on, don't bullshit me.

Sat Apr 3 2004 2:35 PM


Demoratassskicker:

At first I liked your statement in general after all this is a free country where everyone including idiots have that right. However, once you mentioned Arianna Huffington and your book writing I just fell off my fucking chair laughing and I could not get up. I think Arianna had let you "huffed" too much of her whining wrinkled pussy. You need to get your mouth out and your head out of her ass at the same time to smell some fresh air of the beloved United States of America.

Mon Apr 5 2004 2:19 AM


brewster:

Even though I am a Rebublican.. I still have'nt heard of a logical "plan" of how and to whom we hand over Iraq... perhaps it's in the working and it's previliged info... we will see.

Condi Rice is very impressive, I trust her more than anyone....

Fri Apr 9 2004 5:16 PM


njguardsman:

Mr. Glliam

Did you like John "F" Kerry when he voted for the 87 Billion or Did you like him when he voted against it???

(guess we all found ot what the "F" stood for didnt we)

Sun Apr 18 2004 8:54 AM


Jim Gilliam:

I can't stand John Kerry.

Sun Apr 18 2004 10:57 AM


njguardsman:

Mr. Gilliam,

Since you cant stand John "F" Kerry, if he becomes the Democrat nominee will you vote for him???

Mon Apr 19 2004 8:39 AM


Jim Gilliam:

Assuming he's the only credible challenger to Bush, then yes, sadly, I will vote for him. That vote will be added to my growing list of "not quite as bad as the other guy" votes -- right alongside John Edwards and Cruz Bustamante.

Mon Apr 19 2004 8:45 AM


njguardsman:

Mr. Gilliam

I have this question to ask you:

Will you really place the safety of you and your family on the altar of the UN???

Think of that when you vote in November.

Thu Apr 22 2004 1:57 PM


njguardsman:

Dispatch from Iraq

From a Marine Corps Officer on his SECOND tour in Iraq.

Americans Attention span is too short. We are used to instant gratification. Cell phones, email instant messaging, FedEx. We don’t want or expect to have to wait for anything. In this regard many people forget our own history. How long did it take our constitution to be written and adopted? How long after that was our own civil war, women’s right to vote, desegregation? Things that have taken us 200 years to develop cannot be instantly imposed on people who have no real concept let alone any history of democracy.

Most people have no concept of the culture. The majority of the people are very passive, will go out of their way NOT to disagree with or offend anyone. This unfortunately allows the few militant or religious leaders to have a huge influence over the population. But it allows them to swing just as easily tour side. They do not necessarily have any true loyalty but they are survivors. I think many of these characteristics are true of most Arab cultures but especially so for those living under an iron fisted dictator of which Sadam was as bad as any. Let’s not forget that on average he killed 29,000 Iraqis per year if you don’t count the two wars he started. To many Iraqis what happened 1000-1300 years ago is still very important and personal. Think of all those southerners who still haven’t gotten over the civil war and multiply that by 10. We are still the infidels over here.

All news organizations are there to make a profit. (This would take more time and ambition than I have in my current Pepsi deprived state. In fact it would probably require large volumes of alcohol.)

Political agendas and posturing have twisted and distorted what we have done and the real reason we’re here. This means the issues being discussed are largely irrelevant to the big picture. If anybody does not think this is ground zero for the war on terrorism they are wrong. Success here will not end terrorism but will establish a foundation that will allow the war to be successful. It is going to be a battle that continues for the foreseeable future (20+ years). If we fail here we will never be safe anywhere. It’s going to take time. If you have never been here you are probably never going to understand all the issues and the US media is not going to help – as a matter of fact it is going to make it worse. Everybody needs to slow down on the investigations, post mortems and writing the history books. There will be plenty of time for that 50 years from now. Right now lets do the right thing and finish what we started. The only way this will not be worth the price we’ve paid is if we, through our short sightedness and limited vision, do not see this for what it is and give up on a right and noble cause.

Fri Apr 30 2004 11:20 AM


njguardsman:

It is safe to say that if John Kerry had lost his Senate re-election bid to Republican Gov. William Weld in 1996, Mr. Kerry would not be the Democrats' presumptive presidential nominee today. Mr. Weld, who won re-election as governor in 1994 with 71 percent of the vote, was a formidable opponent. In a novel arrangement, both candidates pledged to limit the use of their families' personal wealth to $500,000 for the general election.
Mr. Kerry, whose campaign outspent Mr. Weld's $12.6 million vs. $8 million, won the race with 52 percent of the vote. Post-election finance reports revealed that he received a last-minute $1.7 million infusion from his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, who inherited the Heinz ketchup fortune from her first husband. Ever the master of nuance, Mr. Kerry claimed not to have violated the $500,000 agreement because the $1.7 million was a loan, not a contribution.

Fri Apr 30 2004 12:19 PM


Gerry Eve (UK):

George W did not storm the White House,he was voted in,so vote him out...

I sat with my newborn son asleep in my arms and thought 'That idiot will take America into war ...any war!'

There's NO WAY the US can gracefully evacuate its forces from Iraq so a 'hand-over' is as good a surrender as any!

Sat May 1 2004 5:53 AM


njguardsman:

Gerry Eve (UK)

I wonder what would have been your opinion if terrorists flew planes into Big Ben, and Buckingham Castle or Harrod's?

You just don’t understand, do you think this is all going to stop if we have a different President? It could get worse, did you notice what the UN did when they were attacked, they turned tail and ran. Turkey refused to let foreign military into the country and STILL they were bombed. This also happened to our “friends” in Saudi Arabia

Would you call Winston Churchill an "idiot" if he was leading you country at this time??? Did you protest your government during the Falklands war?!?

My countrymen and yours are “over there” so that my four year old and your new born wouldn’t need to be.

Mon May 3 2004 12:40 PM


Mike Rosenberg:

God help us all if Bush remains in office. I am the father of two boys 23 and 20, also a Vietnam Vet, but I'll be damned if my boys are going to get caught up in some idiot's private battle. Turn it over to those fantics that don't want us there to begin with, and bring home our sons and daughters. War on terrorism BS! He should have learned from his daddy.

Fri May 7 2004 7:55 AM


njguardsman:

Mr. Rosenberg

With all due respect for your service in Vietnam, your wrong these "fanatics" are coming for us and I for one would to take care of them "over there".

And George Bush Sr. should have gone the distance but he was a good boy and played by the UN's rules and that’s why we find ourselves there now.

Fri May 7 2004 10:53 AM


AthenaDaytona:

Blown up by a suicide bomber in Israel the remnants of a bus was hitched on to a trailer, flanked by monitors displaying still images of the aftermath of said bombing. This Gruesome installation was then carted around the West Hollywood area (mostly Russian/Jewish neighborhood)..... To do what?!? What message was being put across there? I will spell it out, gimmie an...F...E...A...R ! What does that spell? Control! What does that spell? Propaganda! Fear mongering and tantamount to terrorism. It is the justification of power abuse and a steady chipping away of the basic human rights of the peoples of the world for private economic and religious agendas. Whoa... my head spins when I think of it. FEMA, PENAC, quiet amendments made to the constitution Limiting our rights to privacy and enabling a single person (The President) to strip the populous of it's civil liberties upon the declaration of a National Emergency. A National Emergency was declared on 9/11 and never undeclared, with a few well-placed "Terrorist Acts" within the country, your local post office could become your local work distribution center and your local school, a bread line. Protecting our freedom is indeed the most important issue at stake here; but from whom are we protecting it?

Fri May 7 2004 11:47 AM


njguardsman:

AthenaDaytona
We are protecting it from all those who would consider women: property, slaves, chattel. We are protecting it from those who believe Islamic fundamentalism is the only way and everyone else must convert or die.

We are protecting the rites of people to give their opinions and not worry about getting stoned to death or have their right hands cut off.

"Blown up by a suicide bomber in Israel the remnants of a bus was hitched on to a trailer, flanked by monitors displaying still images of the aftermath of said bombing" - GOOD, I'm glad that happened I wish that would happen in the New York area, this country needs a wake up call to let them know whats coming for them if they "turn the other cheek"

"It is the justification of power abuse and a steady chipping away of the basic human rights of the peoples of the world for private economic and religious agendas." - Are we talking about black helicopters and conspiracy theories?!?!?

"A National Emergency was declared on 9/11 and never undeclared, with a few well-placed "Terrorist Acts" within the country, your local post office could become your local work distribution center and your local school, a bread line."- Are you accusing President Bush of manufacturing the War on Terrorism????

Fri May 7 2004 6:17 PM


Athena Daytona:

Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses?

As far as I know it is no longer legal to keep slaves in this country but from what I can glean of your opinions you may not think that’s such a good idea. To quote an earlier posting from you…

“I am NOT 100% in step w/ the President, I have issues with him signing the largest entitlement in American history, letting illegal aliens work w/out fear of deportation…”

You realize of course with out that illegal work force the economy would collapse? You think though it best to keep them living in fear? Why? I am not sure you would even know the answer to this so I’ll tell you; they are better than slaves that way. Slaves you still have to support feed and shelter when there is no work for them. Here we have the entire economy standing on the backs of said illegals but if they dare to demand the same rights as the citizens they support then we’ll just send em back from where they came from. So it’s really “Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, as long as they will do hard labor for 5$ an hour…No wait actually we take that back it’s don’t send them to us, we’ll just export the labor to you.

“We are protecting it from all those who would consider women: property, slaves, chattel. We are protecting it from those who believe Islamic fundamentalism is the only way and everyone else must convert or die.
You make it sound like the entire Middle East is out to get us.
Does protecting our way of life mean that the rest of the world must adopt our constitution and live like us? Why not make it easier for people who want to live like “U.S.” to come and live here?
Other than Canada the U.S. has more land mass and less population than anywhere on earth, we have room for those masses to show the rest of the world by example that our way of life is a good way of life.

“We are protecting the rites of people to give their opinions and not worry about getting stoned to death or have their right hands cut off.”
How does that justify torture? http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/iraqis_tortured/


We HAVE those rights; they ARE protected by the constitution (Unless of course there is a national emergency, then the Federal Emergency Management Agency, supercedes our government, our laws and our constitutional rights. Whom did you vote for in the back up government?) As soon as we can actually live up to our own utopian ideals then maybe just maybe we could have the right and the rites to prescribe them to the rest of the world. PNAC (my bad btw for my earlier reference being miss spelt) Policy for a New American Century is an actual document, a plan for the next hundred years, containing the signatures of some of the most powerful=$ men in the world one of them being the current president.

“Are we talking about black helicopters and conspiracy theories?!?!?”

There is nothing theoretical about this agenda it is in plain view for all to see. http://www.newamericancentury.org/

"Blown up by a suicide bomber in Israel the remnants of a bus was hitched on to a trailer, flanked by monitors displaying still images of the aftermath of said bombing" - GOOD, I'm glad that happened I wish that would happen in the New York area, this country needs a wake up call to let them know whats coming for them if they "turn the other cheek"

The point of Terrorist acts is to create fear, fear undermines freedom, action and tolerance. Fighting fear with fear on our own soil? Fighting fire with gasoline, excuse the cliché but that’s what comes to mind

"A National Emergency was declared on 9/11 and never undeclared, with a few well-placed "Terrorist Acts" within the country, your local post office could become your local work distribution center and your local school, a bread line."- Are you accusing President Bush of manufacturing the War on Terrorism???? (?!?! He did declare it)
You, I believe were or are in the military so you of all people should know that our radar grid is the most sophisticated in the world. Within minutes of those planes going off course not only did air traffic control know it, so did our military. The simple fact that we had the time to broadcast to the entire world, LIVE the images of that second plane hitting the towers but no time, even with prior warning to shoot it out of the sky. This raises my eyebrows; it looks an awful lot like it was allowed to happen. Now THAT would be a conspiracy theory. I am not accusing anyone of anything; I just don’t believe I have been told the truth of what happened that day. I don’t know the truth of it and I don’t believe you do either.

And BOB, thanks and bless your heart it is indeed true that fear can stop you’re loving and LOVE can stop your fear. There is a fellowship of love in the world as well as the constituent of greed; there are many of us and fewer of them than they would have us believe. What we think, how we vote, how we live and lead by example it all counts, and it all matters. Here is one good place to start, get informed. http://www.soros.org/


And YOU demoratasskicker: Quit yer mud slinging and actually contribute something to this thread, anything! Other wise take your 800-word vocabulary, volunteer and go die for what you believe in. If only so we don’t have to listen to your filthy fucking mouth anymore. Get an education they are readily available in this country.

Love
Athena

Mon May 10 2004 7:23 PM


Mike Rosenberg:

njg,

First thank you for your respect for my service that was something we missed. First, Bush's War on Terrorism has some strikingly parallel tones to it. WE MUST BE IN NAM TO STOP THE SPREAD OF COMMUNSIOM; WE MUST REMOVE THE TYRANT TO FIGHT TERRORISM.

Bush uses his war of terrorism to stop anybody from saying something against his administration. The guy is an idiot who wants other people's children to die for his cause.
Afghanistan yes, I saw the point. Iraq no. To fight the war on terrorism we need to stop focusing our troops on places where don’t belong.

Beside, no solider should have to fight for a coward who used his daddy’s powers to get him out service. John Kerry has his issues, but he fought first and then used what is a free society to voice his opinoin afterward.

Tue May 11 2004 6:39 AM


njguardsman:

Athena

“Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free” You forgot to the fine print – Those under 18 not admitted without parent or guardian – Remember Elian Gonzales?!?!?!?

“As far as I know it is no longer legal to keep slaves in this country but from what I can glean of your opinions you may not think that’s such a good idea. To quote an earlier posting from you…”

“I am NOT 100% in step w/ the President, I have issues with him signing the largest entitlement in American history, letting illegal aliens work w/out fear of deportation, not securing the borders, if you look on Mr. Gilliam’s marriage sight you’ll see my position.”- Wed Mar 24 2004 01:37 PM–if you’re going to quote me, please use the entire quote
- Illegal aliens have broken the law to come here they are criminals, they have thumbed their nose at American sovereignty. I am not against people coming here to better their lives so long as they do it legally.
- “You realize of course with out that illegal work force the economy would collapse?” Only because we’re “addicted” (for lack of a better word) to this because it’s so easy to find cheap labor- so you are for greedy land owners to pay these people almost nothing, what happens when these people get hurt “on the job”, what about their retirement, what about their children’s futures???
- For your information, I am the son of a Cuban refugee.


“The point of Terrorist acts is to create fear, fear undermines freedom, action and tolerance. Fighting fear with fear on our own soil? Fighting fire with gasoline, excuse the cliché but that’s what comes to mind” –

““We are protecting the rites of people to give their opinions and not worry about getting stoned to death or have their right hands cut off.”
How does that justify torture?” – Did you see any of these people being thrown off a third floor roof, how about having their tongues cut out, what about drilling a hole in a prisoner’s hand???

Were they mistreated? YES, yes they were.

Were these people wrong in what they did? Yes they were.

Were the prisoners abused? I can agree.

Were the prisoners humiliated? Yes

Were they tortured? No, definitely not!

Am I defending the soldiers? NO, absolutely not.

-Remember, This prison is maximum security, the worst of the worst are in there, do you know what they’re in for: terrorists (that if given the chance would kill you on sight), Iraqi soldiers still loyal to Saddam and other monsters that our military members have daily contact with. These men have rioted, attempted to murder guards and other assorted offences. Please know that I’m not making excuses for the SEVEN or so people who are responsible for those pictures.
-Were you this outraged when FOUR CIVILIAN CONTRCTORS were killed, ripped apart and their burned bodies hung like trophies, how about Dan Pearl and how he died, what about Nicholas Berg, the man they decapitated , what about the bus load of school kids that died when a bomb went off in Bagdad.
-I want an apology AND an investigation for these acts of murder!!!!

“Policy for a New American Century is an actual document, a plan for the next hundred years, containing the signatures of some of the most powerful=$ men in the world one of them being the current president.” – I’ve been on this site and I find nothing I have an issue with, we should do all we can to export freedom and safeguard our citizens around the world.

"Blown up by a suicide bomber in Israel the remnants of a bus was hitched on to a trailer, flanked by monitors displaying still images of the aftermath of said bombing" - GOOD, I'm glad that happened I wish that would happen in the New York area, this country needs a wake up call to let them know whats coming for them if they "turn the other cheek" - I think you misunderstand me, I don’t want a terrorist act to be committed I want that static display to be shown in the northeast.

Here are some websites for you:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/5/11/112439.shtml - Congress Ignored Reports of Prisoner Abuse
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/03/cnna.Dershowitz/
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4932951/ - Walking a Fine Line in Iraq
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/5/9/135645.shtml - 9/11 Flashback: When Libs Backed Torture


Mr. Rosenberg
I agree with you in part, There are some similarities with Vietnam & Iraq especially the media demonizing our soldiers, destroying their morale and over all doing everything they can to undermine a good and noble cause. Please remember we liberated approx 50 MILLION people in Afghanistan & Iraq and the majority of people like us and want us there.

Iraq (under Saddam) provided training facilities (planes) for terrorist to practice their “craft”.

Sir, George W. Bush is a Harvard Grad and no amount of “daddy’s” money could by that, maybe it got him in the door but that’s it.
I personally believe people’s main reason for joining the military is because they’re patriots, not to become rich or to parlay it into a political carrer. Just because President Bush served in the Air Guard instead of the “regular Air Force” does that make him any less a military member?!?!? If this is true then cheapen my military career and countless others!

About Mr. Kerry he is an admitted war criminal who has yet to be tried for his crimes in Vietnam, and this man wants to be president?!?!? He would rather see us as flunkies for the UN rather then lead and put America first. I question Mr. Kerry’s motives for joining the military specifically because he wanted a life in politics – as a means to an end, not necessarily to serve his country

I really don’t understand the HATE, just pure hate people have toward Pres. Bush.

I agree with what he’s done and frankly he doesn’t go far enough for me BUT he’s much better then the alternative.

Thu May 13 2004 11:27 AM


njguardsman:

The other Abu-Ghraib Story:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninger/?id=110005081

Sat May 15 2004 12:29 PM


njguardsman:

Click on the link above.

"This crime deserves condemnation from international medical societies, such as the U.N.'s World Health Organization, or the Red Cross. And Don North's film indeed should be seen--but may not be. After two months of trying, no U.S. broadcast or cable network will take it. This is incredible. TV can run Abu Ghraib photos 24/7 but can't find 55 minutes for Saddam's crimes against humanity?"

Sun May 16 2004 8:53 AM


threerandot:

I think that we need to ask the questions. What is a patriot? Can patriotism go too far? What is worth dying for? Can only a few people fairly decide for an entire nation what is right and what is wrong?

Is it reasonable to believe so strongly in one's leaders to the exclusion of all else? President Bush is only human after all. Am I right? What are his true motives?

Was this War really justified? Why was it fought? Why was it so easy to capture Saddam? What about Osama Bin Ladden? Wasn't he the one who attacked New York on 9/11?

Is putting all of our trust into one leader wise? I'm just asking questions? Can using a gun on your brother really be the answer?

As a Canadian, I am shocked all the time by Americans who constantly feel that their actions are "justified", that being "patriotic" to the extent that the rest of the world doesn't matter is supposed to be a reasonable viewpoint.

In the end, it always fails. Many Iraqi's may or may not have a better life right now, but at what cost? How many people have to die for a lost cause. The US is there, in my opinion to influence those who control the world's oil supplies. If this action on Iraq helps individuals who live there, then it can only make them look good.

Their investment in time and money, not to mention manpower and swaying public opinion are some of the factors. They are there not to really "help" Iraq in what would appear to be the humanitarian way. They are there, in my opinion to make friends with those who hold the key to the world's oil supplies.

I feel it is their intention to create a government system in Iraq which will support US intiatives to control gasoline. All of the arguments as to why US occupation in Iraq has helped people there falls apart when one considers whether this was done for purely "humanitarian" reasons.

Why didn't they take Saddam out before? Why did they wait until now? Where are the weapons of mass destruction?

As to the attacks on 9/11, I think the US saw this as the perfect opportunity to rally public support for the war. Everyone knows that it was Osama Bin Ladden who organised the attacks on 9/11. However, before the war, a large percentage of Americans beleived that Saddam Hussein was responsible.

I kind of look at the US as the "bid kid" in the playground who just got a fat lip. The "big kid" is so mad, that he smacks the first kid he can get his hands on just to intimidate the rest of the kids from getting any ideas about punching him on the nose again. There are other reasons as well.

I see the War on Iraq as a "display of muscle" and a "show of stength". "Look, we're America and no one else had better pick on us again". This was a great way to rally patriots from around the country to support this war. Remember Bush's famous comments: "If you're not for us, you're against us". If that isn't supposed to be a battlecry, I don't know what is.

Iraqis may be better off than before without Saddam. However, are America's motives and actions justified? Wouldn't it have been easier to simply hire an assassin to kill Saddam Hussein? Did an entire army have to go off to fight a war against an enemy who had no real armies anymore? If Saddam was a real threat to the US, why didn't he launch an attack years ago?

In the end, whether or not I was in Iraq, I think that Bush and his administration launched this war and subsequent occupation for their own gain. If Iraqis benefit, then this just lends credence to the US actions on Iraq.

Right now, the War is very unpopular, but I don't think this will deter the Bush administration. They want control of the world's oil supplies, because the price of crude is extremely high right now. Witness Canadian Gas Prices right now. 99.9 cents a liter! Everyone isn't too happy about that. If the US can control that region, it leaves the door open for further attacks on countries that disagree with them.

No one can force another person to agree with them. Even if you hold a gun to their head and then they do what you want them to, underneath it all, you have an enemy, an enemy who may one day jump up and give you a "fat lip" when you least expect it.

America is hoping to keep it's friends close and it's enemies even closer.

Sun May 23 2004 10:33 AM


brew:

In regard to the so called prison abuse...
WE ARE AT WAR PEOPLE and THESE PEOPLE INJ PRISON WERE TRYING TO KILL OUR TROOPS. DOESN'T ANYONE GET THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BAD THINGS HAPPEN IN WAR.... WE DO THINGS TO GET INFORMATION..... AT LEAST WE ARE NOT CHOPPING HEADS OFF...

Enough said.. MOVE ON!!!!

We need to talk of rebuilding, talk about how we are helping the average (Free) Iraqi citizen.

Sun May 23 2004 3:54 PM


njguardsman:

threerandot:
“I think that we need to ask the questions. What is a patriot? Can patriotism go too far? What is worth dying for?” -More importantly the question is: What are you willing to do to save/protect/preserve your way of wife?
“Can only a few people fairly decide for an entire nation what is right and what is wrong?” I’m thinking you’re talking about our form of Government, contrary to popular belief, we live in a Representative Republic, we ELECTED George W. Bush to among other things to defend and protect us, we (the people of the United States) entrusted him with the welfare of this country. That means a majority of Americans believe in him and still do so this thing about “a few people” goes out the window.
“Is it reasonable to believe so strongly in one's leaders to the exclusion of all else? -Would you say this about Franklin Delano Roosevelt and then Harry Truman during WW2?, It is a good thing to question but do it before or after, during we must show a united front so that our enemies realize what they’re up against.
President Bush is only human after all. Am I right? What are his true motives?” – What are your true motives? Could you have some type of agenda?
“Was this War really justified? – YES!!! Yes it was
Why was it fought? – Because we were attacked, almost 3000 people lost their lives, and these monsters wanted to bring the free world to its knees.
Why was it so easy to capture Saddam? – The Iraqis hated him, we were lucky enough to be able to be at the right place at the right time,
What about Osama Bin Ladden? Wasn't he the one who attacked New York on 9/11?” – Yes he was but as I said in previous statements on this site, Saddam provided “passive” support to the terrorists.
“Is putting all of our trust into one leader wise? I'm just asking questions? Can using a gun on your brother really be the answer?” – Well your “brother” someone who hits you from the blind side totally unprovoked then yes.
“As a Canadian, I am shocked all the time by Americans who constantly feel that their actions are "justified", that being "patriotic" to the extent that the rest of the world doesn't matter is supposed to be a reasonable viewpoint.” – As an American I am shocked at how dismissive the world is to what we are doing, the problem is that “we”(USA) didn’t get your (UN) approval/permission to defend ourselves.
“Why didn't they take Saddam out before? – The United States has –or- had a policy against assassination Why did they wait until now? – Because we had, the UN had the world had information about what Saddam was doing
Where are the weapons of mass destruction?” – A shell loaded with Serin exploded affecting soldiers sent to disarm it, so do you think that’s the only one?!?!? A big problem I had was that we waited too long to invade, I think some was loaded taken on trucks to Sierra (another Ba’ath stronghold), how easy is it to hide a Petri dish of Anthrax in a country the size of France?
“As to the attacks on 9/11, I think the US saw this as the perfect opportunity to rally public support for the war.” – You (by this statement) imply that the war was setup and ready to go B4 anything ever happened, I am enraged that you would try to “politify” the worst day in American history! The same was said about President Roosevelt in 1939 that he had prior knowledge about Pearl Harbor and he let it happen.
“I kind of look at the US as the "bid kid" in the playground who just got a fat lip.” – Actually my take on this is that the U. S. is the big kid that knew what he could do to the other kids in the playground and did nothing, even after being provoked (Somalia), provoked again (Kobar Towers), again (1993 attack on the World Trade Centre), and again (USS Kole).
Time after time we have extended our “hand” in friendship only to have it bitten time after time – Any time there is something that happens in the world be it: floods, storms, famine what have you, we are the first to offer a helping hand, then these places thank us from one side of their mouths and calling us the “Great Satan” from the other side. And we still offer the helping hand!
The “Big Kid” is tired of being: antagonized, ridiculed, and scared to act when needed.

Mon May 24 2004 2:59 PM


njguardsman:

“I think that we need to ask the questions. What is a patriot? Can patriotism go too far? What is worth dying for?” -More importantly the question is: What are you willing to do to save/protect/preserve your way of wife? * I meant LIFE

Tue May 25 2004 4:12 AM


njguardsman:

Here is something you wont see in the liberal media because it comes from a "Greedy Capitalist, Imperialist Company" that's only there for money & oil AND wants to make Iraq the 51st State:

http://www.gcsdistributing.com/UntilThen.htm

Tue May 25 2004 11:50 AM


Jr:

Bush Family is a family with no hart all fack and no soral we all know Bush Sr started all this mass from the last war we had with Suddam and we also know that when Regan and Bush was in office they where good friends to Suddam if you dont remeber that I fill for you man , any way yes The Regan and Bush and Bush Jr now the leader that was Elecited by the the suprem courts in 2000 I did not know we had a cry baby crying in the Governer House in Texas saying MY BROTHER PROMESS ME FLORDA now do you all remeber seeing this , it was all set up for him to go after Suddam by bomping Iraq 5 month in to his office and that is when Ben and Suddam set up a meeting to have the Al Qatia blow up the World Trade Center and this is now the way that Bush Jr can get back at US he dose not care about us the United states of America he is only in there to get revenage on us for not electing hes dad back in to office see look at it now what has happen

Sun May 30 2004 3:55 PM


brew:

you are a complete idiot

Mon May 31 2004 5:32 PM


Robroy:

Jim,

I enjoy reading your comments and agree with every word you've written. The big question in my mind is how in the hell can it be that fifty percent of the American people are not able to see what a total farce this administration is. I compare it with a nine year old who believes what he sees on all pro wrestling. If I take a couple hundred pounds of horse crap and wrap it up in fancy paper and put a big bow on it, will fifty percent of the American people really believe me when I tell them that it's not horse crap?

Wed Jun 2 2004 6:27 PM


njguardsman:

The only “FARCE” would be & has been a liberal administration in the Whitehouse, and thinking it will all be better, we could apologize to the nice terrorists and promise we’ll play nice from now on.

Save the whales & the Spotted Owl but suck the brain out of a BABY that’s almost full term & just waiting to be born thanks to a Clinton appointed activist judge in that bastion of family values San Francisco, so if you want to thwart the will of the American people JUST FIND A JUDGE.

Now this is a load of crap with fancy paper and a big bow on it.

Thu Jun 3 2004 4:16 AM


Johnathan Mcnab:

Bush sucks. screw republicans. democrats YAY.

Fri Jun 4 2004 6:21 PM


njguardsman:

My tribute to President Reagan, (In my opinion) One of the top Presidents ever to occupy the Oval Office

-Funny how we’re still fighting for the same things 20 years later.

"I believe that faith and religion play a critical role in the political life of our nation -- and always has -- and that the church -- and by that I mean all churches, all denominations -- has had a strong influence on the state. And this has worked to our benefit as a nation.

"Those who created our country -- the Founding Fathers and Mothers -- understood that there is a divine order which transcends the human order. They saw the state, in fact, as a form of moral order and felt that the bedrock of moral order is religion.

In 1963 the Court banned the reading of the Bible in our public schools. From that point on, the courts pushed the meaning of the ruling ever outward, so that now our children are not allowed voluntary prayer. We even had to pass a law -- we passed a special law in the Congress just a few weeks ago to allow student prayer groups the same access to schoolrooms after classes that a young Marxist society, for example, would already enjoy with no opposition.

And the frustrating thing for the great majority of Americans who support and understand the special importance of religion in the national life -- the frustrating thing is that those who are attacking religion claim they are doing it in the name of tolerance, freedom, and openmindedness. Question: Isn't the real truth that they are intolerant of religion? They refuse to tolerate its importance in our lives.

"The truth is, politics and morality are inseparable. And as morality's foundation is religion, religion and politics are necessarily related.

And without God, democracy will not and cannot long endure. If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under." -- Remarks at an Ecumenical Prayer Breakfast in Dallas, Texas, 23 August 1984

Mon Jun 7 2004 2:31 PM


njguardsman:

Here is where the entire speech is, about half way down the page its worth the short time it takes to read.

http://www.geocities.com/peterroberts.geo/Relig-Politics/RWReagan.html

Mon Jun 7 2004 8:37 PM


brew:

cheers - I agree completely

Tue Jun 8 2004 7:12 AM


Mike of the Great White North:

well, here's my two cents. it doesn't matter if you vote rep. or dem. (although repulicans act pretty f'n fanatical at times). Bush vs. Kerry? wake up... it's all the same. domestically, they may opposing views on tax cuts or envioronment.. but the foriegn policy of your country is a joke. i hear all the time from repulicans mostly, but some dems to 'they're fighting for our freedoms!' sorry you dum hick.. last i checked iraq was not about to attack and occupy mainland US of A. you had 'HIM' (aka saddam) holed up between 2 no fly zones, pummeled his radar and sanctioned his ass for the last umpteen years. im quite sure you were safe. so what does bushy do? he sends in young men and women (not his own family though) to fight an unneccessary war on the pretext of wmd (lie), on liberation from brutal dictator (liberate into abu gharib prison i take it) and has his vp DICK cheyney give lucrative contracts to his old company Haliburton for oil production (conflict of interest? hell no). And he wonders why they hate you.. for your freedoms? (you aren't free, the Patriot act will make sure of that).

I keep reading people stressing 'he was a monster, he killed his own people, he used wmd on them... thats why we went in!' <-- lets break this down shall we, for the uneducated. 1. many monsters out there, more terrifying than saddam. now that your stuck in afgan and iraq, what will you do if Kim Jul Ing decides to light up South Korea with one of his DECLARED WMD! (he says he has a nuke or two, why wasn't he first on the list?) 2. so he killed his own people, tragic yes. a pretext for war, hell no. i would not go fight a war to save the chinese from the communists because some got run over in tianeman square. you gonna liberate 1.6 billion from their communist oppressors? again why is saddam on the top of your list? 3. his using gas on his own people was indeed deplorable. the fact that Rumsfield was in Iraq shaking hands with saddam as the contract was signed for the US to sell WMD to Iraq is even more deplorable. YOU CANNOT JUSTIFY THIS WAR, unless you have have a piece of asparagus as your brain.

And heres where Kerry joins Bushy in the anals of stupidity. He supports this war too... NEWS FLASH you dumb retarded eggplants who start saying 'gee gosh darn it... dem ragheds iz tryin to kill us so weez shud kill dem.'... all Arabs aren't grouped into one lump sum. And Iraq sure as hell didn't have a damn thing to do with 9-11 (if you think so, join 80% of those uneducated eggplants who get their news from fair and balanced FOX news... your one stop propoganda shop)

and now get ready for the kicker... maybe i should get my lawyer first though, i hear the antisemite crowd coming.. when Bush asks 'Why do they hate us'.. before you spin off another 'freedoms' bit, think about the TOTAL, UNEQUIVACAL SUPPORT your country gives Israel and ask if that makes no diff to the problem. Let me state FOR THE RECORD; Israel has the RIGHT to exist. It has the right to defend itself from an attack of aggression. There. It does NOT have claim to any land it tried to annex after the 1967 war. (UN resolution) It has a duty to take all care of citizens under its occupation (UN and Geneva) It has no legal right to build and maintain settlements within the occupied territories (UN and Geneva) and so on and so on. There thats why they hate you. Because this is the root cause of most all Islamic terrorism, and until this is dealt with, your war will go on forever. And when the US veto's resolution after resolution brought against Israel by the UN, while Israel recieves aprox. 4billion of your tax dollars in loans and subsidies for building illegal settlements and buying US military hardware to crush palastinian people under occupation... do i need to go on?

didn't want to bring all that up but it goes back to your prez and prez wannabe. Both of them SUPPORT the 'DISENGAGEMENT' plan set forth by that beastly pig Sharon. In case you haven't paid attention, the plan means leaving Gaza (good) but retaining most of the prime real estate in the west bank (bad).

So to summerize... Root of all terror = Palastinian/Isreal conflict. Solution = US honest broker in negotiation of EXISTING UN resolutions to trade land for peace and a return to 1967 borders. Dilema = Bush/Kerry same foriegn policy one side slant to Israel. Cause and effect = never ending war. Never ending war = more loss of civil liberties in US. = Death of constitutional freedoms. = you decide.

America was built on the principle of taking care of her own people, not meddling in the affairs of other nations and not to go looking around the world for boogymen to destroy. Somewhere you lost sight of this. And the founding fathers are spinning in their graves over Iraq.

Wed Jun 9 2004 9:55 PM


njguardsman:

Mike of the Great White North,

“but the FOREIGN policy of your country is a joke” – Do you say this when disasters fall on other nations and the American people come to their aide (economically, medically, and yes militarily? What about Gulf War part one??? When the US of A made up 90% to 95% of the total forces during that time. If I remember correctly Canada sent THREE ships (thanks for the help) as its contribution. YES our foreign policy IS a joke because we continue to help those who hate and despise us AND we’ll do it again (much to my disbelief).

As always the world waits for the U.S.A. to do the “heavy lifting” and then condemn us for: nation building, imperialism, oil, or some other alternate motivation. If we “wanted oil” we could have taken over Kuwait in 1991 BUT WE DIDN’T!!!!!! Your argument is FALSE.

Haliburton has been working with the American government for DECADES for both Republican & Democrat Administrations alike, as I’ve said before on this site President Clinton actually gave a contract to Haliburton even though they were out bid by another company.

“YOU CANNOT JUSTIFY THIS WAR, unless you have a piece of asparagus as your brain” – We have as much if not more justification for this war, almost double the people died on 9/11/2001 then at Pearl Harbor, the only difference is that we are not fighting a country/nation, we are fighting a movement [violence (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands] that knows no borders and DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE GENEVA CONVENTION.

As I’ve also said on this website Saddam (IRAQ) provided aid to the terrorists in the form of training grounds and our former policy of “Containment” was no longer working because terrorism knows no bounds. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060746734/

North Korea is also on the list (do you remember the AXIS of EVIL); show me that Kim Jung Ill ignoring 17 UN resolutions. If after all the things that Iraq did are repeated by NK then I will hold President Bush’s feet to the fire. He needs to also take a harder stand with Cuba and the FARC in Columbia and other terrorist organizations in the world.

Your argument about Israel is also flawed because the Palestinians were also thrown out of Arab countries Egypt among them I don’t see “Palestinians” demonstrating on the streets of Cairo do you?

“America was built on the principle of taking care of her own people, not meddling in the affairs of other nations and not to go looking around the world for boogiemen to destroy. Somewhere you lost sight of this. And the founding fathers are spinning in their graves over Iraq.” - If this were true, the world would probably be speaking German of Russian right now, no one could practice their chosen religion and so on.

Remember you statements when the next world war breaks out.

Fri Jun 11 2004 8:22 AM


Mike of the Great White North:

njguardsman, lets take these a point at a time shall we...

1. Yeah, we sent 3 ships. Hey im not proud of the fact my liberal government has fucked up our military and thats all we got. Id boost our military spending. Humanitarian aid constitues only one part of foriegn policy and i never knocked your country for not being gererous with aid, even though per capita it is lower than other countries. but thats not the point i was making. when america wants to be be good, she can be. but right now foriegn policy is controlled by people who want nothing more than perpetual war. I dont know when war all of a sudden became cliche and was viewed as good. People die in these, civillians, soldiers, mothers, fathers... and on and on. Real people with real lives. only when its ours (western) does it mean anything. We lose 3000 people who will never be able to do things again, its tragic. So why do we not care, or try to persuade ourselves that the bombing of a wedding was just 'colateral damage', or the heavy handed sacking of Falujah which killed more civillians than insurgents(whom i will call patriots in so far as they see occupiers in their country that they want out... remember, youd do the same thing if any country invaded the US). To finish... i supported the fight in Afghanistan to bring in the person behind 9-11. Osama. He's the one who put the whole thing together. Saddam did not... this leads to point 4.

2. Sure, ill grant you didn't occupy Kuwait. You saved those rich royal monarchs and their oil reserves. It would have looked bad if you did take over Kuwait after you had gone to war with saddam to prevent him from doing the same. And lets not forget how democratic Kuwait is (sarcasm) and how the few rich oil kuwaitis control the rest of their populace. (i see women wearing burkas in kuwait, will you liberate them too?)

3. Hey ive got no qualms with you on the Clinton part giving a contract to Haliburton. Remember, im not a democrat... i think they're just as bad. That proves your 2 party system is really just one and a vote really doesn't mean much anymore. The fact is that if Cheyney was Haliburts CEO while working with the government, and now he's the VP of the USA and also giving Haliburt contracts outbid on, thats a HUGE conflict of interest. If it was dispickable when Clinton did it, its unethical for Cheyney to do it.

4.I understand that you are fighting against movement and not a nation. Terrorism is an ideoligy and a means to an end for politcal change. And thats why you wont beat it militarily. You have to take away the envioromental causes to terrorism. This isn't the same as appeasing. You still have to go after the perp (osama) and try him and execute him. But if you think you can militarily beat this down without creating new generations and more people who see America not in the same way you do, than your only fooling yourself. And lastly, Yes i concede the saddam was providing aid to terrorists, but the fine print on this peice is he gave money to family members of suicide bombers of palestinians. That is a regional conflict between israel and palestinians with no exportation of terror attacks outside those bounds. Hizbolah, Al Aqsa's, etc.. are all rebbelling against an occuping power (again i say, you wouldn't tolerate the chinese dismantling your home and making you have to go through checkpoints.)

5. Your stance on Nor.Korea puzzles me. Follow me if you will. 17 resolutions. This is the cause for the war. How come Israel hasn't been invaded yet... they've got 3 times as many resolutions against them. Saddam said he had no WMD, Kim said he did. Saddam let inspectors into his country, Kim wont until he can get guarentees the US wont attack him. The IAEA said saddam did not have a nuke or a program. The CIA doubted very much that saddam had the capability to. Kim kicked the IAEA out. The CIA takes his nuke claim VERY seriously. So my question again is, what made Saddam get to the top of the war list?

6. Again i will yeild to your argument (see, i have the ability to agree with a point, only expand on it too) Yes some palestinians were kicked out of Egypt, but most were not of Egypt, they were refugees whom Egypt did not want to take in. There is somthing summarily different between not wanting to take in an influx of refugees and the wholesale occupation of a people and trying to drive them out to make room for expantionist settlers whom believe GOD gave them that land and to hell with anyone else. They would rather see people die than give back the land they're not entitled to. And you've got to remember what i said about the root of terror. It doesn't matter how YOU percieve whats going on in the middle east, its what the people THERE percieve. And as long as they see Jews taking land they say is theirs, Jews shooting protesters with US M16's, knocking down building with US M-1Abrahms tanks, and firing missles into crowds with US Apache gunships... they will always come to the same conclusion that the US is the evil terrorist helping ISrael try to destroy them. If you cant grasp this, God help us all.

7. Dude, i seriously hope the next world war never starts, but i only hope you see that the current foriegn policy of both Dems and Reps are both leading us towards armageddon. Your friends with Pakistan now, but just wait till a day when musharaf is assisinated or turns, and hes got nukes. if you keep making claims the iran or syria have wmd with no proof... you'll scare them right into GETTING WMD, to prevent you from doing what you did to WMDless Iraq.

8. On a final point,not related to anything we've discussed... i worry for your troops over there. Since Bush and Rummy have thrown the articles of Geneva out the window and choosing when they can declare people 'enemy combatants' as they did to get people into camp xray and abu gharib... i dont even wanna finish this point. People agreed to sign and ratify that to protect the soldier. Ethically, if you invaded another country now (syria, N.Kor) how can you possibly expect them to treat POWs. They will be 'enemy combatants' to those regimes and your troops will suffer in any future wars because Bush changed the rules.

I like America, i really do. I put my own Canadian pride over on the backburner and say America IS the greatest country on the earth in almost every regard, economically, militarily, etc... so please dont let a few neocons send others to fight wars they wouldn't, bankrupt your economy, stretch your millitary to the point of bringing back the draft and bringing in unconstitutional acts the violate your god given rights and freedoms. Im not American and i feel like im fighting for your constitution harder than Americans will. And im sad Reagan passed, he was probably one of your best ever. And he learned right after Iran Contra that containment, not preemptive strikes was the way to go. The only thing he messed up on was giving Osama CIA training and weapons to fight the soviets. But other than that he was a great leader. Bush really could learn a lot him, if he can even learn at all. After all, he said doesn't bother to read newspapers. His words not mine.

Hoping for America.

Fri Jun 11 2004 5:37 PM


njguardsman:

OK Canuck

“when america wants to be be good, she can be. but right now foriegn policy is controlled by people who want nothing more than perpetual war.” - First, this is a blatant lie, Were those “peaceful” people who flew planes into buildings? WE (USA) are RETALIATING after an attack on our sovereign soil!
“People die in these, civillians, soldiers, mothers, fathers... and on and on.” – People died in NYC (mothers, fathers, children) people died in Washington DC (mothers, fathers, children) people died in a farmer’s field in Pennsylvania (mothers, fathers, children) Real people with real lives and all they did wrong that morning was go to work and take a trip, who will never be able to do these things again, its tragic.

“So why do we not care, or try to persuade ourselves that the bombing of a wedding was just 'colateral damage',” – If this was actually a “wedding” the liberal media would have never let it die, we were firing on TERRORISTS.

“Sure, ill grant you didn't occupy Kuwait. You saved those rich royal monarchs and their oil reserves. It would have looked bad if you did take over Kuwait after you had gone to war with saddam to prevent him from doing the same. And lets not forget how democratic Kuwait is (sarcasm) and how the few rich oil kuwaitis control the rest of their populace. (i see women wearing burkas in kuwait, will you liberate them too?)” – DO you know that no Kuwaiti citizen works, all their labor is brought in from other countries. Burkas are (as far as I know) part of their religion, We’ll free them just as soon as we’ll free Jews from their head coverings or free Buddists from their robes.

“The fact is that if Cheyney was Haliburts CEO while working with the government, and now he's the VP of the USA and also giving Haliburt contracts outbid on, thats a HUGE conflict of interest. If it was dispickable when Clinton did it, its unethical for Cheyney to do it.” – So the U. S. Government cant do business with companies that can build infrastructure better/faster or construction companies to rebuild schools, hospitals & jails. What about communications companies??? ALL BECAUSE SOMEONE IN THE GOVERNMENT ONCE WORKED FOR THEM!!!!

“I understand that you are fighting against movement and not a nation. Terrorism is an ideoligy and a means to an end for politcal change. And thats why you wont beat it militarily. You have to take away the envioromental causes to terrorism. This isn't the same as appeasing.” *** Replace TERRORISM for COMMUNISM and read this again! Reagan once said something along the lines of: “the only way to have peace is to win the Cold War!” This nation’s 40th President (God rest his soul) knew evil has to be confronted, not contained. This nation’s 43rd President is following this same doctrine

” Your stance on Nor.Korea puzzles me.” – NK is like a snarling dog that growls when you try to take its food away but does nothing when you actually do it. NK wants attention, “look at me I have WMD” NK seeks to be a major player in the “nuclear club” and by not recognizing that part of it we are subverting them, China has 150,000 troops on the NK border just in case they get out of line. Is NK a threat yes , Are we aware of that threat yes, are we doing something about it yes.

“And as long as they see Jews taking land they say is theirs, Jews shooting protesters with US M16's, knocking down building with US M-1Abrahms tanks, and firing missles into crowds with US Apache gunships... they will always come to the same conclusion that the US is the evil terrorist helping ISrael try to destroy them.” - As long as there are terrorist that blow themselves up in buses, pizza parlors, schools, protesting in the streets with men in masks parading with AK47s THEN Israel has a rite to defend itself how it sees fit. Palestine was a region no one cared about until the Jews decided to settle there.

“Your friends with Pakistan now, but just wait till a day when musharaf is assisinated or turns, and hes got nukes. if you keep making claims the iran or syria have wmd with no proof... you'll scare them right into GETTING WMD, to prevent you from doing what you did to WMDless Iraq.” – FIRST, a WMDless Iraq is a FARCE. NEXT: the UN Russia, France, Germany everyone said Iraq had WMD including Kerry so I say again: Until you guarantee me that EVERY SQUARE INCH of Iraq has been searched (Iraq is the size of California or France) then I’ll agree BUT why would President Bush commit political suicide so close to an election by invading a country for (in your mind) no good reason. Iran has American troops on both it’s borders and it’s population was wondering why we stopped at Iraq they’re spoiling for us to move in. Syria (the last Ba’athist party stronghold) “sees” the writing on the wall just like Libya. Pakistan is another issue entirely, but sometimes you have to “deal with the devil”, Musharif serves a purpose and now we’re keeping an eye on him.

“They will be 'enemy combatants' to those regimes and your troops will suffer in any future wars because Bush changed the rules.” – Bush & Rummy didn’t change the rules, we were forced into playing a different game and those rules don’t apply and if you’d open your eyes you’d see.

Please spare me your “concern” for the troops, you’re just like the idiot elitists in Hollywood who say “were against the war BUT we love the troops” NEWS FLASH: it’s all or nothing, if you don’t support the mission HOW CAN YOU SUPPORT THOSE WHO CARRY IT OUT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

P. S. just for the record to me they’re terrorists NOT insurgents, they lost power and are desperate to get it back and the closer the handover gets the more desperate they become because they know power is lost to them.

Sat Jun 12 2004 11:43 AM


Mike of the Great White North:

For a second i though i could have a conversation with an intellectual. i was wrong. Fine, you have the right to your opinions. The constitution gives you that right. Real men died for that right, not some clown who was appointed to office. You can spew every lie that Fox news puts out ad verbatim. I recognise that you, the politacal structure, indeed half the US is locked into this closed mind mentality. So be it. Im through trying to get people to understand. To you, they are the enemy. To them you are the enemy. And neither of you are going to win, the war will go on forever, blood will be spilled, innocents will continue to die all for imperial goals and religious fanatisism. Ive said from the onset, im of no politcal stripe, i view both sides and try to understand both sides or at the very least try to comprehend what the motive is. And i see that its because neither side is willing to deviate from what is set in stone from them.

You can support the troops without supporting the mission. Support means you want them to come home alive. The mission is created by people who dont actually fight it. Cowards and war profiteers, sending yound people from middle class down who were looking for a good job and personal pride. These soldiers would defend the US to their last breath, but right now they dont know what they're fighting for. WMD? WHERE! Quote the Rummy, 'they're in there, in and around tikrit, we know they're there'. SO WHY AREN'T THEY THERE. It wasn't to liberate Iraqies... You got rid of saddam to give iraqies freedom. FINE, THEY'RE FREE, GET THE FUCK OUT. thats what they want. the freedom to say Yankee go home, to elect they're own, not a puppet gov't of the US. they want control of their OWN OIL, hands off Haliburton. SO WHY ARE YOU STILL THERE??? to fight terrorism? it wasn't there until AFTER THE WAR.

the Prez commited political suicide because he doesn't read papers, listened to his neocon advisors who fed him lie after lie which he took as truth.

Reagan won the cold war by opening a DIALOGUE with Gorbachev. He didn't invade the USSR. He made concessions with Gorbachev, shelved the star wars plans, instituted arms control treaties and scaled back nuclear weapons. Thats how he won it. He's nothing like BUSH jr. Reagan was a real tactition, he was up to date, he had smarts. Your hero is a fucking mr. potato head.

but i give up. the purpose of this exercise wasn't to change your mind, it was just to open your mind to other possibilities. like the government isn't always right, blind faith and alleigence to any one man is a danger, consolidating power under one man is the first step to the removal of the same constitution real men died for. and thats what you want. say it loud, for the world to hear. I WANT A POLICE STATE, abandon my rights for security. I care not for the suffering of innocents unless they have the US flag burned on their foreheads.

btw-i see your name is njguardsman, i assume this means you serve in the forces. which branch, where have you fought? been to Iraq yet? talk to any troops there and ask them what they think?

It is the solemn duty of every patriotic citizen whom truley believed in this war to march on down to the local rucruitment office and sign on board for operation Iraqi freedom. Get down to the front lines and do your part. Or you can just wait for the draft.

a wmdless iraq is a farce??? guess David Kay, the man BUSHY hand picked to survey iraq.. musta smoked some real good shit, cuz he says there are no wmd, nor likely ever were in the HUGE amounts that bush exaggerated. BUSH HIMSELF, has come out and said there are NO ties between saddam and al qiada. so if you still believe either, your a loyal fox news supporter.

i cant wait until China, Russia and the rest of the caucasses decide they've had enough of American Imperial encrouchment and push back and decide to 'liberate' countries too. and dont complain when US troops face torture. You were forced to into playing a different game? why not apply that at home. why should we wait for someone to actually commit a crime! Search everyones home, stop people at will and search their cars and person. if we need to play a different game abroad, why not at home? the rules are what seperate us from them, and the second you cross it, you are no better then them.

the handover is a farce. you want a real handover... give them full soverienty, elections, and leave! and when you do leave, then you will see the people celebrating, throwing flowers and candy....

Sat Jun 12 2004 4:39 PM


njguardsman:

Looks like I struck a nerve to get you so upset! (or was it because I called you “Canuck”)

Yes they (Terrorists) are the enemy and the sooner you realize it the better off you, your family, your community, your country our world will be!

“You can spew every lie that Fox news puts out ad verbatim.” – And: CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, NY Times, Wash. Post, and so on are you pillars of truth and justice with no agenda.

“You can support the troops without supporting the mission.” B.S. (Bravo Sierra)! I am one of those troops, I’m in the Air National Guard the same military service Bush was in, so now because I’m a “Guardsman” my military service belittles me in your eyes SO BE IT! I am ready to go and serve my country if I’m called and your writing like those people after the Vietnam War calling returning soldiers baby killers and other cute little names.

Maybe you don’t understand because it hasn’t happened to you (Canada) maybe you will understand when terrorists blow something up in Ottowa or Vancouver for no other reason then you’re in the same hemisphere as the U. S.

The closed minded one here is YOU! Just because someone takes you to task on your viewpoints you resort to insults. Because this is not the type of government you’d like running the most powerful nation on earth, immediately the administration is cold and manipulating.

“Support means you want them to come home alive.” Do you think I don’t want my friends home alive?!?!?!
“The mission is created by people who dont actually fight it. Cowards and war profiteers, sending yound people from middle class down who were looking for a good job and personal pride.” – For your information WAR PLANS are made by those who have been in battle, have seen their soldiers die, they have EARNED the RANK of: GENERAL, ADMIRAL! They’re not some “Rich Kids” playing STRATEGO or BATTLE SHIP with people’s lives. Colin Powell came from the Bronx in NYC (a REALLY “rich” neighborhood).

“Reagan won the cold war by opening a DIALOGUE with Gorbachev. He didn't invade the USSR. He made concessions with Gorbachev, shelved the star wars plans, instituted arms control treaties and scaled back nuclear weapons. Thats how he won it. He's nothing like BUSH jr. Reagan was a real tactition, he was up to date, he had smarts. Your hero is a fucking mr. potato head.”- Reagan won the Cold War because of the largest military rebuild in American history, deploying new cutting edge weapons @ the USSR’s doorstep (how’s that for a bargaining chip) he made clear he wasn’t “F”ing around and GORBY knew it! The USSR was run into the ground by the fact a free and open economy is the way to go. All Reagan’s critics had your same attitude “Your hero is a fucking mr. potato head.” Funny how history repeats itself.

“say it loud, for the world to hear. I WANT A POLICE STATE, abandon my rights for security. I care not for the suffering of innocents unless they have the US flag burned on their foreheads.” – Let me tell you something about myself, I am the son of a Cuban refugee so I know a bit more insight about a police state then possibly you so I suggest you try a different tactic then the “SLIPPERY SLOPE” argument. I know what my family goes thru there and that’s one of the reasons we freed 50 MILLION PEOPLE hopefully my family’s turn will come in my life time.

“the handover is a farce. you want a real handover... give them full soverienty, elections, and leave! and when you do leave, then you will see the people celebrating, throwing flowers and candy....” – It took us 200 years to get our form of government and we still had problems (slavery, segregation, women’s rites) but we’re allot further along then they are. What a plus it would have been for us to have that kind of help when we started. We have a duty & obligation to make sure they can take care of themselves B4 we leave, AND WE WILL LEAVE!

BTW They have a leader who doesn’t like U.S. but I guess you knew that already knew that.

Sun Jun 13 2004 8:13 AM


Mike of the Great White North:

Yes, you cut me real deep with the canuck comment. Real deep.

Yes terrorists are the enemy.They have to be beaten. I agree. But our views are diametrically opposed on this. You see military power as the only solution, and fail to see brutal force and it's blowback if you will, generate new legions of terrorists. I see the end by multiple means, military, judicial, economic. I also see the need to remove certain precursors to terrorism and its recruitment, which include social inequities, support of despotic regimes when it suits americas interests, and the hypocrisy (real or percieved) of american foreign policy around the globe.

All news media lie to a certain degree, i dont watch any one source. I get from tv, paper, internet. I come to my own conclusion, not have some blathering monkey tell me what im supposed to think.

I dont ever belittle the troops. Your out there to do a job your ordered to do. But where as you believe your fighting for americas freedom and doing the right thing, i see it as your commander and chief made you remove a neutered leader from a collapsing state that had no capability to threaten the US at all. and with that removal of saddam who was secular and did not tolerate al-quida because of their fanatical view of islam, you've opened the door to fanatical islam to move into iraq and fester. where once there was no al-quida, now they're recruiting. it only happened after the war. and no, im not talking about actual battlefield stratagy (ie generals, admirals) im talking about the civilian dunderheads (ie. wolfowitz, fieth, perle) who orchastrated this sorry affair to begin with. these are the cowards i refer to. people who were born with the silver spoon and never served a day in their life, yet eager to send people off to die in their adventures in imperialism.

if i actually resorted to any personal insults when you took me to task, i apologize. but i take nothing back when talking about the bush administration.

im sorry, but history shows reagan and gorby signing the arms reduction treaty. If you think for one second its because of new cutting edge weapons, im sorry for you. Reagan didn't want to win the war like his hawk advisors suggested, winning a Nuclear war with the USSR. he wanted to contain the USSR until communism destroyed itself through greed and corruption. And dont mention the Star Wars plans as the great equalizer to bring gorby to his knees. the anti missle system cant even shoot down target without transponders today, it would never have gotton off the ground in the early 80's. ill say it again. Reagan smart, Bush not.

Sorry, but i will not stop the slippery slope argument at all. When the right to freedom of speech all of a sudden becomes 'unamerican', 'unpatriotic', 'gives aid to terrorists', etc... when people can be targeted and locked up for having views different from the gov't in power, when the man in charge has the supreme power to detain without proof, indefinatly without a lawyer, in essance to 'dissapear' someone, thats downright scary. And thats what the patriot act does. And when congress, the ONLY authority granted under the constitution the right to declare war, passes that responsibilty to one man, that is scary. The slope is already forming, it's just a matter of how big the grade will be.

Question... if the US invaded Cuba and Castro loyalist holed up in the same town/city your family was in, would you raise/firebomb/fallujah the city? if the people didn't stand up to the fighters they would deserve it then no? this is the what iraqi citizens face and you see nothing wrong with brutal tactics?

if you can agree to me on this, then i will yeild to you on this argument. If after the handover date, the new Iraqi gov't says 'we can handle it from here' and says US troops out. if they say they will rebuild their own oil refinery's, US contractors out. If they say we want free elections and they elect a islamic gov't, will you abide by the free election results.

and yes i know he does'nt like U.S. but in his case he's just playing politics to win support. If you were to leave, he'd be dead by sundown and he knows this.

Mon Jun 14 2004 4:23 PM


SnaggleSnake:

And the best you can do is come up with that bore, John Kerry.

OMG

He will put the sleeping pill companies out of business - exciting as lint.

Mon Jun 14 2004 6:58 PM


ArabPrince:

The Jews say Bush is the First Jewish president.

Hopefully when Kerry gets in, he will NOT be a puppet of the Jews like Bush.

Mon Jun 14 2004 7:02 PM


GoldToeNail:

Greg Eve,
Who gives a ratz ass about your newborn son.

You act like your the only one on earth that has had a child.

Mon Jun 14 2004 7:06 PM


njguardsman:

Mike of the Great White North

- Military power is only the most obvious solution to the world, when the war on terrorism started the government said they would get them: militarily, economically, thru the UN (yeah sure), by any and all means available!

- The “precursors to terrorism” as you put it, are the madrasas indoctrinating 5yr olds to blow themselves up for some stupid theological reason AND telling these same kids that America is the “Great Satan”. Yes some of our “allies” have these same schools.

- If by “support of despotic regimes” you mean Israel I still think you’re wrong.

- I don’t know how it is up north but in America the media is 90-95 % Democrat (liberal) so forgive me if I get my news from “other” sources, I too formulate my opinions much the way you do, I’m not some mind numbed robot.

- I don’t understand why you invoke class warfare, because someone happens to be born into money THAT does not make them evil/bad. I have the belief that ALL people are basically good no matter what their economic circumstances 9until proven otherwise.)

- You see my CNC in the wrong light, I believe he's done the right thing at the correct time but in my view he still has a long way to follow thru.

- Your view of Saddam is also flawed, in 2000 & early 2001 representatives from Iraq and Al-quida had a meeting I wonder what they were talking about (the enemy of my enemy is my friend), also Iraq was dealing trading oil for weapons NOT FOOD thanks to UN greed. Top of the line MIG (Russian) planes fitted with spy equipment from our good friends France and Germany all of a sudden flew themselves to Iraq. (check the link in my comments of: 11 JUN 04 @ 08:22 AM

- Again it was Reagan no nonsense “this is the way it’s going to be” attitude that broke the USSR. Do you remember Reagan walking out of negotiations with the USSR simply because he would not GIVE IN! His M. O. was no compromise, no containment. He called the Soviets what they were “The Evil Empire” that is not containment, he said this and he also said “Tear down this wall” against the advice of his handlers, over the objections of his advisors AND making Democrats soil themselves over these comments they thought much like you do now nuclear war is imminent, I’m still here what about you.
Star Wars is doable just expensive proof that it works is Star Wars on a smaller scale: PATRIOT MISSLE SYSTEM!

- Yes a balance is needed between security and freedom, more of one less of the other the ratio has to be worked out. In an open society this infinitely harder to achieve.

I have a question = Are you an American or a Canadian, you tout freedom of speech and talk about the Constitution as if it covers you. I’m sorry but the REALITY is if you are not an American citizen, you are not covered by the Constitution, now there are those who have green cards, I’m not talking about them or other legal immigrants.

In response to your comments about leveling the city where my family lives = Yes I would destroy the city where my family lives, they like other people would have left the city the moment fighting started. I know innocent people will die in war we knew this going in and we’ve gone to extremes to avoid this we probably would not have lost as many people as we have now because we’re thinking of civilians. There is always a way to resist (Tiananmen Square China, MLK, the Dali Lama, Gandhi).

In response to your comments about leaving Iraq = Well if President Bush agrees to those conditions, sure. But I suspect there will always be some sort of American presence in Iraq (maybe 10% of the total troops there now.)

In response to your comments about the current leader of Iraq = Again you don’t count on the fact that people want to do good things (until proven otherwise.)

Tue Jun 15 2004 6:47 AM


Goattail:

Kerry is a Sagitarrius that’s related to the Ascendant generally gives a “horsey” appearance with a long, thin face and big-toothed smile.

Thu Jun 17 2004 6:59 PM


njguardsman:

What’ it gonna take

Now these monsters have separated the head from another American’s body. A civilian, a contractor – a person whos only crime was going to work, oh yeah I almost forgot, being American the worst sin of all.

When are you people going to get it through your heads, these subhuman fanatics don’t care about our sexual preferences, our politics, the color of our skin, or how we profess or faith what matters is that WE ARE ALL AMERICANS, when are YOU going to stop politicizing Iraq and unite!?!?!

They need to see a united front form “U. S.” both them and our deployed military.

Bush and the Saudi government should have gone on TV and announced:

“To these holding Paul Johnson Jr, if you execute him we will execute 10 of your people”

But alas, due to political correctness and “ how we’re perceived” in the world that’s not going to happen.

To those of you (and you know who you are) how many more heads need to roll before you set aside politics and unite under our flag?

Our divisiveness only makes these monsters bolder/stronger! Those of you who continue to politicize the War on Terror, the blood Nick Berg & Paul Johnson Jr, is on your hands.

Fri Jun 18 2004 7:54 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

Hey nj, hows it goin.

God i hate going on a point for point basis so ill keep these as quick as possible because these back and forths go nowhere. Your mind is set, so is mine.

1. Military power is part of a solution but not the most obvious. Just ask the former USSR about Afghanistan. And terrorism is an act of desperation by people who try to change policy when no other means are available to them. Al-quada and other 'terrorist' entities cannot be destroyed by military means because they propagate to young impressionable uneducated masses the evil of the west and point out percieved injustices in the Muslim world perpetrated by the west. All they have are match sticks, dont give them the gasoline to fuel the fire.

2. Support of despotic regimes, while it may include Israel, thats not what i refered to. It was the US that supported Saddam in the mid 80's and gave him the wherewithal to develop 'wmd' for use in the Iran-Iraq war. US morality did not step in when saddam gassed Iranian troops. It also did not bother to protect the very same kurds it asked to rise up and overthrow saddam after gulf war 1. Only when it became politcally convenient did the US decide to play the moral card against saddams mass graves, helped in part by US aid to Saddams regime. The support of the Taliban pre 9-11. No one cared about liberating women from burqas until it became convenient, because the Taliban were doing a good job of preventing the production and traficking of drugs into the US market. Supporting Musheraff, the General who won a coup against an elected president. The puppet Shaw of Iran before being deposed... I can go on and on.

3. The 9-11 commision (bi-partisan, and set up months after stonewalling by the whitehouse) has just confirmed what i've said all along. So these meetings took place. That in itself is meaningless. I could set up a meeting with Toronto Raptors and propose taking Vince Carter and giving them two nickels and a bag of dirt. Does that mean anything constructive happened? Facts are facts. Saddam was as secular as they come and theres no way in hell he'd hand over wmd to bin laden so he could use them against him to make Iraq a fundamentalist islamic state. And the implication your making of france and germany selling military stuff to Iraq... your telling me only the USA has the right to sell arms and equipment?

4. The patriot missle system FAR from perfect. And ill reiterate again... at this very moment stage one of the missle defence shield is being put into place, without any confirmed test data that the sytem works at all. With reports of the system unable to bring down missles unless they are at such a low velocity and have an electronically enhanced radar signature, which makes these tests absolutely retarded. No country on this planet would fire missles as incompotent as the ones that are uses in the tests. The system may NEVER work, and its being rammed through.

5. I am Canadian, and proud of it. I also enjoy that fact that if my government, lib, tory, whatever makes a dumb move, i can BLAST them to kingdom come with my words and not have to worry about being called Unpatriotic or treasonous and be put under survielence. Here we wrap ourselves in the flag just as you do. But our patriotism doesn't lead us to blindly follow our government. We implicitly DO NOT trust government to do the right thing for us. Big government has only one purpose, to serve itself and to that end we hold them accountable. When they brought in a stupid gun registry that sucked up billions when it was supposed to be 2 mill, your damn right we'll scream. When they give ad contracts to their rich friends for work never done that costs more millions, heads roll. Say what you want about our 'left wing' media, i will be the first to admit they are 'far' left.. but at least they ask the hard questions. Far to often right wing media simply ignore the facts of what is bad and say 'why dont they ever report the good?' Reporting is reporting and if something happens thats bad, do you dismiss it because it wasn't feel good news? Thats irresponsible journalism. So yes, i do not enjoy the rights under your constitution, i have my charter, but if i was born south of the 49th, your damn right id still be fighting for my first amendmant right to freedom to say what i want without fear of government reprisal or being labeled a traitor. And thats what far to many americans have forgoten what it is that they fight for.

6. What if your family did not have the ability to leave, what if they had to care for someone who could not get mobile. what if they assumed 'this is my home and dammit, and no ones gonna force me out'. You'd still flatten it. Give me liberty or give me death takes on a whole new meaning with that one.

ok, so i couldnt keep my points short. i apologize. Let me just conclude on one last note and im going to appeal to your military honour, which i hope reflects actual combat brass over civilian idealogues hell bent on proving think tank results. When you have Colin Powell constantly apologizing for things said in reports or quotes made by certain administration officials, when you have Norman Schwarzkopf denouncing Rumsfields battlefield strength numbers to secure Iraq, when you have Anthony Zinny saying planning was screwed right from the getgo, when you have the Strategic Studies Institute of the Army War College saying that to deviate from the fight against Bin Laden and Al quada to war with impotent Iraq would waste valuable resources needed to fight 'terrorism'. These are all RESPECTED generals and commanders of your armed forces saying these things. Who opposes these men, neocon suits whom have never known war except for video games and thesis studies in their hawkish think tanks. To them you are a pawn to be played as a means to an end. The end being an ideoligical world molded to their vision. If this is the sacrafice you want to make, for an ideological fantasy, i cant stop it. But since i do not know whether you have been to Iraq, will be going to Iraq or are not in Iraq, i will only say this. If you do or have the chance to talk to troops coming back from Iraq, ask each and everyone of them if they know exactly what it is that they're fighting for.

Mon Jun 21 2004 9:08 PM


njguardsman:

Hay Canuck

First Happy Father’s day to those who deserve it!

Now I agree with you for the most part except for some points: “And terrorism is an act of desperation by people who try to change policy when no other means are available to them.” It’s more like they’ve tried to put through their radical agenda and the government (whatever government) safeguards (whatever they may be) have been stopped and have resorted to TERROR (sore losers-so to speak), “because they propagate to young impressionable uneducated masses the evil of the west and point out percieved injustices in the Muslim world” = MADRASAS, we need to take these out!!!!!!!

I think you have forgotten something all thru our history we’ve made friends of enemies AND enemies of friends. Britain was our worst enemy 200 years ago, not anymore. Italy, Japan & Germany were bent on world domination (WW2) again bitter enemies and now we have great relations w/them (after WE rebuilt them from the ground up). Now Libya has made great strides to “better” its relationship with the U. S. Even on a more personal level, how many people were close to you and now because of some core belief/point of contention you find yourself at odds with them or a particular person. As I said B4 about Musheraff, some times you have to deal with the devil believe me I’m not happy about this but we need to keep our eye on the prize (OBL) and he will help us a great deal simply because he wants to get on our good side.

The 911 Commission was a farce, it had no investigative powers, it had to rely on the FBI, CIA FAA, NSA and what ever agency I’ve forgotten to list bringing the commission paperwork for them to go over, can you imagine the RCMP working like this?!?!?!?

I ALSO disagree with you about the Patriot Missile System, it is a viable active and productive system or we wouldn’t be using it right now, we relied on it to keep Israel out of the Gulf War in ‘90/91 AND IT WORKED.

I’m happy that you have such pride about your country, I’m happy your able to take your government to task when you feel warranted. As I’ve written B4 on this site I AM NOT 100% IN STEP WITH MY PRESIDENT, and I call him on issues that concern me or I feel need to be addressed (borders, entitlements, illegal immigration, NAFTA to name a few).

“What if your family did not have the ability to leave, what if they had to care for someone who could not get mobile. what if they assumed 'this is my home and dammit, and no ones gonna force me out'. You'd still flatten it. Give me liberty or give me death takes on a whole new meaning with that one.” – Do you think the founding fathers of my country didn’t lose family and friends in the war? What about the Civil War?
Do you think if I was there, where they are I would do all I could to save them? Wouldn’t I be a hypocrite if I were to spare a city full of terrorists because I have family there?

In your final paragraph, these are respected people you’re referring to and they are entitled to their opinions! I however disagree with their opinions, so does Conde Rice and for the most part Colin Powel and the rest of Bush’s cabinet, if they didn’t believe in what they are doing they have the option to resign.

I voted for Bush, I hired him to represent me and if I didn’t believe he could represent me and take care of the issues facing the American people he would not have gotten the job in the first place. I (personally) have placed my faith/trust in him to do what needs to be done to keep America safe. I still have issues with him BUT he’s the best man for the job at this time compared to the alternative ESPECIALLY in a world that and despises us simply for who we are.

Tue Jun 22 2004 6:32 AM


Eh' Yankee:

:)

Im glad this is turning out to be more civilized than it began. We can respectfully agree to disagree.

Point taken. Madrassas are the worst of the worst and i dont think i would make any attempt to claim trying to save these people because if they are there, they're beyond help. These are the fanaticals who do have to be destroyed and i wholeheartedly would love to see all these people put into one giant stadium and sarin gas them to paradise godspeed. But as these nuts take their worldview to the extreme for their recruitment purposes, i cannot continue to stress that worldview of the israeli-palastinian conflict does not help the situation. and it is all to easy to take an impressionable youth who sees he has no future, sees his kind being brutalized by Israelis in US armour and his people disposesed by settlements built by US loan guarentees, and believes that he can do absolutely nothing about it... well its easy to put a bomb on his chest and tell him to strike whatever target be it military or civilian, so long as it has ties to Israel or its chief backer to avenge what is happening in their part of the world. Their envioronment does affect who or what they become.

Indeed i understand the need to court the devil in order to achieve your present aim. But spooks have a term for the unwanted afteraffects of dealing with the devil. 'Blowback' and it comes to haunt you at the worst moment. It happened with both Saddam and UBL. And heaven help if Musharaf pisses into the wind and the fanatic factions inside his own military take him down and redress Pakistan into a taliban style islamic state WITH nuclear bombs. Christ i think we're all closer to full scale nuclear war today than the cuban missle crisis (well ok, not there yet but its gaining)

yes the commision had no investigative powers, the bush administration made sure it couldn't dig deep, just to look at the intelligence presented from those agencies. it didn't have the power to look at how that inteligence was used, twisted or manipulated by Cheyney and the 'Office of Special Plans' to suit its own agenda, while leaving out all other caveats of said information. eg CIA says aluminum tubes possible use for centrifuges for nuclear weapons but unlikeyly do to poor quality. most likely to be used for conventional rockets. OSP-Aluminum tubes can be used as centerfuges for nuclear weapons are proof that saddam has reconstituted nuclear program. the 9-11 commision wasn't allowed to probe how the information was used to run up the war.

The Patriot system does work, but its track record is not the best. There is still debate as to how accurate they were during the first gulf war and how many different hit to miss ratios have been put out. There is also the cases of the software problem that has not been fixed in the missles inability to identify friend or foe from the radar signiture, with the loss of an us f-18 and a british warplane to patriots. This system may work adhoc as a bandaid but it is far from bulletproof and definatly not at a stage that it should be even considered for knocking down north korean icbms heading for the west coast. and by trying to put such a system in place that will attempt to handicap all other nuclear nations where their nuclear arsenals are nuetered and allows the US both aggressive and defensive tactics with nuclear weapons, your basically saying 'i can hit you and you cant touch me'... it almost invites them to start firing missles because in the end run, what have they to lose?

im glad your not 100% in step with your president. and i do not disuade you from entertaining any opinion on either side of the fence. thats my point. debate should not be relegated to one side claiming that another side is un-american this or traiterous that. it is that freedem which you should hold dear. Sure you may absolutley disagree with someones position but i would hate to believe that because someone wishes a different method to confront the problem that they do not love their country. and i see the patriot act as a precursor to the loss of freedom, and a consolidation of to much power to government and one man. I cant remember who said it but i think they said it best with 'We have a piece of paper, not a king. we have that paper because it empowers the people and not any one man to change the destiny of the nation'.

Your founding fathers lost loved ones fighting to create a nation and to seperate itself from tyrannical rule. the civil war was about bringing rights to people who had none, but that was internal. 'the US should not go out in search of monsters to destroy'.. again a quote by one of your presidents (cant remember who)Maybe you would be a hypocrite, but we always have to look at the big picture, what is the price of knocking down a city to kill some local terrorists when the bodies of mothers and daughters will end up on Al jazzera before the 6oclock news and just incite more hatred from even people who would have agreed with the decision for war.

i just dont understand. why wouldn't you hold Rumsfeld accountable for sending such a small amount of troops into Iraq when top army brass said at least 200,000 were needed to secure Iraq, take order, protect supply lines, etc... Rummy's arrogance probably cost the lives of many troops. Wolfowitz and Fieths lectures of how Iraqis would greet you as liberators and throw candy, pure ideological fantasy given the geopolitics there. you must forgive me as i have a hard time comprehending how you can give more credance to civilian ideologues that talk a big game, so long as its not them or their families out on the battlefield. it's easy for someone like Bush to say 'bring em on', he's not the one who's looking over his shoulder. Their ultimate goal was to transform Iraq into their image, the whole war was a simple remove asshole from power, take over country, install regime and force democracy on people and it will flourish throughout the middleeast. Now you have to contend with the possibility that your fellow countymen have died for no wmd, no ties to alquada pre-invasion, absolutely no link to 9-11, oil revenues will never catch up to cover cost of war, possible islamic state with elected mullah similar to Iran, and the US army asked to leave. I ask what have the neocons accomplished on the blood and tears of the 800+ servicemen lost?

i cant change your mind and im sure you do believe bush is doing what needs to be done to keep your country safe. i only hope you see that for every action he takes in the name of saftey he more often than not makes the situation worse. and i also hope you realise that half way around the globe there are people who ask themselves why do the americans hate us simply for who we are.

Wed Jun 23 2004 6:10 PM


njguardsman:

Canuck

I’m starting to think prolonged exposure to intence cold reeks havoc with peoples brains (HA HA HA)

“Their envioronment does affect who or what they become” POVERTY IS NO EXCUSE FOR TERRORISM!!!! Thank you Thank you Thank you, it seems I’m actually making headway!
Again Isael is protecting itself the way it sees fit “to the winners go the spoils” or do you think that because both our countries were colonies once we should… return to their rule???

“But spooks have a term for the unwanted afteraffects of dealing with the devil. 'Blowback'” Since you’re paraphrasing quotes let me use one – “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. = Edmond Burke” In 1939 we did nothing and Europe went up in flames, until Pearl Harbor. QUESTION what blowback did we have in WW2???

Please name me ONE WAR we initiated REMEMBER the Gulf War never ended so you cant say the “Iraq” war. All through our history we’ve fought DEFENCIVE WARS, we have been attacked so I ask you do we hate?, answer we hate those who attack us!

“it almost invites them to start firing missles because in the end run, what have they to lose?” What do they have to lose? Try THEIR LIVES! How do you come up with these conclusions? During the cold war when the USSR was number 1 were we lobbing missiles at them? Lets say we have a missile defense system, and it works why would that cause us to attack another country, after we built the “Bomb” and used it on Japan did we go around the world threatening invasion, answer NO.

Our President is the focal point, there’s a reason he call the most powerful man in the free world. He is there to lead, if you think that’s too much power for one man, it sucks 2B you!
He also has to convince the congress to go along w/him to do things.

The Patriot Act is our insurance policy for freedom it has built in safeguards just to stop what you people are worried about. I can ASSURE YOU that ALL MY FREEDOMS ARE INTACT!

Those who have made the ultimate sacrifice did not die in vain! You still cant guarantee me there are no WMD in Iraq, even President Putin (Russia) said Saddam was going to attack the U.S. I maintain there is a link between Iraq & Al-Quiada, Saddam provided passive support for the 9/11 attacks. We were never there for oil (although we should take a %age of oil to recoup our costs AND as payment for services rendered). A possible Free state where all aspects of the country are represented, where commerce and capitalism thrive providing a way for the Iraqi populace to “Manifest their Destiny”

On a personal note, every time these monsters murder another person (civilian, contractor, soldier whom ever) it only reinforces my support for the war and for my president. These cowards hide behind masks and claim to do god’s work when in fact they see their power dwindle and fade, they are the last desperate gasp of a dieing regime it might not happen in my life time but IT WILL HAPPEN!

Thu Jun 24 2004 11:58 AM


njguardsman:

Mike of the Great White North

Apparently I'm not making headway with you (after rereading your blog, oh well so much for wishful thinking).

Fri Jun 25 2004 8:47 AM


MSgt USMC (Ret):

To the terrorists currently operating in Iraq,

I see that you have captured a U. S. Marine, and that you plan to cut off his head if your demands are not met. Big mistake. Before you carry out your threat I suggest you read up on Marine Corps history. The Japanese tried the same thing on Makin Island and in a few other places during World War Two, and came to regret it. Go ahead and read about what then happened to the mighty Imperial Army on Tarawa, Iwo Jima and Okinawa. They paid full price for what they did, and you will too.

You look at America and you see a soft target, and to a large extent you are right. Our country is filled with a lot of spoiled people who drive BMWs, sip decaf lattes and watch ridiculous reality TV shows. They are for the most part decent, hard working citizens, but they are soft. When you cut off Nick Berg's head those people gasped, and you got the media coverage you sought, and then those people went back to their lives. This time it is different. We also have a warrior culture in this country, and they are called Marines. It is a brotherhood forged in the fire of many wars, and the bond between us is stronger than blood. While it is true that this country has produced nitwits like Michael Moore, Howard Dean and Jane Fonda who can be easily manipulated by your gruesome tactics, we have also produced men like Jason Dunham, Brian Chontosh and Joseph Perez. If you don't recognize those names you should. They are all Marines who distinguished themselves fightin! g to liberate Iraq, and there will be many more just like them coming for you.

Before the current politically correct climate enveloped our culture one of the recruiting slogans of our band of brothers was "The Marine Corps Builds Men." You will soon find out just how true that is. You, on the other hand, are nothing but a bunch of women. If you were men you would show your faces, and take us on in a fair fight. Instead, you are cowards who hide behind masks and decapitate helpless victims. If you truly represented the interest of the Iraqi people you would not be ambushing those who come to your country to repair your power plants, or sabotage the oil pipelines which fuel the Iraqi economy. Your agenda is hate, plain and simple.

When you raise that sword over your head I want you to remember one thing. Corporal Wassef Ali Hassoun is not alone as he kneels before you. Every Marine who has ever worn the uniform is there with him, and when you strike him you are striking all of us. If you think the Marines were tough on you when they were cleaning out Fallujah a few weeks ago you haven't seen anything yet. If you want to know what it feels like to have the Wrath of God called down upon you then go ahead and do it. We are not Turkish truck drivers, or Pakistani laborers, or independent contractors hoping to find work in your country. We are the United States Marines, and we will be coming for you.

MSgt USMC (Ret)

Thu Jul 1 2004 12:35 PM


annie grogan:

if the people over sea relly wanted to wipe out the people in usa,most of are over counter drug is maid in one ore the other of those country dont meed to run plains in to buoldings get real

Sun Jul 4 2004 1:41 AM


Walt:

Sempter Fi, most here won't understand you though.

Mon Jul 5 2004 7:19 PM


Walt:

I saw your girl, what's she doing with a looser like you?

Mon Jul 5 2004 7:22 PM


madsonv:

Jesus H Christ. Some people just don't get it.
The rest of us in the world - yes there is a world outside your great expansive US of A - are forced to get involved in the internal politics of a sovereign state - the US of A - because of the dire cock up you are making of it yourselves.

What is the problem here, is it the
- american polical system (all that power in the hands of one man, get real, did you really think that that was going to work)
- american foreign policy (blatently make up reasons to carry out your foreign policy objectives - ie Iraq)
- american economic hedgemony (all bow to the great liefstyle of consumerism and fear)
- american general public political apathy (all those rednecks sipping JD and cola's)
- american corporate greed (who's pulling the strings exactly)
- americans (mmm... if it aint any of the above this must be it)

Don't antagonise us - fix your problems now, before some jumped up sob gets your country in some dire shit. Be proud of your country, grapple back the control from the usurpers.

Fri Jul 30 2004 8:35 AM


RoidianSlip:

njguardsman, you are waging a most impressive battle on this board - Nicely done.

It is a shame that the vast majority of Americans are soft and have a short memory. Their only concern is getting home to watch FRIENDS on T.V. and get their news from Katie Couric and Matt Lauer. Save the whales but abort our babies - I think that is the truly sick part of America in addition to thinking we can just sit around and get bombed by terrorists without doing anything about it. If you ignore terrorists long enough there will be no more America - they don't care about who is president it goes far beyond that.

Wed Aug 4 2004 7:38 PM


phaedrox:

Mike of the North, I am sorry they insulted you. You are correct. Anyone who does a little background check in our history knows they hate us for the little shannigans we have been playing in their world over the last 60 years (not to mention south america)and other places. If our country continues to behave like this we are going down.

Mon Aug 9 2004 12:36 PM


gregglory:

Jim-

I think that's absolutely great! I have just done the same thing. First time registrant, first time dedication to a cause. Suspicion of traditional party politics, etc. Only, I've come down for George W. Bush.

It's just too important to NOT vote FOR Bush!

Tue Aug 10 2004 6:43 AM


Evil wins:

"Evil wins when good does nothing" -- think about it.

In the early 90's, muslim terrorists tried to knock down one of the WTC towers. Their van loaded with explosives killed 6, but the towers held. We did nothing.

Embassies were bombed in the name of Allah...we did nothing.

The USS Cole was attacked and US sailors were killed. We lauched Tomahawks missles at a vacant training facility on a weekend. Probably killed the janitor, but in essence, we did nothing.

Sorry Jim...there is evil in the world and when evil attacks, it messes up free trade and our way of life. Look at the markets after 9/11. Bin Laden pushed America's markets into trillions of lost dollars on top of the civilians he murdered.

Free trade and free markets can't happen when evil rears his head for it is the goverment's job to protect and defend this nation first and foremost.

Once that happens, good things happen...especially when government stays out of our wallets as they already have more money than they need for many programs that simply waste our tax dollars.

Evil does exist. It will not go away. It will attack again and to sit and wait for them to punch again would necessiate action for impeachment of any President that doesn't protect this country.

And by the way...Amercia does not need permission to protect ourselves. Our troops should never fight under UN (the most corrupt of all) authority but the authority of the country that pays for most of the UN expenses...that's the USA, Jim.

Last but not least...at least Bush took action. He does what he speaks and speaks what he does. You may not like it, but I sleep better knowing the Muslims now understand that if they mess with us, that we can drop a 2000 lb. bomb at their cave or camel skinned tent entrance...anytime, anywhere.

We are protected and they get their 73 virgins (I lost count) plus a free pass to see Allah. A WIN-WIN for both counts.

Thu Aug 12 2004 2:42 PM


njguardsman:

RoidianSlip:
Thank you for your comments above, I just wonder where everyone’s common sense is? Don’t they realize that with out “U. S.” being secure nothing else matters (guy marriage, economy, civil rites, jobs and so on.

Fri Aug 20 2004 4:14 AM


Roger From Toronto Canada:

I just saw a poll where 53% Americans still believe that Iraq had WMD! I am hoping that Americans haven’t lulled themselves into accepting the current administrations lies. The wealthy supporters of this American president own most of the media channels. American television news networks lead by the Fox News Channel have been misleading and scaring the Americans since the day they announced Bush’s victory.
I would like to share how some of us in Canada see the current climate political in the US. All things considered we are of a firm opinion that the Americans must vote George Bush out. Too bad this self styled war president can not be impeached. Both Republican and Democrat Senators and Congressmen are an impotent, hypocritical and corrupt bunch. Just like the President most of them are more interested in lobbying for their financiers than serving the American people with honesty and integrity. It hardly matters that they are being paid by the American tax payers! It is now up to the American citizens to show Bush the way back to Texas.

Former US President Bill Clinton boosted the image of the US on the world stage. He presided over a booming economy and job creation. Providence will prove him to be one of the best Presidents of the USA. If personal indiscretions are a measure of integrity then the current occupant should never have been admitted inside the gates of the White House. Everyone expected Al Gore to be the next president of the US after Bill Clinton. But the rot to the US democracy had already set in years prior to the 2002 President elections. The US had quietly and slowly turned into an aristocracy. The ducks had already been lined up by the Republicans much before the coronation of King George Bush the II. The US upper class which holds most of the nation’s wealth and power had launched a covert assault on the free political process. The crown prince had already been chosen. The opinion of the American majority was frivolous and their choice redundant. The will of a few wealthy and powerful Americans was to be implemented without scruples.

The Republicans and their right wing supporters realized that if it was up to the people of the US they would not have a Republican in the White House for a long time. So in 2000 the Republicans hijacked the American democracy. Just like a real aristocracy the chosen one was to become the occupant of the White House. Democracy was toppled over. Suspected Democrat voters were prevented from voting in Florida. African Americans were embarrassingly denied the right to vote. Older Jewish men and women were treated like second class citizens and their votes were manipulated. A whole group of people who opposed the Republicans were marginalized in a nation which is based on the principle of ‘justice for all’? Republicans at different levels began creating chaos and confusion at locations where recounting was taking place. A Republican appointed to the Florida Elections Commission by the brother of the Republican candidate for President declared the brother of her boss as the next president of the US. She is now a Republican Congresswoman. Shamelessly the highest court of justice in US openly colluded in putting the fix in. Most of the judges had been appointed by former Republican Presidents. The elections were rigged for George Bush junior. This hijack left the whole world stunned. Which nation were we going to look towards as an example of a true democracy? USA had just turned into a banana republic with an unpopular dictator as the president and a lot of other unpatriotic and corrupt Americans hovering around him!

The Republican Party and its benefactors played a great part in sneaking this most strange character into the White House. The world’s greatest democracy went from having the best President to the worst president in its history. The incompetence and poor persona of Bush are unambiguous to the rest of the world. Since taking oath as the President he has ruined just about everything that President William Jefferson Clinton had built. Since his arrival the office of the president has become a topic of world wide humor and revulsion. Is this what the incumbent meant when he claimed that he was going to “restoring honor and dignity to the White House”?

How could these hijackers of US democracy (how can most of them call themselves patriots?) let this demolisher loose on American values, prosperity and freedoms. The signs of his convoluted world were already visible a long time ago! From shoving fire crackers into the mouths of frogs, to excessive drinking (and then driving), alleged drug use, womanizing and being a self admitted “C student”. How can you expect anything patriotic from an American who avoided fighting for his nation? He couldn’t even keep his commitment with the National Guard and ran away from it! He had proven himself to be an extremely inept businessman when he presided over bankruptcies of his small Texas companies. So why would you give him the power to manage and run the great USA? Did the American people think that he was going to change for the better overnight? The Republicans and their rich allies had their own agendas and conveniently put the power of greatest nation in the hands of an idiot.


September 11, 2001 was a sad day for the entire world including us, Canadians. Terrorism can never be justified and there is no rationale for it. We were stunned at what had happened inside the US. Every time we saw the planes crashing into the twin towers on TV we felt as if the terrorists were piercing our hearts with their knives. The loss of more than 3000 American lives was heartbreaking. We just let the tears flow until they dried up. It was almost as if a dark shadow had descended on the US. We were scared for our neighbors and for ourselves.

We learned that the terrorists belonged to the terrorist group Al Qaeda which was based in Afghanistan. The Saudi Arabian terrorist connection to the attack on the US was two fold. The Leader of the terrorist group Osama Bin Ladin was a Saudi Arabian and 15 of the 19 hijackers too were Saudi Arabian! Canadians along with numerous other nations joined the US to remove these madmen from Afghanistan. The terrorist supporter Taliban regime was replaced and many terrorists were either killed or apprehended. Somehow the most important terrorist leader Osama Bin Ladin and his deputy Ayman Al-Zawahiri got away? Later we learned that shortly after the 9/11 attacks many Saudi Arabians including members of the Bin Ladin family were conveniently put on planes and moved out of the country in a hurry. It is strange that US which spends millions of dollars and resources to counter terrorism would let these high resources of information slip away so easily? There are about 124 suspected Saudi terrorists still imprisoned in the US military camp in Guantanamo Bay. Why was that group of Saudis moved out so quickly and without any interrogation in September, 2001? Didn’t we already know that most terrorists responsible for September 11 were Saudi Arabian!? Perhaps the aristocrats who ruled the US had something to do with the evacuation of the Saudi aristocrats?

The terrorists in Afghanistan had been killed, captured or they had been chased away. Logic dictated that the next attack on hostile terrorist activity by the US and its allies would obviously in Saudi Arabia. After all most of the hijackers came from that country? But that didn’t happen. The man who had forced his way into the White House decided to hijack the war on terror itself. Days after the Saudi Arabian terrorists attacked US this president invited the Saudi ambassador to dinner. They apparently sat on a balcony of the White House and smoked cigars and perhaps contemplate about how they can screw the Americans even more? Isn’t the President of the United States an example for patriotism? Instead this one created a ‘Patriot Act’ guised to erode the very foundation of American Democracy. How can you be a patriot if you chickened out and disappeared when it was time to fight for your country?

It is evident that the Saudi royal family has close business ties with the Bush family! Apparently the Saudis had bailed Bush out of a few financial blunders in the past. How can he be disloyal to his friends who had saved his skin so many times? So he forgot about the 15 Saudi Arabians who had attacked the US on 9/11/2001. Conveniently for Bush selfish monetary interests took precedence over the securing the nation.

After Afghanistan the Bush administration quickly pushed the Iraq alarm button. Bush, Cheney and their administration started spinning yarn about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction and their possible links with terrorist organizations. A most unpatriotic citizen of US who somehow happened to become the president began leading the chorus of lies. His administration, the Republican senators and congressmen joined in. The media especially the TV news networks became their master’s voice and began beating the drums of Iraq war. Heck even the Democrats became wimpy and bent over backwards for the imposter and his allies. They lined up to kiss the emperors hands. However there was one exception. The American people who were already confused were fed lies about this new Iraqi enemy and scared into submission. Intelligence reports were fudged and exaggerated to attack Iraq. Even the Prime Minister of Great Britain was suckered into the meaningless but imminent war.

Fortunately most of the world outside the immediate axis of drivel saw right through the lies of Bush and his ilk. Countries like Canada, France, Germany, Russia, China, India etc. refused to be a part of an unethical war. Bush in his true dictatorial ways called the nay Sayers “unwilling” and “not with us but against us”. George Bush declared himself a synonym of United States of America. His lack of intellect scares him from dissenting opinions or debate. His supporters too launched a campaign of ridicule against the French, Germans and even Canadians. Blinded with unlimited but undeserved power Bush forgot that the extent of his views and lies was rather unimportant to most people outside the US borders.

The initial Iraqi boogeyman created by Bush had weapons of mass destruction and was about to attack the US with in hours. This boogeyman also slept in the same bed as the terrorists who wanted to do harm to the American people. Eventually Iraq was attacked and conquered. Both principle reasons for going to war turned out to be fabrications. Iraq did not have WMD and did not pose an imminent threat to the US. The fact is that the terrorist organizations actually hated Saddam Hussain and called him an infidel. For example under his regime women had rights and also weren’t expected to cover themselves quite contrary to the fundamentalist Islamic principles.

A democratic leader who leads his people into an unnecessary war should either resign or should be impeached. But this isn’t going to take place in the present day US, even though it has been established that Bush was lying all this time. As soon as his pundits felt that the American people were onto to the administrations and their leaders lies they started a new spin on the war. The reason for sacrificing more than 900 American lives became deposing a brutal dictator and bringing democracy to the Iraqi people! Why would you gut your economy and sacrifice hundreds of American lives to depose Saddam and kill his criminal sons Uday and Qusay. Since when did the US get into the business of regime change and imposition of democracy in far away lands? Is the huge cost of lives and resources worth it?

Several big businesses which are the “support base” of the president have made millions due to the war. Vice President Dick Cheney’s former and potentially future employer Halliburton has reaped the bonanza of rebuilding Iraq. Saudi Arabian royal family too is breathing a sigh of relief as they are more secure after the removal of their arch enemy Saddam Hussien. However the Americans are probably more insecure than ever. By most accounts the Iraqis feel that they have become worse off since the Americans have occupied their country. So much for a good reason! Only George Bush can explain the intricacies of the reasons for attacking Iraq. Barring a miracle, the mantra of an ill conceived war to win the next election has almost faded for Bush. The barbarians could still be at the US door and the Iraq war has probably helped in strengthening their resolve to attack and convert the rest of us. This war has been a complete blunder and an utter failure. The responsibility rests upon the shoulders of the bumbling US commander-in-chief.

Whatever happened to the real war on terror? Let’s not forget that America and the entire Western world are still under probable terrorist threats. A few weeks ago the Saudi Arabian security forces killed an Al Qaeda leader. This was a knee jerk reaction by the Saudis after several attacks on foreigners. Isn’t anyone curious as to why years after 9/11/2001 and the war on Afghanistan, Saudis still have Al Qaeda members running around freely? Why do the American people tolerate the lies of Bush and his administration regarding fighting terrorism? The US should have cleaned house in Saudi Arabia a long time ago. But apparently the personal relations of the current president of the US and the Saudi royal family have taken precedence over the peace, security and prosperity of the American people! This commander-in-chief has been sleeping on the job.

After exhausting all other means of regaining power the current President and the US administration has sunk to an extremely low level. The theory is that by scaring the American people and creating new terrorist threats they can regain the White House. The Bush administration had almost three years to win the war on terror but it let this opportunity slip through its fingers. The administration and specifically Tom Ridge the secretary of homeland security should be embarrassed about the failure to alleviate the fears of the American people. Instead Ridge shamelessly arrives at press conferences and announces new threats based on very old information. Coincidentally the security threat is raised whenever Bush administration has a crisis or John Kerry and the Democrats score big with the voters. The Republican Senators and Congressman too have become complicit in this blackmail and fear mongering. Some Democrats like Senator Joe Lieberman aren’t far behind as they have their own agendas.

Since the forced induction of George Bush into the White House there were a few other imminent danger signs for the American democracy. The Republicans relics (mostly) who occupy the US Senate and Congress are probably as corrupt as the President. The Democrats themselves have proven that they lack the courage to become an effective voice of opposition. Democrat Senator Russ Feingold from Wisconsin is a beacon of American courage and integrity. He stood up against bullies from both sides and resisted the chipping away of American rights and freedoms. The corruption and lobbying among the aging politicians in Washington stinks like rotten eggs. Why haven’t the American people made these complacent politicians accountable? The real power does not belong to the President, his administration, the senators or the congressmen. They can all be fired and thus it ultimately belongs to the American people. The November elections are an opportunity for the American citizens to take back their country from the clutches of these vultures. Hopefully the eagle will fly back to the USA in November 2004.

God Bless America!


Written by your friendly Canadian neighbour: Roger

Fri Aug 20 2004 1:32 PM


njguardsman:

Rodger,

You REALLY need to read my blogs back during March of this year, MUCH to your disappointment the media in the U.S. is approx 90% liberal not the other way around, "alternative" media only has talk radio and maybe one or two channels on TV.

Sun Aug 22 2004 8:50 AM


AcademicElitest:

I think I might like Bush if he would buy all of the republicans a copy of Strunk and White. Their murder of English and good grammar is an act of terrorism if ever there was one. Who among you will fight for the misused comma, the missing apostrophe or the misspelled words? Please, republicans, if you insist on posting, edit first; Graduate from high-school at the least.

"Electorial collage," that is priceless.

Sun Aug 22 2004 8:54 AM


eros:

though i must agree some of your writing appears contradictory, i must say... wow. so many people are against what you wrote. they even, childishly, attack who you are. maybe if they were educated, were able to analyze situations, and happened to study "The Prince" (by Niccolo Machiavelli), they'd see right through bush's agenda. anyone here happen to notice fox news airing another leader's "approval of the honest bush that the people can trust"? i found it quite obvious when fox news pressed this over and over again throughout one of the first week's bush was officially in office.

Mon Aug 23 2004 12:36 PM


Nick in Japan:

I would love to call G.W. names as I am not a huge fan, but that just isnt constructive. I have several reasons for disliking the job he is doing in office. First, why all the secrecy? Why has he classified most of the papers that cross his desk? Does he think its cool? Or, does he know that they wont be public record for 40 or so years when he long gone?

Second, why does he and his cabinet insist on pissing off the majority of the world? We just can't afford to do that in this day and age. To illustrate, the only reason we won the Pacific theater in WWII was due to our manufacturing might. Should another "Pearl Harbor" occur, pulling us in to another sustained conflict where are we going to rebuild and manufacture the mass amounts of millitary hardware neccesary for this size of a conflict? We have no manufacturing capability anymore. (I am not making this up, look at the drop in jobs in the manufacturing sector. Not to mention everyones declaration that we are not a manufacturing economy anymore.)

Third, and sorry to dwell on Japan...Does G.W. or his merry band of associates read history books? When I heard that Powell was asking Japan to consider changing article 9 of their constitution I thought it was a mis-print and bought another news paper to make sure it wasnt a joke. I couldn't, and still can't for that matter believe our representatives would ask a nation who is a known millitary aggressor to change the clause that prohibits them from aggresive millitary actions or declaration of war. Did I mention it was the US who wrote this in to their Constitution 60 years ago? /boggle.

Basically boys and girls, its about trust and and communication. This administration seems to think the US public can not handle the information or is to stupid to understand. Worse, maybe they know in their hearts what they are doing is foolish, dangerous or wrong?

I am not a declared memeber of either party either... But to be honest, I will settle for anyone who wont pee in my ear and tell me its raining (regardless if they are wishy washy, a professional wrestler or a known adulterer).

Tue Aug 24 2004 11:25 PM


Josh McAdams:

You are on the list, pal.

After the election we will see you either deported or charged with treason.

Gave a nice time in GITMO, traitor.

Thu Aug 26 2004 10:16 AM


njguardsman:

Come on Roger! Do you REALLY believe CNN is conservative?!?!?!? Along with the New York Times and other media outlets?????


”Former US President Bill Clinton boosted the image of the US on the world stage. He presided over a booming economy and job creation. Providence will prove him to be one of the best Presidents of the USA. If personal indiscretions are a measure of integrity then the current occupant should never have been admitted inside the gates of the White House.” – Please don’t make me puke, the former Commander and philanderer did nothing but turn the white house into a “no-tell motel” then with the straightest face denied everything. He ordered the greatest tax increase in American history, he did nothing about the terrorist attacks on the American embassies in Africa, allowed our soldiers to be dragged thru the streets in Somalia, did nothing about the USS Cole and sent Monica missiles into Iraq and killed an aspirin factory. Oh and left his successor the present of a recession along with him dealing with 9/11. If that’s what you value then I’m glad I’m not Canadian!
W is the man – deal with it and thank GOD Gore was not in power during 911!!!
I’ve already taken apart these arguments in preceding blogs so you can keep your holier the US attitude – take your black helicopters and conspiracy theories somewhere else!


Thu Aug 26 2004 8:40 PM


Klaus Nielsen:

I wish I could vote in your country, so I actually could do something to get Bush out of Office. Bush is making the rest of the world fall apart, not just the US... Good Luck

Fri Aug 27 2004 2:26 PM


joe:

Bush best president ever? Is that some sort of sick twisted joke? The guy has an IQ of 98 for christ sake! You Republicans are all sheep. Go watch fox news and be oblivious! Fools!
Seriously, name just 1 thing bush has done that was good for the country! Just one!

Fri Aug 27 2004 7:52 PM


JimIsGeekierThanKarlRove:

"If this is such a just war, why did the President have to lie about why he wanted to fight it?"
----------------
The United Nations picked the fight. As we prepared to back up the words in res. 1441, a few other nations turned their backs on the very resolution for which they voted unanimously.
============================
"Did he not think we could handle it? Americans wouldn't want to liberate a people from the tyrannical grip of a brutal dictator? Only if we felt threatened would we support such a just cause? The ends were so worthy they justified the means."
------------------------------
This last sentence reminds me of something very popular among Dems. "Affirmative Action." Racism is the unjust treatment of another person based on race, or a policy based on race (for good or ill). Therefore, AA is actually just a form of "good racism." Sure it helps minorities, but it is still racism. Why are you not upset that the Dems have not owned up to that?
=========================
Or maybe he knew he would have to answer the question -- why this evil man, and why now? He wasn't committing genocide or holding hostages at the moment. He was even letting us inspect his country for weapons he previously agreed to not have.
------------------------
Why that evil man? and why now? He did not comply with any UN resolution for over 10 years. He took advantage of the oil for food program, using the money earned for his own personal interests, not for the well being of his people. And the UN voted unanimously that "severe consequences" would be due, should Saddam fail to comply yet again. And do you really think that Iraqis weren't conspiring against the inspectors, as even Hans Blix clearly agrees to?
==========================
"If I lived in Iraq I would have been fighting against tyranny there. But I don't, I live in America, so I fight here"
--------------------------
If you lived in Iraq and said the kinds of things you are saying now against your leader over there - you would simply be dead.

It is very easy, as JFKerry is proving, to say "if I were...". There is no proving those kinds of statements. If you demand hard facts from your opponents (I assume me and others), you must in good faith provide facts in return.

I am not unreasonable, and there is no vitriol in what I say here. It is inequitable and not an educated choice however, to ignore the UN's role in the Iraq conflict.

Also, it is important to clear up that the USA had full rights to invade Iraq at any moment, due to the agreement at the end of the original Gulf War. The same way we would have treated Germany, had Hitler given up his decision to invade all of Europe. Once we go to war with someone, we reserve the right to go back if they are not complying with the end of war agreement. That's simple math. There's your explanation for the war. I don't need the president to provide the basic logic for why we had every right to do what we did.

Mon Aug 30 2004 8:03 PM


ThisStatementWasRetarded:

"Too bad this self styled war president can not be impeached"

Dumbass, if there were any evidence to support any/all the claims the anti-Bush retards have been pushing, he WOULD BE IMPEACHED ALREADY!!!

If any of the complaints against Bush were true, court would be in session, Congress would be meeting now to pore over the details of said infraction, and arguments for both side would heard. All this would culminate in a vote that, whether Yea or Nay, would be called "Impeachment"

This is the answer people. Now, the argument back to this must be "of course he's not being impeached because his daddy's friends wouldn't let that happen." GHWB isn't in control of any Democrat, and though I'm unsure of the specific process of impeachment, I am sure that with proper evidence, even the best connections can't get one out of it. Even Clinton couldn't get out of it.

Please give me a better retort than this one. How can one say that there is so much evidence of misdeeds, yet no action has been taken by ANY member of Congress to right it?

Mon Aug 30 2004 8:28 PM


Rodger:

The United States has more freedom than any other country in the world. If this was not true, we would not have so many people immigrating to the US every year. We have a very prosperous country, but it is also filled with many individuals who have an entitlement attitude – people who think they have the right to free healthcare, education, job training, food, etc. As a general rule, the Republicans stand for the right to make your lot better - pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. If you want something – work hard and obtain it. The democrats on the other hand want everyone to be equal – no one should be rich, we should all be able to afford nice houses (i.e. affordable housing), if you make more money than someone else, you’re going to get taxed more (exponentially).

What did “W” do for this country? He showed the world that we’re not going to sit here and get our butts kicked by some cave-dwelling terrorist or some Hitler wannabe who has killed hundreds of thousands of his own country’s people with WMD’s – there is proof that can’t be refuted. Whether or not the WMD’s are still in Iraq or not is irrelevant – they existed and were used. It was just a matter of time before they were used on the free world. I personally am sick and tired of the United Nations – most of them are a bunch of pussies. In fact, most of them don’t allow voting for leaders in their own country. Not the kind of organization we should really be affiliated with. It’s about time the US stood up for what’s right and ignored the opinions of the stand-and-watch countries. The only time they talk to us is when they have a natural disaster and come to us for aid and being the ‘nice’ country we are, we offer them millions in relief with no strings attached. I don’t have a problem helping out these countries when they need it but as soon as they get back on their feet, they forget all about who helped them…

The US has tried to play peacemaker for decades and while it worked for some countries, the same rules don’t apply when dealing with terrorists. “W” has done more for this country in terms of national security that any democrat will ever do. If Kerry gets into office our security and armed forces will be depleted to the point where terrorists will be able to march down main street USA and do whatever they please (metaphorically speaking).

From an economic perspective, the Dem’s rode the wave that GHWB built in the late 80’s and early 90’s – Clinton rode it for several years before sending it downward and giving the reigns to “W” who tried hard to turn it around, but hit a wall on 9/11. It’s finally starting turn around – take a look at the economy – it has grown 4.8% in the last year – as fast as any year in nearly two decades. Productivity has grown at the fastest 3 year rate in the last 50 years. According to an analysis conducted by the Treasury Department after Bush’s tax relief was implemented last year, economic growth would have been more than 3 percent lower and 2 million fewer Americans would have been working at the end of last year.
Creating jobs - since last August, over 1.5 million new jobs have been created. The unemployment rate has fallen from 6.3 to 5.6 percent, below the average of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. This job growth is widespread – employment over the last year was up in 41 of the 50 states, and the unemployment rate was down in 47 of the 50 states.
I’m not saying Bush has all the answers or is perfect, far from it, but in terms of overall good for the American people and the economy, there aint no one better.
“W” in ’04!

Tue Aug 31 2004 1:17 PM


Geoff Resnik:

Jim, Thank you so much. You have made me an even stronger Republican. Since you have never voted before in your silent protest- which actually is your lazyness. It must make you furious that so many men and women have given their lives for you to havbe the right to vote. I look forward to voting for President Bush again with pride knowing he is a man of courage and conviction.

Fri Sep 3 2004 10:34 AM


Conservative John:

Jim,

You say that you've dedicated your life (until November) to getting George Bush out of office. That is so sad. You should stand FOR something, not simply AGAINST someone. You said that you were a Democrat for Dean. Well, last time I looked, Kerry was Bush's opponent. If your life goal is to get Bush out, then you must be planning on casting your (first ever) vote for John Kerry. Are you really convinced that he is the answer? I realize that John Kerry fought in Vietnam. And then there's the fact that John Kerry fought in Vietnam. And let's not forget that John Kerry fought in Vietnam. But besides those overwhelming qualities, are you sure John Kerry is prepared to ascend to the presidency? If Kerry wins, but proves to be a disappointment, will you set a new life goal: to oust Kerry from the presidency? Will you apologize for your hard-line anti-Bush position should Kerry not sparkle as president? You strike me as a kind of "stand-for-nothing-but-protest-anything" kind of guy. I suggest a new life goal: Dedicate your life to the elimination of reality television. Now that's an issue on which I could stand behind you. (And did I mention that John Kerry fought in Vietnam?)

Thu Sep 9 2004 3:45 PM


njguardsman:

Mr Gilliam

I'm still waiting for you to answer the comments of conservative John.

I'd love to read your responce.

Fri Sep 10 2004 2:27 PM


The Sword:

Modern Republicans are a skillful bunch of facists.

They make the Nazi's look like rebellious teens.
Oh, and Fox News is "fair and balanced". Seriously. No really. Tch. Our own version of Chinese policy....At least we have that in common.

In the soon to be immortal words of Green Day:

"Welcome to the new kind of tension/All across the idiot nation."

Our new pledge SHOULD include "One nation, controlled by the media."

Sat Sep 11 2004 7:47 PM


Patriot:

"More freedom than anywhere?" Are you slow?

Canada has more freedom than us now. So does Denmark. And we are supposed to be "the leader of the free world". Ha. I love my country, but damn, our freedom sure could improve some. And what kind of deluded mind would think modern conservatives want to PROTECT our freedom, as opposed to taking them away, one by one? I've never seen a group want to "ban" so many damn things. Ban this, ban that. Screw them.

Sat Sep 11 2004 7:53 PM


Michael:

WASHINGTON - Texas oilmen, led by takeover specialist T. Boone Pickens, helped fuel the anti-Kerry advertising campaign of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a report filed Friday shows.

Pickens contributed $500,000 to the group, the report said. A second oilman from Dallas, Albert Huddleston, contributed $100,000.

The group, whose controversial attacks on the war record of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry have attracted national attention, claims it has raised $6.7 million, but it portrays itself as a grass-roots effort thriving on small contributions.

"The average contribution to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is $65," Weymouth Symmes, the group's treasurer, said earlier this week.

The report filed with the Federal Elections Commission on Friday detailed 683 contributions totaling just over $1.9 million, none of them less than $100. Federal law requires organizations such as the veterans group to show how they've paid for advertising within 24 hours of the ads' airing on television.

The group reported that it spent more than $700,000 to buy time for an anti-Kerry commercial now running on national cable television and paid for it with the contributions listed.

Pickens, 75, the founder of Mesa Petroleum, the largest independent oil and gas producer in the United States, made the largest contribution. A major Republican donor, he's previously supported both Bush and his father, former President George H.W. Bush.

Huddleston, 51, also is a major Republican donor. The chief executive of Hyperion Resources Inc., an oil and gas company, he raised at least $100,000 for Bush's 2000 campaign. He's also a heavy donor to Republican candidates in Texas, giving $704,500 in 2002, according to the nonpartisan group Follow the Money, which monitors Texas political contributions. Follow the Money reported that Huddleston also gave $68,000 to Texas Democrats that same year.

Mike Russell, who works for the Washington-area public relations firm Creative Response Concepts, which represents the Swift boat group, declined Friday to discuss how Pickens or Huddleston had come to donate to the anti-Kerry effort.

"I'm not going to comment on any of our major donors," Russell said. "We're just not going to say anything other than we appreciate the support of major donors and minor donors. We appreciation donations of all kinds."

Russell said Swift Boat Veterans for Truth had received donations from 53,000 people, most of whom had contributed through the group's Web site. On Thursday alone, he said, 2,681 people had given $82,405.

"Like any organization, we have major donors and small contributors. I think the important thing is we have taken in a huge amount of grass-roots support."

A fuller accounting of the group's contributions is due in October.

Š Copyright 2004 Knight-Ridder

Sun Sep 12 2004 7:50 AM


Conservative John:

So, Michael, what's your point?

Are you disputing the Swift Boat Veteran's claims, or are you questioning their first amendment right to speak their minds?

John Kerry was the one who put his Vietnam experience front and center. If the Swift Boat Veterans' are correct in what they say, who gives a damn who financed them?

If they're lying, or stretching the truth (a skill perfected by pseudo-celebrity and future Subway pitchman Michael Moore) then let's fry them on that. I don't think anyone wins in a dirty election filled with lies and innuendo.

If, however, they're telling the truth, where the money came from to back their efforts should be secondary to Kerry's claims.

It seems like you're alleging that George W. Bush and the Republican Party is behind the Swift Boat Veterans' attack. I don't know if they're directly responsible or not. Neither do you. But if you're shocked at the possibility, then you must be young, idealistic, and new to the political process.

Welcome to the game. (Wear a cup.)

Sun Sep 12 2004 1:19 PM


njguradsman:

Just so everybody’s clear over 80% of all money given to 527 organizations has been to fund groups like: moveon.org and Americans Coming Together all anti Bush/Republican entities the majority funded by George Soros

This goes to you: Michael, Patriot & The Sword

Sun Sep 12 2004 8:33 PM


Michael:

Well well conservative John.
Aren’t you the pot calling the kettle black.

Who gives a damn who financed them eh?

Do you think in your wildest naive, idealistic conservative dreams that where the money comes from makes no difference. Or that people are so honest that they will tell the truth regardless of the money involved, (especially if they’re your righteous conservative brothers), or that people with hidden agendas won’t slant the truth or even lie? What mossy rock have you been hiding under?
You conservatives who demean and slander liberals at the drop of a hat, and then are all righteous about your own b.s.. You guys are really too much. You ought to try getting over with something other than your belligerence. Why not start by telling us what great stuff G.W. has done for this country the last four years? How we are better off. How much cleaner the environment is since G.W. took office. How under control our immigration and borders are now. How quickly we dealt with the terrorists responsible for 911. How better off we are economically. How proud we are of our place in the world. How respected by other civilized nations for the noble and courageous way we responded. How wonderful it is that G.W. can represent us with his eloquence and dignity using his powerful negotiating skills to restore peace to a troubled world. How he united a country divided by a close and controversial election. How we all have better paying jobs now. How much better our quality of life is now. How our economic policy has balanced the budget and is thriving with new growth and entrepreneurship . How life liberty and the pursuit of happiness is thriving under G.W.

Come on conservative boy. Give us something.

Mon Sep 13 2004 10:05 PM


Michael:

Hey njguradsman.

What's your point? That the b.s. is thick on both sides?

I guess everyone will have to take their medicine eh?
Or did you think your b.s. doesn't stink?

Mon Sep 13 2004 10:12 PM


Michael:

NEW LONDON, N.H. -- Hilary Cleveland felt a tad the traitor on Friday evening, as she prepared to toss fruit in the porcelain bowl from China that was a gift from Barbara and George H.W. Bush. Hours before, she had taken the helm of the GOP Women for Kerry Steering Committee in this battleground state.

In truth, she left the Republican Party months ago, her opposition to the war in Iraq prompting her to change her lifelong political affiliation from Republican to ''undeclared." It was not an idle move for a Republican stalwart, the widow of James Colgate Cleveland, a 10-term congressman who was the senior Bush's regular paddleball partner when both served in the US House of Representatives. Cleveland died in 1995.

''George and Barbara are very dear friends. But this war, so wrong to begin with, is destroying the image of America as a peace-loving country in the world," she said. ''I know the president would say that he is 'liberating' Iraq but I don't think that Iraqis who don't have running water, electricity, a job, or safety on their streets would agree with him. It's fair to say he has disappointed me."

Hilary Cleveland had expected to be as supportive of George W. Bush's presidency as she had been of his candidacy in 2000. She organized vigorously for him then, hosting his mother on a campaign swing through this bucolic village in the shadows of Mounts Sunapee and Kearsarge. She was finance chairwoman of the senior Bush's presidential primary campaign in New Hampshire in 1980. In 1990, President Bush appointed her to the International Joint Commission, which acts as an intermediary in boundary water and air pollution disputes between the United States and Canada.

''It was a wonderful job he gave me," she said as she snapped the ends of green beans for the dinner she was preparing for her son, Lincoln, and his wife at her Main Street farmhouse. ''Born on Lincoln's Day, he is the real Republican," she laughed, noting that he alone among her children disapproves of her public efforts to unseat the president. ''We won't be talking politics tonight!"

As an adjunct professor of political history at Colby-Sawyer, a small liberal arts college just down the street from the Cleveland homestead, Hilary Cleveland talks and thinks a lot about politics at an age when others might be content to enjoy a quiet retirement. ''We have the future to think of," she said, citing her urgent concern for the threatened environment, the ballooning deficit, and the faltering status of the United States in the international community.

''Jim would be horrified," she said of her late husband's likely reaction to Bush administration policies that have created record $400 billion deficits. ''Republicans are fiscal conservatives. Cutting taxes at the same time you are spending billions for this war makes no sense. My father used to say, 'When the going gets tough, tighten your belt; you can't spend what you don't have.' That's always made sense to me. It's really a Republican idea."

But, mostly, it is Bush's doctrine of preemptive war that pushed Hilary Cleveland into the camp of Massachusetts Senator John F. Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee.

She supported Bush's military action in Afghanistan, just as she supported his father's Gulf War in 1991. ''The goals were clear and limited and the threats were real; Afghanistan was harboring terrorists and Iraq had invaded Kuwait," she said.

''This war is very different. I think he is usurping an authority he does not have. He has alienated our allies, destroyed our relations in the Muslim world, and actually invited terrorists into Iraq. I think Kerry is our best hope to get us out of Iraq and reestablish our diplomatic relations in the world."

She has not spoken to her friends in Kennebunkport about her change of mind. ''I should write them a note," she said. ''It's awkward. Parents, of course, are so proud of their children."

Š Copyright 2004 Boston Globe Company

Mon Sep 13 2004 10:33 PM


ME:

Stop the whining and look at the records. I could care less what either candidate did back 20 years ago. What I want to know is what have they done recently and plan on doing in the near future. I am from Massachusetts and I can say that Kerry has made no significant contribution to our state as Senator for almost the past 20 years. The last thing we need now is a do-nothing politician. Write or wrong I respect individuals that can make decisions and live by them.

Tue Sep 14 2004 12:45 AM


Conservative John:

Michael,

You seem like an intelligent guy. Do me a favor. Find where I ever said that I thought that George W. Bush was a great, or even good president.

Come on, Mikey boy. Give me something.

I have made several points since I started contributing to this board.

1) Jim Gilliam is a sad, pathetic creature who doesn't want Kerry elected, he simply wants Bush gone. I suggested that Jim stand for something. That is not a ringing endorsement of George W. It's more a swipe at an assclown who stands for nothing.

2) If Kerry wants to make his military record such an issue (you know, the Great American Hero) then he'll have to answer some difficult questions. About the finances, I simply said that if what the Veterans are saying about Kerry is true, than his lies should come under more scrutiny than who financed the truth-telling.

I am curious, though, Mikey boy. How well do you know me? You claim that I have "righteous conservative brothers." Does that mean that if you dare to question Kerry, you're a righteous conservative? Conversely, if you support Kerry, must you be liberal?

I also think you need to check out what that whole "pot calling the kettle black" phrase means. While it does sound biting and witty, I'm not sure it's applicable here. I don't think I ever extolled the virtues of either candidate. I'm unfortunately skeptical and pessimistic about both of them.

And Mikey boy, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed. You likened me to a conservative who demeans and slanders liberals at the drop of a hat. Then you added that I ought to try "getting over with something other than (my) belligerence." Sorry. I'm not sure what that means. I was unaware of any belligerence, or (for that matter) what it means to get over with something other than that alleged belligerence.

I'm still undecided as to what I'll do in November. I think both sides are flawed. You might not like the job Bush has done, but you have absolutely no reason to expect that Kerry would have done (or will do) any better. Perhaps you should spend more of your time giving the election a more thorough examination, and less of your time trying to pigeon-hole me into some sort of Republican/conservative stereotype.

You don't know me, Mikey boy. I don't belong to either political party. I vote for individuals, not parties. And while I am conservative, I am by no means militant or stereotypical about it.

You're convinced that Kerry's the guy. Or maybe you just hate Bush enough to vote for ANYONE but him. I don't know. At least I admit that I don't know you or how you think.

And I'm far too old, and far too educated, for you to call me 'boy.' I am no one's boy.

Fri Sep 17 2004 11:41 PM


Michael:

OK Conservative John sorry to have misread you. Glad you are an independent thinker.

Your comments have brought up an interesting point. Which is, how well do we know the candidates.

From seeing Bush in action over the past four years we should have a pretty good idea of what to expect. I would say that regardless of what he says to get elected he will do what he wants. Now what is it that he wants or will do?
a. Appoint more conservative judges?
b. Stay in Iraq?
c. Invade other countries?
d. Raid social security?
e. Not deal with immigration?
f. Not reform health care and health insurance?
g. Not support environmental issues?
h. Cut taxes?
i. Raise the deficit?
J. Not balance the budget?
k. Increase military spending?
l. Not support gay marriage or unions?
m. Not going to care what you think about what he does?

Please add some more.

What is Kerry going to do?
Well we don't really know him that well because we have had no direct experience of him being in office just like we didn't know what Bush would do before he was elected. But lets see.

In this discussion I am disregarding the past history with the national guard and vietnam of both Bush and Kerry. We'll let them have fresh starts.

a. Appoint liberal judges?
b. Slowly move out of Iraq in favor of a more multinational force.
c. Probably not invade other countries?
d. Keep social security intact?
e. Give immigrants working permits allowing them some legal benefits?
f. Take on the AMA and insurance companies to reform health care and insurance?
g. Support more environmental issues?
h. Raise taxes?
i. Reduce the deficit?
j. Attempt to balance the budget?
k. Reduce military spending?
l. Support gay unions?
m. Be more of a people's candidate?
n. Will Edwards being a lawyer really effect Kerry's decisions?

Please add some more.

OK these are some starting points.
I suppose a key question is can Kerry make the tough decisions regarding terrorism and that brings up the debate which we should discuss independent of the candidates. (What should we do about the war against terror?) How tough or soft an approach should we have? How far can we extend ourselves with manpower and financially in a war against terror?

If we discuss these things on the blog, hopefully we can give ideas and direction to those who are reading.

Perhaps we can get some helpful ideas without the political polarization and name calling.

Sat Sep 18 2004 12:36 AM


phaedrox:

I have read and listened to everything the swift boaters have to say. It's Archie Bunker all over again.

Mon Sep 20 2004 9:22 AM


Mike of the Great White North:

Holy sheep $#!T, I'm gone for a couple of months and nothings changed... except for the media finally growing some balls, albiet still small ones, and finally taking 'W' to task on his ill-begotton imperial adventures in Bagdad. Scanning down the line since my last post I see the same old tired arguments from the usual suspects (you know who you are) Its actually quite sad, but i'll go on just fine. It's nice up here, where we can call our PM a putz and a loser, an Uber-Liberal without the fear of having CSIS knock on our door for an interview. We were unafraid to shout at our government in one voice 'No war in Iraq'(a country that did not threaten us), and we were not branded 'anti-canadian' or unpatriotic (did that make us antiamerican?). We refused to believe the lies of WMD and ties to Al-Quada, while many of you hunkered down in front of the TV watching Fox, following the 'XX days till WMD are found' ticker. We refused to believe the sole reason was to liberate 50 million muslims, when you could have easily liberated so many more from your allies in SaudiArabia, Egypt and Pakistan. We have such a clearer view up here with our clean air (exclude Toronto) and our vast amounts of television networks. Aside from the good ol standby's of CNN, ABC, CBS etc... we got the CBC, the BBC CityTV, hell we've even got German News on at 4 in the morning. We get WorldView, not InsideAmericaOnlyView.


Ahh, it was good to catch up on some interesting reading, but i will not be back again for sometime. I refuse to subject myself to the whimsical musings of raving fanatics who will bend over backwards to protect the stupid and destroy the law of Darwin. I feel for you America, the biggest election of your history and both parties are running brain deficiant treestumps for the presidency. You have no real choice. You seem destined and doomed to endure 4 more years of fear, terror, isolation and defecit with either candidate. Ill say a small prayer, not that im religious... just a prayer nonetheless.


And oh yeah, the reason i stopped coming here? Someone here had the nerve to say, and i quote :"We were never there for oil (although we should take a %age of oil to recoup our costs AND as payment for services rendered)"end quote. - EXCUSE ME? Services F'N rendered? Thats gotta be one of the most retarded things I've heard in my life. Thats like saying China drops a nuke and the white house lawn and bills Liberals everywhere for 'services rendered'.


As a parting shot, here are 2 more quotes from the same person. Ill let you guess where he gets his fair and balanced news from, and ask him if his thoughts have changed since then...

Quote 1.
"You still cant guarantee me there are no WMD in Iraq, even President Putin (Russia) said Saddam was going to attack the U.S."
Quote 2.
"I maintain there is a link between Iraq & Al-Quiada, Saddam provided passive support for the 9/11 attacks."

Fri Sep 24 2004 9:07 PM


Michael:

Bush's popularity slips to all time low.

Harris Poll

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=496

Sat Sep 25 2004 7:13 AM


njguardsman:

Mike of the Great White North,

Thought you would be hibernating right now, BUT again you call me out OK I'm here!

I stand by what I said on this web site! Those quotes were my opinions. So GET REAL China nuking the US to help the Libs Please spare me, why don’t you just say Kerry’s hard on terrorists!

OK ONE MORE TIME: For people to live in peace, to have civil rites, to look for a job or just to criticize the president THEY HAVE TO BE ALIVE TO DO IT!!!!!

OK ONE MORE TIME: and I quote: ”When are you people going to get it through your heads, these subhuman fanatics don’t care about: our sexual preferences, politics, skin color, or our faith, what matter is that we’re all Americans (yes that means you too Mike), when are you going to stop politicizing Iraq and unite?!?!?!?!”

YES the world’s been getting off easy letting “U. S.” shoulder the burden of trying to rid the world of the greatest threat to freedom since the Cold War.

This EVIL needs to be confronted and defeated absolutely and completely!

Wed Sep 29 2004 2:32 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

The China comment was an analogy.. understand. Funny how you assume Kerry would be soft on terrorists when he's not been given 4 years yet. The same 4 years that the tough 'W' has failed to get Osama (the real terrorist) and diverted your war effort to Iraq (no threat). You say i politize Iraq. I dont have a choice. You and your keepers fail to accept the responsibilty of the LIE, the fabrications that took you to war in Iraq in the first place. You ask us to accept a position that Iraq is a fight against terror. It may be now, but clearly was not before the war. This mess is of YOUR making, and i include you and hold you to task because accepted the rhetoric, refused to question, failed to listen and ultimatly refused to understand the dynamic of Iraq. Look back to the first post i put up here... i agreed with the war in Afghanistan and the hunt for Bin Ladan. But your lemming like approach to follow this president blindly against irrifutable evidence and proceed into an unsanctioned, illegal and immoral attack on a soveriegn nation is definatly something to get political about. Against the voice of the world, you created the bed you lie in. All the villification of nations that would try to steer you in the right direction. The backlash against Germany and France. 'Freedom Fries' get the fuck out of here. It was so easy to tell the world to fuck off when it didn't serve your interests. Now you need them to help 'shoulder the burden'. I dont see any countries refusing to help the US in the hunt of terrorists in Afghanistan, or intelligence sharing amongst law enforcement agencies between countries. The burden you talk about is the imperialistic endevour 'W' is on in the middle east. In the end the world may have no choice but to throw troops into Iraq to quell this civil war and foriegn fighters, but they will not reward incompitence.

We are all Americans, but ill take it one further. We're all human beings and we all suffer and i refuse to ever put the value of one human life over another no matter where they were born or what their skin colour is. We all grieve for the 3000 lost in 9-11. The same respect is not given to the 30000+ iraqi civilians dead during this war, the 500,000+ iraqi's dead during sanctions brought about by US and Britain. We cried for vengence when the towers fell, at 1-100th the body count they've suffered.

Everyone hears about the terror Israel suffers at the hands of those occupied palestinians. It's funny how an occupied people will fight back, fighting to obtain freedom. Thats whats happening in Iraq right now, they're fighting for their freedom. And whatever Bush says, i know he's not looking for freedom in Iraq. He's scared of it, because a free Iraq would say in one voice, 'US out, our oil, our destiny'.

The real fight was Al Quada and Osama. I was with you all the way on that. But I will not forgive the president for the fallacy of Iraq, the lies leading up to the war, the failure to admit to the lie, and expanding the problem, creating more terrorism and giving Osama everything he wanted for christmas. Bush truley made it an 'us vs. them' approach. It's never that simple and never that black vs. white. And thats why he needs to be held accountable.

Fri Oct 1 2004 6:15 PM


njguardsman:

Mike

Kerry hasn’t run anything in his life, he has no experience and the Presidency of the United States is no place for On-The-Job-Training on top of the fact that he is a self admitted war criminal who has yet to pay for his crimes yet people want to give him the biggest gun on Earth.

Again you fail to see reality. The war is against TERRORISM which includes: Osama, Saddam, Arafat, Fidel, The FARC, Tamal Tigers and whom ever the “F” else I’ve missed. I guess Milosevic doesn’t count (even if it wasn’t on W’s watch).

Who are you to say we’re not hunting Osama, if you think its so easy buy a ticket to Pakistan and go for it! You’ll be 25 million richer. So stop acting like an angry little boy that didn’t get his way
.
I guarantee that Iraq will be better off in time, how long did it take to stabilize Germany, or Japan?!?! Oh I forgot, we’re STILL THERE! Aren’t we still in Korea too?!?!? Oh but that doesn’t count. Do you know that the US lost ˝ a million soldiers in (approx) four yrs of the 2nd World War?!?!?

You are stuck in the age of instant gratification and as much technology as we have, as I want the war to end tomorrow, that’s not going to happen. We have to be ready for the long haul and the quicker people realize that the sooner everybody can sing campfire songs.

“Against the voice of the world “ – yeah the voices of the world like: Germany, the UN and whom ever else has got their hands in the Oil- for- Food program. Where’s your righteous anger about that, countries sucking the lifeblood from the little Iraqi children for yes that’s correct sports fans M O N E Y! Do you hold the UN to the same Standards you hold Big Bad “W”?!?!?

P. S. I will be damned if I let you (the World) tell me how to defend myself!

Sat Oct 2 2004 7:35 PM


MC:

Well Bush has run an oil company into financial trouble and was bailed out by the Saudis.
He has run this country for four years. Or at least his people have.
I really don’t feel that he has done the best job we could have done.
I don’t hate him. I think he has done all he could.
See he’s a Texas kind of guy, and thats what your gonna get, a Texas kind of government. Kind of a John Wayne mentality.
Allot of people like that. I prefer a President who is a little more savvy. Who can think through a situation. Who sees all sides and then makes the right decision. I don’t believe understanding all sides of a situation is a weakness but a strength.
We are in a war against terrorism. A different kind of a war than we have ever had before. So the question is, how are we going to fight that war? I don’t believe we can go it alone. Just in terms of the strain on our own economy. I also don’t think GW is very good at making allies or at any kind of negotiation other than that of intimidation. Intimidation and leveraging are powerful tools in negotiation but not the only effective ones. What we are trying to achieve, which may be close to impossible, is to live in peace with every different nationality and religion in the world. Maybe some people just don’t believe that’s possible and that we should just look out for ourselves. I understand this, because it may not be possible. But I think we have to try where we can.

Iraq is not a pretty picture right now. Its turned into a killing field. Can we force it into something else if we keep at it like we are doing? Or is it better to have more allies. Allies that would send significant support. If we go it alone, what will we do if some other emergency on the planet occurs?

We know what Bush will do if the worst should happen and we get attacked again. He will relentlessly pursue and attack whoever he thinks is responsible regardless of where they are. In some ways that is comforting for us. Not so comforting for the rest of the world though. Nor for the foreign innocents.
What would Kerry do? We don’t really know. We do know he was under fire in Viet Nam. That he pulled a comrade out of the river. We also know he protested the war. Would he go to war as quickly as Bush and put our troops in harms way, knowing what war is like first hand? Would he be more prepared? What would be the differences in his decisions from Bush. Does being in war make you a better commander in chief?

Now what about the other issues. Some people believe there are no other issues. What about our economy? What about health care? What about the environment? What about education?
Lets see in the next debates.

If we went to war over everyone you want to njguardsman, we would be at war all over the world with every dictator and despot. Can we realistically do this? Are we so sure that the cost of civilian casualties and US soldiers lives is worth it. Do you think the Vietnamese villagers really gave a hoot who governed their country. They probably would just like to have lived in peace and grow rice and vegetables on their paddy farms.

njguardsman, should we invade all these countries one by one and station troops there for years? Can we do this alone? Is that what all of us should dedicate our lives to?

I suppose there are business deals and shady deals going on all over the world, including within our own country. There has been tremendous arms deals for years all over the globe. If you want to sink your teeth into some stinky stuff try arms dealers. Maybe we should stop the arms dealers from selling weapons all over the world.

It seems inevitable that some country or group that hates us will eventually get a nuclear weapon. Apparently there is allot of weapons grade uranium missing. What are we going to do about that? Both candidates agreed that was the greatest threat.

I think if Bush was pro environment, and not so pro large corps, and a little more savvy at negotiations and more concerned with the economy, a little brighter at evaluating intelligence reports, a little smarter about the consequences of war in a foreign country, willing to straighten out the health care system, a promoter of accountability for big businesses, and a respected world leader, well I would be inclined to vote for him. Because he does make other people accountable for their actions. He believes in free enterprise (although mostly for big business). And perhaps most importantly he is a stand up guy for America. But perhaps not everyone in America.

Sat Oct 2 2004 11:28 PM


njguardsman:

I appreciate the tone you have in this message-not accusatory or hostile, very frank.

“Njguardsman , should we invade all these countries one by one and station troops there for years? Can we do it alone? Is that is what all of us should dedicate our lives to” – Terrorists are terrorists no matter where they are.

Iraq is going thru “growing pains” for lack of a better term, it will be some time B4 Iraq comes out of this (unfortunately), because of Saddam’s rule keeping these factions under his thumb for so long and now the leash is off so it will be a while B4 these factions are brought under control.

You also wrote of “foreign innocents”, what about DOMESTIC INNOCENTS?!?!?!? and the price they might pay whom ever they are.

“Can we do it alone?” – for the most part we are, we’re doing the heavy lifting (as usual)
“and station troops therefore years?” - Aren’t we doing this now in Korea, Japan, and Germany?!?

“It seems inevitable that some country or group that hates us will eventually get a nuclear weapon” – So what do you want to do?! Appeasement and containment are no longer viable options (Kobar Towers, terrorist bombings in Africa, Mogadishu Somalia are a few examples)!

You also spoke of Bush being “pro large corps” if by that you mean Haliburton, isn’t it a smart thing to hire a company that can to what it was hired to do better and cheaper than the government can?!?!

Fri Oct 8 2004 8:48 PM


MC:

There are worst scenario scary things about both candidates and our current situation.

Kerry: worst case scenario. He gets elected and we get attacked again by terrorists. How would he respond?
Can he build a world coalition against terrorism? When there are guys like Chirac and the UN is hard to mobilize.
Will the Republican congress become bipartisanly polarized because a democrat was elected.
Kerry raises taxes.

Bush: worst case scenario. He gets elected and we get attacked. He institutes the draft because he doesn't have to worry about being re-elected and doesn't care if he is popular. We are unable to negotiate anything so we go to war with several more countries. This straps our economy and we go further into debt to fund multiple wars around the globe. Domestic programs in all areas are cut. The patriot act is re-enforced and we begin living in a more 'big brother like' society. Large corporations thrive at the expense of everyone else. Big secret deals are made behind closed doors to control the wealth and power of the country. Meanwhile we are all being told that everything is ok and the economy is good and that speaking out against government policy is unpatriotic. When questioning government decisions Bush and Cheney tell us to fuck off.

Please add to either list.

Sat Oct 9 2004 7:59 AM


njguardsman:

MC

I dont buy your doom and gloom scenario or your conspiracy theories I do think deals are made on both sides but not to the extent you say, it comes down to a matter of trust and I for one do not trust Kerry, I dont think he's right for the Presidency especially @ this time in history.

I dont think President Bush will be the way you think if he gets elected to a second term, he doesn’t strike me as that kind of person. He is a man of conviction, a man who deeply cares for this country and will do his best to defend it.

That stuff about the Patriot Act is just fear mongering on your part, you'd do better to worry about the next psycho who thinks he/she is going to blow something/someone to hell, what happens when they decide that blowing up a bus is a smart idea?!?! or maybe they take a que from Russia and take over a school?!?

Sun Oct 10 2004 9:07 PM


njguardsman:

OK people read it and LEARN!!! what fellow serviceman think of John Kerry.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1235321/posts

Mon Oct 11 2004 7:11 PM


andrew hastie:

bye.hillary.

Sat Jan 28 2006 12:57 AM


Jamie:

I think the president is an uneducated twit. The stuff that comes from that mans mouth is unquestionably the stupidest of any president. I do however feel that you can not take one mans stupidity and put the blame on an entire party. I am a democrat, and I choose to make my vote count. For the person who thinks Clinton did not do anything in office, well I hope you never get sick and have to miss work, or I hope a family member does not come ill and you need to take care of them; because you do not deserve to use his FMLA plan. I also want to point out that he improved are education in this country and made it possible for children with poor school systems to get a better education somewhere else, he also gave the poor school systems more resources. He was a good president, when he was in office we were not paying over $3 a gallon for gas. When he was in office we did not have the highest precentage in home forclosures ever, and most of us had a job. People are loosing hope with our country, they are loosing hope with our politics, and they are loosing hope with one another. This is not the time for fighting, this is a time to come together for a change. That change is long over due. Our country can not servive much more hate, we have enough countries mad at us, we can not turn on eachother.

Tue Nov 14 2006 4:26 PM


Jim Gilliam
Jim Gilliam

Email:







Add to My Yahoo!

Last week's soundtrack:

jgilliam's Last.fm Weekly Artists Chart