I finally get it: If GW is not man-made, then God is punishingus with it

jeff wrote:
Edward Dolan wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
Liberals are so blinded by ideology that they are unable to
comprehend, much less deal with, the simplest facts. Folks, there
is nothing dumber in this world than a liberal. I give you Mr.
Sherman as a prime example of the species.
Lets look at these remarks as it explains a lot.

People, tend to think that others would do the same thing as they
do. Hence, if you are an ideologue, you think your opponent must be
also.

Now, Mr Dolan has not refuted a single fact, he has instead
engaged in the most typical conservative line of personal attack.
That gets around those pesky facts which are so hard to explain.
Bill Sornson gives anyone all the facts they would ever need.
Which is none.

I go to the
heart of the matter which is the ideology of liberals. It is
wrongheaded.
I
have never known a liberal whom didn't deserve to be executed for
crimes against humanity. A liberal is a socialist is a communist.
They are kin to Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. Leftists all!
These are all strawman arguments. You make your opponent out to be
something of your own creation, so you can attack it. To actually
believe that Obama is a communist is bereft of any real understanding
and delusional. You don't have a clue.

That is the ultimate destination of all liberals. After all, communism
is nothing but liberalism perfected. Marxism is basic to all Leftists.

BTW, I assume that you will be giving up up your Social Security
and Medicare. Send us proof.

I am one of the few persons in this country my age who does not have
Social Security and Medicare. As you can see, I marched to a different
drummer than the common man.

I'm reminded of what Col Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powels longtime
aid, has said about George W Bush, he should be tried for treason.

You have got everything backwards. It is Obama who will be tired for
treason. After all, he is destroying America as we have known it for
several hundred years.

Er, did you miss that the financial system was in collapse?

Did you miss that this is widely referred to as the worst recession
since the Great Depression?

Did you miss that growth has returned and the unemployment rate (which
you seem to like) is heading down.

Did you miss that the Deficit nearly tripled under Bush?

Bush was twiddling his thumbs when all this was going down. Did you
not notice how much of the initial reaction was waste?

Jeff


Colin Powell in fact is guilty of treason himself. He was never loyal
to Bush. Why did he not resign if he did not agree with Bush on the
Iraq war? He was nothing but an opportunist and owed everything he was
to the Repubs. **** that cowardly general - who never met a war that
he liked.

I missed this before.

They were all loyal, and they all came to understand the facts were
being manipulated. It is not just Colin Powell but George Tenet, Paul
O'Neill, Scott McClellan, Richard Clarke...

Powell was a typical army general, not wanting to get out ahead, and
being faithful. The UN speech is what gave the Iraq war it's rationale.
It was all misinformation made up by the OVP (Cheney).

Jeff

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle wrote
jeff wrote
Edward Dolan wrote
jeff wrote
Edward Dolan wrote

What would the Middle East have cost us if we hadn't invaded Iraq?

In a lot better shape. Iran wouldn't be the huge problem it is in now, because
Iraq would have kept it in check. And we would have finished Afghanistan.

Bush will go down in history as the president who took on the Islamic
terrorists while the rest of the world stood by and did nothing.

Er, did he have a choice? He will go down as the president on whose
watch 9/11 happened and who let binLaden get away while he strated a
war that had nothing to do with alQaeda in Iraq. You do realize that
the drones that were tracking binLaden were pilled out of
Afghanistan to track Iraq instead?

I think he will also go down as the president that marks the "beginning of the end."

I dont. Bet he ends up being seen like that fool Hoover or Spiro Agnew.

Because he invaded Iraq precisely because it had NO
WMDs, Iran and N. Korea decided to get the real thing.

They did indeed.

WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE.

There's no jungle in North Korea either.

"jeff" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
What would the Middle East have cost us if we hadn't invaded Iraq?

In a lot better shape. Iran wouldn't be the huge problem it is in now,
because Iraq would have kept it in check. And we would have finished
Afghanistan.

Bush will go down in history as the president who took on the Islamic
terrorists while the rest of the world stood by and did nothing.

Er, did he have a choice? He will go down as the president on whose watch
9/11 happened and who let binLaden get away while he strated a war that
had nothing to do with alQaeda in Iraq. You do realize that the drones
that were tracking binLaden were pilled out of Afghanistan to track Iraq
instead?

Compared to Clinton, Bush did indeed do a lot. We shall have to effect
regime change in Iran too sooner or later.

To his
credit, Obama seems to be doing the right thing in Afghanistan.
[...]

After languishing for years, because the eye was on Iraq.

Note that 2009 was a record year for killing alQaeda and Taliban. 2010 is
well on the way to eclipsing that. The leader of Pak Taliban is dead. But
in additional much progress has been made in cutting off their finances.
The difference between a working government and one trying to limp to the
finish line. Attention is finally being paid to Yemen. You did know that
Bush had a bit of a tiff and halted efforts there?

Iraq was the central battleground as long we we there. Even the Islamic
extremists agreed with that. What difference does it make whether we kill
them in Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan or anywhere else. The important
thing is to kill them wherever they are.

It [the debt] is unsustainable and
highly dangerous. The only way out will be hyperinflation, the gravest
sort of tax on the middle class and the working poor.
No sign of hyperinflation. Plenty of signs of fear and rabid behaviour
on the right. The debt will have to be handled, but the right has no
plans other than tax cuts and more spending off books. But first the
economy. You always spend your way out of a recession, that is if you
want to get out. Historically money is put back during good times. W
drained the pot.

This business of spending your way out of a recession may be seriously
flawed. However, time will tell and any chickens out there will soon come
home to roost. The debt is very worrisome.

Yes. Reagan was wrong in that deficits don't matter. So was Bush 2.
Remember he was given near surpluses.

Their means of fighting a recession was to lower taxes, especially on the
rich. It seemed to have worked rather well. So far, Obama is making a mess
of everything.

But the recession comes first. Note that the value of the dollar which
had fallen so much under W is up under Obama. That borrowing rates are
historically low and that the % debt to GDP was higher post war.

You can not lower taxes and fix the debt. It has always been the opposite.
Even Reagan and George Bush 1 had to raise taxes after a while. Trickle
Down does not work.

Trickle down works in the short term, but not in the long term. We all
believe in the progressive income tax, don't we?

There is little discretionary spending that can be cut, and the right
refuses to consider tackling mandatory. The only plan they had was to
privatize SS, the safety net. How many people would be destitute now if
that had been in place?

Agree with you on the above.

Bush was a big spender and he never vetoed anything. He was not a true
conservative by any means.

He was the darling of the conservative set, how can you deny that? You
still defend and admire him.

I admire Bush for taking on the Islamic extremists, something Clinton never
did. The invasion of Iraq was a stroke of genius. Bravo Bush!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"jeff" wrote in message ...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
But there are none so blind as those
who will not see, i.e., liberals.

You have only beliefs, no facts. Just because someone you like says it's
so, does not make it so.

I leave it to others with lesser minds than mine to supply facts. I supply
ideology. I hate Leftists because they have been wrong about most everything
for the past hundred years. Furthermore, it was Leftists that gave us the
20th century, the worst century in the history of the West.

I heard a Tea Partier saying they liked Sarah because she think like they
do. Exactly.

Keep your eye on Sarah. She has hit a raw nerve in this country. She may or
may not ever become president, but she is changing how things are discussed.
She makes the Leftists look like the fools that they are.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"jeff" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
The Repubs do blather on about taxes way too much I must admit. But we
have got to get some control over spending. That is the problem, not
taxes.
[...]

Exactly what spending? I've posted the links to the 2010 budget, did you
look? What would you cut in the discretionary that would make a
difference?

ALL spending - you dolt!

Would you take the wars off budget again so the numbers look better?

There is one main reason why we have a federal government, to protect the
people. Why do the Dems always want to cut defense spending?

As someone put it, The Tea Party is like a dog chasing a car. If they
ever caught it they wouldn't know what to do with it.

The Tea Party movement is a sign of hope. They want smaller government
and less spending. If you are on the frugal living group, you should be
for it.

Sarah is a woman with much ambition, but little ability. She has little
clue of what is going on. She has narrow dogmatic beliefs. It is not just
liberals that believe that.

Just keep believing that and you will soon get the surprise of your life.
McCain was dead until he got hold of Sarah.

Sarah ran a state where the average citizen received far more from the
government dole than the lower 48. Indeed while she was mayor of Wasilla
she lobbied heavily and got government dollars. And she quit the
Governership in shambles, she treated the office like it was for family
and personal benefit. What a messy family life she leads.

Who cares about any of the above. Alaska has always been ****ed up. So what
else is new?

Sarah at least is not a murderer like liberals are (abortion).

But she think like you, which is to say, not deeply.

We deep thinkers are alike in that we hate liberals. But Mass. gives us
hope. Imagine people so stupid as to keep voting for Kennedy even though he
was a murderer (Chappaquiddick) and a craven coward. But that is a liberal
for you!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message ...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
But there are none so blind as those
who will not see, i.e., liberals.
You have only beliefs, no facts. Just because someone you like says it's
so, does not make it so.

I leave it to others with lesser minds than mine to supply facts. I supply
ideology.

Yes. Which makes you an ideologue. Someone who believes just because
they do.

I hate Leftists because they have been wrong about most everything
for the past hundred years. Furthermore, it was Leftists that gave us the
20th century, the worst century in the history of the West.

An odd turn there. Was it not the right wing that brought us both world
wars?

I heard a Tea Partier saying they liked Sarah because she think like they
do. Exactly.

Keep your eye on Sarah. She has hit a raw nerve in this country. She may or
may not ever become president, but she is changing how things are discussed.
She makes the Leftists look like the fools that they are.

She is incompetent. She flaked out on the big Republican fund raiser,
and she hit this one to get the 100K. You did know that, didn't you?

Jeff

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"jeff" wrote in message
...
jeff wrote:
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
Colin Powell in fact is guilty of treason himself. He was never loyal to
Bush. Why did he not resign if he did not agree with Bush on the Iraq
war? He was nothing but an opportunist and owed everything he was to the
Repubs. **** that cowardly general - who never met a war that he liked.

I missed this before.

They were all loyal, and they all came to understand the facts were
being manipulated. It is not just Colin Powell but George Tenet, Paul
O'Neill, Scott McClellan, Richard Clarke...

Yup, they were all just too dumb to ever see anything until it was too late.

Powell was a typical army general, not wanting to get out ahead, and
being faithful. The UN speech is what gave the Iraq war it's rationale. It
was all misinformation made up by the OVP (Cheney).

Nothing was made up - you confounded dolt. Everyone in the world believed
that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he would use them (as
he had in the past). Apparently, only you ever believed otherwise.

Bill Sornson has posted many times what everyone was saying at the time. But
of course, liberals are never deterred by any facts. All liberals know how
to do is spin, spin, spin and lie, lie, lie! And of course, hindsight is
always 20/20.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"jeff" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
I leave it to others with lesser minds than mine to supply facts. I
supply ideology.

Yes. Which makes you an ideologue. Someone who believes just because they
do.

I am a conservative ideologue based on my reading of history and my views on
human nature. What do you base your beliefs on?

I hate Leftists because they have been wrong about most everything
for the past hundred years. Furthermore, it was Leftists that gave us the
20th century, the worst century in the history of the West.

An odd turn there. Was it not the right wing that brought us both world
wars?

WWI was brought on by a general lust for war by all the great powers. It
marked the end of three empires. WWII was brought on by Leftists like
Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin; Korea and Vietnam, again by Leftists. Or do
you think republican democracies start wars?

I heard a Tea Partier saying they liked Sarah because she think like
they do. Exactly.

Keep your eye on Sarah. She has hit a raw nerve in this country. She may
or may not ever become president, but she is changing how things are
discussed. She makes the Leftists look like the fools that they are.

She is incompetent. She flaked out on the big Republican fund raiser,
and she hit this one to get the 100K. You did know that, didn't you?

Let's talk about Edwards, a real scum bucket if ever there was one. Kerry
was a scum bucket too.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
What would the Middle East have cost us if we hadn't invaded Iraq?
In a lot better shape. Iran wouldn't be the huge problem it is in now,
because Iraq would have kept it in check. And we would have finished
Afghanistan.
Bush will go down in history as the president who took on the Islamic
terrorists while the rest of the world stood by and did nothing.
Er, did he have a choice? He will go down as the president on whose watch
9/11 happened and who let binLaden get away while he strated a war that
had nothing to do with alQaeda in Iraq. You do realize that the drones
that were tracking binLaden were pilled out of Afghanistan to track Iraq
instead?

Compared to Clinton, Bush did indeed do a lot. We shall have to effect
regime change in Iran too sooner or later.

Bzzt.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/index.htm

W sat on his ass.

To his
credit, Obama seems to be doing the right thing in Afghanistan.
[...]
After languishing for years, because the eye was on Iraq.

Note that 2009 was a record year for killing alQaeda and Taliban. 2010 is
well on the way to eclipsing that. The leader of Pak Taliban is dead. But
in additional much progress has been made in cutting off their finances.
The difference between a working government and one trying to limp to the
finish line. Attention is finally being paid to Yemen. You did know that
Bush had a bit of a tiff and halted efforts there?

Iraq was the central battleground as long we we there. Even the Islamic
extremists agreed with that.

Hows that? There was no alQaeda in any part of Iraq that Saddam
controlled. There was only after we invaded. Get the difference?

What difference does it make whether we kill
them in Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan or anywhere else. The important
thing is to kill them wherever they are.

The crew in Iraq didn't exist before. Iraq turned into a huge
recruiting boost for alQaeda. One of the reasons, now that we are on the
way out, that their influence has fallen.

It [the debt] is unsustainable and
highly dangerous. The only way out will be hyperinflation, the gravest
sort of tax on the middle class and the working poor.
No sign of hyperinflation. Plenty of signs of fear and rabid behaviour
on the right. The debt will have to be handled, but the right has no
plans other than tax cuts and more spending off books. But first the
economy. You always spend your way out of a recession, that is if you
want to get out. Historically money is put back during good times. W
drained the pot.
This business of spending your way out of a recession may be seriously
flawed. However, time will tell and any chickens out there will soon come
home to roost. The debt is very worrisome.
Yes. Reagan was wrong in that deficits don't matter. So was Bush 2.
Remember he was given near surpluses.

Their means of fighting a recession was to lower taxes, especially on the
rich. It seemed to have worked rather well.

The recession, largely caused by after effects of Vietnam and oil
shocks, was on the way out long before any of those tax breaks took effect.

But those tax breaks are miniscule compared to what W did. Look up
the marginal tax rates if you don't believe me.


So far, Obama is making a mess
of everything.

Except the economy is on the mend. GDP is up, unemployment heading
down. Much success in killing alQaeda. Millions of people retained their
unemployment benefits.


But the recession comes first. Note that the value of the dollar which
had fallen so much under W is up under Obama. That borrowing rates are
historically low and that the % debt to GDP was higher post war.

You can not lower taxes and fix the debt. It has always been the opposite.
Even Reagan and George Bush 1 had to raise taxes after a while. Trickle
Down does not work.

Trickle down works in the short term, but not in the long term. We all
believe in the progressive income tax, don't we?

All that money that W gave to the rich didn't help the economy. It
wasn't invested in productive work. A lot of it went into those exotic
financial instruments that wrecked the economy.

The economy did very well under Clinton with a top marginal Tax Rate
of 39.6%. Not that anyone pays that after tax breaks. What's wrong with
going back to that?


There is little discretionary spending that can be cut, and the right
refuses to consider tackling mandatory. The only plan they had was to
privatize SS, the safety net. How many people would be destitute now if
that had been in place?

Agree with you on the above.

I'm glad we agree on something!

Bush was a big spender and he never vetoed anything. He was not a true
conservative by any means.
He was the darling of the conservative set, how can you deny that? You
still defend and admire him.

I admire Bush for taking on the Islamic extremists, something Clinton never
did. The invasion of Iraq was a stroke of genius. Bravo Bush!

Nope. Clinton had a comprehensive plan, one that was handed off to W who
did nothing. Read Richard Clarke, George Tenet, Paul O'Neill, any of
those who worked in the W Whitehouse (all Republicans) and they will
tell you that W was obsessed with Saddam and cared not a whit about
alQaeda, until... and then the first reaction was to go after Iraq.

Mind you that the designers of the first WTC attack were all arrested
and successfully prosecuted.

While all that was happening the right repeatedly said that Clinton
was too obsessed with alQaeda. The focus shifted when W took office.

And, you do realize there was no alQaeda in any part of Iraq that
Saddam controlled. After the invasion, those were alQaeda converts, that
didn't exist before. All for the loss of thousands of American
Military personnel and many many innocent civilians (The average
civilian death toll was on the order of a hundred a day for years) and a
trillion dollars or so.

What has happened is you have been swept up in the strong talk and
breast beating. Results are what matters.

Jeff


Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
I leave it to others with lesser minds than mine to supply facts. I
supply ideology.
Yes. Which makes you an ideologue. Someone who believes just because they
do.

I am a conservative ideologue based on my reading of history and my views on
human nature. What do you base your beliefs on?

I'm a pragmatist and know a good bit about history and warfare.

I hate Leftists because they have been wrong about most everything
for the past hundred years. Furthermore, it was Leftists that gave us the
20th century, the worst century in the history of the West.
An odd turn there. Was it not the right wing that brought us both world
wars?

WWI was brought on by a general lust for war by all the great powers. It
marked the end of three empires.

And you think Kaiser Wilhelm, Hötzendorf and Berchtold were leftists?


WWII was brought on by Leftists like
Hitler,


Bzzt. Leftist? Get real, he was a right wing fascist.

Fascism, pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzəm/, is a political ideology that seeks to
combine radical and authoritarian nationalism[1][2][3][4] with a
corporatist economic system.[5] Scholars generally consider it to be on
the far right of the traditional left-right political spectrum.

Mussolini

Bzzt. fascist.

and Stalin; Korea and Vietnam, again by Leftists. Or do
you think republican democracies start wars?

You don't have clue about the difference between being a Socialist, a
Communist and a Democrat. Have you ever talked to people that lived
under communism? I know quite a number that escaped from the iron
curtain. There is no comparison between Obama and Communism in their minds.


I heard a Tea Partier saying they liked Sarah because she think like
they do. Exactly.
Keep your eye on Sarah. She has hit a raw nerve in this country. She may
or may not ever become president, but she is changing how things are
discussed. She makes the Leftists look like the fools that they are.
She is incompetent. She flaked out on the big Republican fund raiser,
and she hit this one to get the 100K. You did know that, didn't you?

Let's talk about Edwards, a real scum bucket if ever there was one.

Why. Is he running? Was he president? I never liked him. Did I ever say
I did?

Is he worse than Mark Sanford? Or any of the numerous closeted gay
republicans that have taken a wide stance?

Kerry
was a scum bucket too.

Same as above.

Jeff

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota