Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 115
  1. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    To catch the terrorists who attacked us. He failed. Or did you forget that?
    No--I just can't rightfully make assumptions about what someone like you, who makes very little sense to me means.

    Catch terrorists who attacked us. Ok...perhaps you aren't aware of the MANY terrorists who were captured...including the "mastermind" of 9/11. You are so grossly misinformed, it is really sad. Of course, we've failed to get Bin Laden...for only about 15 years now. Oh--right, you probably forgot that we failed to get him during the Clinton Administration too. Slippery guy.

    Of course, you continue to make little sense whining about the "wars" which is how we caught or killed many of the terrorists we did.

    Yeah, I'm the one who "forgot." The combination of your willful ignorance and arrogance continues to amaze me.

    KAM
  2. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    I didn't realize you were such a well-known economist with such spectacular experience in the field that you are willing to state that economic experts in both adminstrations were flat out wrong and knew nothing. Why....we should give you the Nobel Prize for....what would it be....Fantasy?
    Yes, well, history will bear out who is right and who is wrong won't it. Your slavish devotion to "experts" however tells me a lot about you and your inability to think independently.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    The left attacked Bush because he was wrong.
    Oh, that's how it works. Ok, Great. The Right attacks Obama because he's wrong--see, really easy then. It is amazing that you cannot separate opinion from fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    He invaded a country under false pretenses and was personally responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths.
    No--you simply don't like to consider the facts. "false pretenses" if your opinion, which I know you can't distinguish from fact. This has been covered in other threads.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    The right attacks Obama because he wants to provide health care for all, and intends to make the country pay for it, just like every other developed country. That may be a simplistic leftist view...but that's the way I see it. Can you describe it in any other way?
    Wants to provide healthcare for all? Yes, he's totally above politics, and is really an Angelic Figure who just wants to serve the people. Well, sorry--I don't share that dangerously worshipful point of view.

    Let me alert you to something in America. The government has no right to compel anyone to pay for something for someone else.

    I am well aware of your simplistic leftist views, and I gave you credit for your sincerity. However, it can easily be described otherwise--if you bothered to take off your blinders, and just realize the deals being cut here are the exact sorts of things that you complain about. This is ALL about Special interests and politics. You simply won't consider that.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Hilariously, you keep coming back to the same tired argument. The most important thing is the people vs. the government. Are you a skinhead, a separatist, involved in a militia, or a domestic terrorist? That's what they say. Sounds amazingly similar.
    Its really sad that you don't even BEGIN to understand the nature of a Free society. It might sound amazingly similar...to someone totally ignorant of the nature of our country and its founding. No, I am none of those things. I'm simply a citizen who understands the Government is supposed to be a limited one--one that works within very specific rules, called the Constitution.

    I know you don't care about that--you just want what you want. You and those who follow that "logic" are very dangerous and will end up harming millions of people because of it. But that's all ok--because you "care" right.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    The government is the people. That's how our government is set up, has been set up since the beginning. Your argument makes a lot of sense....if you live in a dictatorship. We don't. Au contraire, it's about the people supporting the government, not fighting them. Until we do that, we will get nowhere.
    My God are you ignorant. A Dictatorship...or what is effectively a dictatorship is what people like you are advocating--a government that can justify anything it wants, take whatever it wants--just as long as they say it is for the greater good.

    People supporting the government. Yes, I'm sure you just happily supported the Bush Administration right? This is sheer idiocy. Citizens job is not to blindly support the government, but to insure that the government is serving the people--not PRETENDING to serve the people, and holding them hostage, begging for scraps. I know that's good enough for you, but not for me.

    Apparently, you believe that we live in an era where government is highly responsible, and responsive to the people. You enjoy that fantasy.

    KAM
  3. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Wow--it's like Deja Vu with the conservatives attacking Obama...

    "They were willing to harm the country, our soldiers in the field and the economy, because they saw an advantage in attacking everything the President did, and blaming him for everything whether it was his fault or not. They don't know anything else. So, they assume that everyone else is as pathetic, and hate-filled as they are. It is easy to justify lowly behavior by projecting that on everyone else."--just hilarious
    If you are correct, then do you support this sort of nonsense or not? I've made it clear that I do not.

    KAM
  4.    #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    No--I just can't rightfully make assumptions about what someone like you, who makes very little sense to me means.

    Catch terrorists who attacked us. Ok...perhaps you aren't aware of the MANY terrorists who were captured...including the "mastermind" of 9/11. You are so grossly misinformed, it is really sad. Of course, we've failed to get Bin Laden...for only about 15 years now. Oh--right, you probably forgot that we failed to get him during the Clinton Administration too. Slippery guy.

    Of course, you continue to make little sense whining about the "wars" which is how we caught or killed many of the terrorists we did.

    Yeah, I'm the one who "forgot." The combination of your willful ignorance and arrogance continues to amaze me.

    KAM
    bin Laden didn't knock down the twin towers under Clinton. It was under Bush, remember? Certainly, even though Liz Cheney and Rudy and other republicans keep wanting to pretend it didn't happen under a republican adminsitration, it did. You to agree with that, right? Bush's "wars" really helped a lot, didn't they? They provided the perfect recruitment tool for Al Queda and rallied the world's moderate Islamists against us. And yes, they failed to get the leadership of Al Queda, except for one poor sucker. Tiresome to hear someone try and justify what Bush did. which is why I'm glad you brought it up and not me.

    You just don't seem to grasp where the hypocrisy lies. That's not surprising because if you did, you'd actually have to support the president. But you don't. You wouldn't have supported any democrat who stood a chance of getting elected because you harbor this unrelenting fear that democrats will make it impossible for you to "take care of your family". Exactly what kind of manure is being spread here? Tell me, do you think that the working uninsured might feel the same way without any help from the republicans? I realize you really don't care much as long as you have yours, but I do. You think that Obama wants the country to go bankrupt? You don't like democratic policies, and you never will, because to you the government is evil. Except when they invade the wrong country. Then they're right on. Sheesh.
  5.    #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    People supporting the government. Yes, I'm sure you just happily supported the Bush Administration right? This is sheer idiocy. Citizens job is not to blindly support the government, but to insure that the government is serving the people--not PRETENDING to serve the people, and holding them hostage, begging for scraps. I know that's good enough for you, but not for me.

    Apparently, you believe that we live in an era where government is highly responsible, and responsive to the people. You enjoy that fantasy.

    KAM
    So my assumption is that you were equally critical of the Bush administration. If not, you're a hypocrite at best.
  6. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Were they all hiding out in Iraq?
    No, they were not ALL hiding out in Iraq. Of course, that's where they showed up to fight anyway.

    Of course, there are other reasons why we took Saddam out...like, oh, his regular violations of the UN agreements that ended the first Gulf War, and the fact that he fired upon our Airplanes--which is an act of war.

    I'll fully agree that The Bush Administration concentrated way too much on WMD, but in my view--Iraq should have been dealt with long before Bush came into office. And of course, Regime Change was the official policy of the Clinton Administration too.

    Funny, how this was not a problem...except when someone actually acted.

    Iraq had a lot of problems clearly. We lost many more men than we should have, and I would have liked something different, but I'm not buying into the leftist mantra, that pretends there was NO reason to fight there, no benefit, that it is a complete failure, etc, etc, etc.

    That's the simplistic propaganda that people such as yourself might choose to swallow, but I realize there is a much bigger picture.

    KAM
  7. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    bin Laden didn't knock down the twin towers under Clinton. It was under Bush, remember?
    Yes. I remember that it was Clinton that passed up a golden opportunity to take bin laden out. I also remember that the twin towers were not the first terrorist acts traced to bin laden.... under Clinton's watch.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  8. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    bin Laden didn't knock down the twin towers under Clinton. It was under Bush, remember? Certainly, even though Liz Cheney and Rudy and other republicans keep wanting to pretend it didn't happen under a republican adminsitration, it did. You to agree with that, right? Bush's "wars" really helped a lot, didn't they? They provided the perfect recruitment tool for Al Queda and rallied the world's moderate Islamists against us. And yes, they failed to get the leadership of Al Queda, except for one poor sucker. Tiresome to hear someone try and justify what Bush did. which is why I'm glad you brought it up and not me.
    That's right--it happened during the Bush Administration. I guess if they were cowards, they'd just say "we inherited it."

    Your claims of a "perfect recruitment tool" is an opinion, not a fact. Perhaps you weren't aware of Al Queda's activities and recruitment being just fine PRIOR to 9/11 and the Bush Response. Oh, no--forget that, it doesn't work for your pathetic distortions.

    One poor sucker--yes, just one guy. Your claim is idiotic.

    You are just parroting the leftist CLAIMS. Reality is a bit different.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    You just don't seem to grasp where the hypocrisy lies.
    From someone regularly displaying hypocrisy.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    That's not surprising because if you did, you'd actually have to support the president. But you don't.
    I insist that you stop declaring what I support and what I do not. You ask if you want to know what I think.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    You wouldn't have supported any democrat who stood a chance of getting elected because you harbor this unrelenting fear that democrats will make it impossible for you to "take care of your family".
    I'll vote for the person who most closely represents my views. Fear? No, its a proven demonstration. But it isn't just democrats. Republicans harm my ability to take care of my family as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Exactly what kind of manure is being spread here? Tell me, do you think that the working uninsured might feel the same way without any help from the republicans? I realize you really don't care much as long as you have yours, but I do.
    Get something straight right now genius. What I have is what I've EARNED. Do you get that? I EARN MY OWN MONEY. I do not steal it, take it from others against their will, or beg for it. I EARN it, and I have every right to it.

    I feel badly for those who are less successful and who want to be and fight to be. I help those people as I choose.

    You people who continually prattle on about this or that, pretending that you are somehow superior because you want to take what is someone's and give it to someone else. Wow, what heroes you are. So generous with someone else's money.

    Of course the bottom line isn't about helping people--its about how to help them. You blindly follow the mangled mess that these political hacks throw together (which has as its first goal--expanding government) and pat yourself on the back for supporting that joke. Well, sorry--I have a desire for ACTUAL solutions, not your political abominations. I'm sorry if you can't accept that people have other views.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    You think that Obama wants the country to go bankrupt? You don't like democratic policies, and you never will, because to you the government is evil. Except when they invade the wrong country. Then they're right on. Sheesh.
    No, bad government is evil. Reckless, idiotic policies are damaging, no matter how many pretty speeches are used to justify them. Talk is cheap, and just because you get elected to office doesn't mean you are any smarter than anyone else.

    I am not sure what Obama wants, but when his policy is something that I think is harmful, I'll say so. I know only you have the right to dissent and not me, but you's excuse me if I don't buy into that.

    KAM
  9. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    So my assumption is that you were equally critical of the Bush administration. If not, you're a hypocrite at best.
    I'm equally critical of equally bad ideas, yes.

    You want a run-down. I'll give you my view on any policy of Bush or Obama, or if I don't have a particular view, I will say so. Your assumptions are your problem.

    You however, are apparently critical of things, based on what party they are, or what their last name is. That is hypocrisy.

    KAM
  10. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Sure, Iraq had problems, but it was no threat to us.

    If he regularly went against UN agreements (suddenly you're a great defender of US agreements??), why was the time to attack Iraq just after we got attacked by Bin Laden in Afghanistan?

    You realize there's a bigger picture? No, Bush used 9/11 to drum up support to go to war against Iraq. Wrong time, wrong place, wrong reason.

    Funny how Bush ignored North Korea, which really had WMD!
    Iraq was no threat to us? Direct threat as in could they mount a military strike against us. No, not likely. However, you conveniently bypass the fact that some goons with boxcutters had just caused 3000 deaths and the loss of billions of dollars. So, "no threat" is somewhat of a stretch--in the realm of possibility. Forget as well, that Saddam funded homicide bombers in Israel and was a destabilizing force in the middle east, having invaded Kuwait, etc, etc, etc.

    Wrong place, wrong time, Wrong reason? Says who? You? Why is your view more important than mine or anyone else's? That's your opinion--fine, you are welcome to it. Reality doesn't conform to your opinion. I think its arguable.

    Why was it time to attack after 9/11...um...well, I'm sure there is a wide range of opinions there. However, I reject the fantasy scenarios that leftists like to dream up, as if Iraq was just some poor innocent country that President Bush decided to invade one day. There were PLENTY of ways that it could have been resolved, and Saddam thought he was calling a bluff. Obviously that wasn't the case, because he's dead, his criminal sons are dead, and Iraq has a chance at being a free nation again. Perhaps that doesn't mean much to you, but it does to me, and how that impacts the future of the middle east...well, that's for the future to tell us.

    North Korea. Yes, very much a problem that should have been dealt with in The Clinton Administration (botched then) and botched under Bush as well...and will likely under Obama, but we will see about that.

    So, since they had WMD, would you have supported attacking them?

    KAM
  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    When dealing with a recession, the democrats looked to the mistakes of the Great Depressions here and in Japan. High government spending was the keys to ending both.
    I agree with the concept, but the "party of spending" took this to a new and inefficient level that was never seen before. Locally I've seen schools and police departments using stimulus for normal budget items. That (and the bank bailouts) really weren't stimulus. (Maybe cash for clunkers was a more effective use of stimulus, but even that was an inefficient use of our natural resources). One could argue that they were bandages, but they are after the fact countermeasures for much more systemic problems that have been our economy for the last several decades. Neither party is without blame, but I do feel like the party in power is now giving democrats a bad name.
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  12. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    hmmmm..let's revisit your extremely partisan quote:

    "The leftists told so many lies and did nothing but Attack President Bush for so long, that they really don't understand anything else. They were willing to harm the country, our soldiers in the field and the economy, because they saw an advantage in attacking everything the President did, and blaming him for everything whether it was his fault or not. They don't know anything else. So, they assume that everyone else is as pathetic, and hate-filled as they are. It is easy to justify lowly behavior by projecting that on everyone else."


    Seems like you support this nonsense.
    Well, I'm sure that's what you imagine.

    I'm sure in your mind, it was perfectly acceptable for Democrats to attack President Bush, call him stupid, declare defeat for our armed forces, etc, etc.

    I think that level of vitriol, that the Democrat party depends on to get elected is not good--no matter who does it. The Republicans have made the mistake of being Democrat light before. I surely wouldn't suggest this again.

    KAM
  13. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    However, reading through all your posts, the "bad" ideas you always seem to be against are progressive ones...

    I don't see anything "equal" in that.
    Yes, I see most progressive ideas for the incredible unamerican frauds that they are. You see--I value this thing called liberty. Progressives oppose that, because they think they can decide how I should run my life instead of me doing that, and they are willing to use government power to take away my ability to control my own life (primarily through taking more and more of my money).

    I sure as heck will not apologize for opposing harmful "progressive" policies. And if there was ever a term more inappropriate, it would be to call these feudal policies "progressive." There is nothing resembling Progress in them. It is simply authoritarianism that tells you how much they care.

    Of course in the end...I don't care what its called--a bad idea is a bad idea.

    KAM
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    .. Sounds like you're being a (vitriolic) hypocrite...again.
    I think he's simply calling it like he sees it. To me, that's perfectly OK, and possibly he's extending an invitation for you to ask him what he really means. Rather than just resorting to "name calling", just ask him to explain what he means by those remarks ... [just my $0.02]
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  15. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    You see--I value this thing called Equality. Because people in power don't readily give up power, it often takes a progressive government to distribute it.
    I think you're describing redistribution.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  16. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    The voters didn't vote out repoublicans because of excessive spending (most voters have to clue about the deficit and the debt), the voted Republicans out because of the wars and the recession.

    When dealing with a recession, the democrats looked to the mistakes of the Great Depressions here and in Japan. High government spending was the keys to ending both.
    No--you're referring to the people who wouldn't vote for them in the first place--the leftists. Conservatives, specifically fiscal conservatives (which independent voters in this country tend to be) punished the Republicans for not being what they promised--for reckless spending. They made a classic mistake--embracing someone different for that reason alone, forgetting that they are actually worse problems for those issues.

    When the Republicans were voted out in 2006, we didn't have a Recession, so...no.

    Of course, you have probably bought into the leftist propaganda that tells you that there has been some sort of shift in this country--proven by the election of Obama. That's false--he simply rode a wave of ignorance fueled by people who blindly embrace "change" without having any real idea of what that means. Of course, those people have started to get a taste of that, and realize that what a lying politician says and does are not at all related.

    No--people are learning that the "most ethical Congress in history" has tax cheats in charge of the tax code, and the Treasury, and happily looks the other way to any and all ethical violations amongst their own party.

    The people are learning that "Transparency" is really just important DURING a campaign. "Bipartisanship" means that everyone agrees with you, and that "fiscal responsibility" means the largest debt increase we've ever had.

    It is HILARIOUS that you reference Japan, given that their seemingly endless string of stimulus plans kept them in the toilet for about 10 years. High government spending was the key to sustaining that economic misery.

    Read up on 'The Lost decade' Of course we are retracing that disaster in many ways.

    KAM
  17. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    You see--I value this thing called Equality. Because people in power don't readily give up power, it often takes a progressive government to distribute it.
    No--you value government sponsored robbery.

    Isn't it interesting that these "progressives" just can't seem to figure out that I simply don't want to be harmed by them. I'm not the one asking them for anything--they are seeking to take from me.

    If these glorious policies were so wonderful, then why do they always require me to pay a price. If you have such high aspirations for wonderful things, then YOU pay for it. Stop using the power of government to take money from me for things that the people of this country never empowered the Federal Government to do.

    Stop using the point of a gun to threaten me into doing what you decide is best for everyone. Also--if you think that's hyperbole--think again. Resisting this government robbery will result ultimately in someone showing up with a gun, and throwing you in jail.

    Now, of course taxation is perfectly legal. Taxation to take money from me to give to someone else is not. Nowhere in the Constitution does it authorize the government to redistribute wealth to individuals.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 01/14/2010 at 03:05 PM.
  18. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    ...and yet you are expressing the very same vitriol you accuse the left of spewing.

    I quote from your post: "(leftists) were willing to harm the country, our soldiers in the field and the economy..."

    Here's another: "Yes, I see most progressive ideas for the incredible unamerican frauds that they are. "

    Sounds like you're being a (vitriolic) hypocrite...again.
    Actually, I'm describing what they actually did, and instead of dealing with that, you try to personalize it, and somehow make it a problem of mine.

    You're not fooling me. I understand how the leftist works--personalize things and make a villain out of those who disagree with you.

    But I'll proudly state that I think (many) Progressive policies are unamerican frauds--violating the very principles upon which our nation was founded.

    Now please stop with your accusations or I might cry.

    Now, I grow tired of constantly having to correct you, but hypocrisy would imply that I said something that was contradictory or inconsistent. What is that exactly?

    KAM
  19. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclancy View Post
    I think he's simply calling it like he sees it. To me, that's perfectly OK, and possibly he's extending an invitation for you to ask him what he really means. Rather than just resorting to "name calling", just ask him to explain what he means by those remarks ... [just my $0.02]
    Thanks for that sane comment. Wouldn't it be interesting to have a discussion in which people had the goal of LEARNING what others think.

    In the example Zeglo stated, to be a hypocrite, I would have to support Republicans engaging in the same sort of tactics that the Democrats did vs President Bush. I would have to cheer them if they were to say that "Afghanistan is lost, the Surge will fail."

    Of course, anyone who made ANY honest attempt to read what I said would note that I said I didn't like or support those tactics.

    Again--they can't discern between disagreement and attacks and declarations of failure in order to harm.

    Of course, it is interesting to note that this is just what Senator Obama said would happen in opposing the Iraq Surge. Even after it worked. Interesting that his solution in Afghanistan was also a surge. Hypocrisy indeed. No matter--I think it was generally the right thing to do in the end.

    KAM
  20. hubz1124's Avatar
    Posts
    37 Posts
    Global Posts
    41 Global Posts
    #60  
    Republicans will be fine, Fox News just hired SARAH PALIN!
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions