Thread: Don't pull no punches, tell me what you really think.

Originally Posted by gugi

Yeah, may be Iraq wouldn't have happened in 2003, it could've been 2005, or it could've been Iran, or Lybia, but I think the cards were heavily stacked towards a war. The neoconservative wing had had these great bright ideas about US and it's role in the world for many decades and no real power to test them out. After all by HW Bush the isolationism had started going out of fashion with the conservatives.
So, a "cheap war" to the benefit of the oil industry and the industrial-military complex seems like something that was just waiting to happen. (Of course after finding out that "war on the cheap" is a risky business that's less likely to happen again, but hindsight is always 20/20.)



By the same token the US military presence all over the world is probably not going to be changed dramatically no matter who's president. Again due to the globalization there are rather powerful business interests all over the world that need the US military support in their region of operation. Yes, the president can fight this, but if it's good for US why would (s)he?

It seems funny to me that you see this current military expedition/fiasco as a one sided issue while I read this post I am reminded of all of the Democrats who voted so blindly for the same war. I am also reminded of Mr. Johnsons war, Mr Trumans war, Mr Roosevelts war and Mr Wilsons war.

It used to be said that "with Republicans you get recession and with Democrats you get war", now that these two parties have finally been melded together you can have either one or both with either party.

In my next presidential candidate (and believe me, I'm not talking about the one currently in office) I want:

Someone who's not afraid to stand for what he believes in, even if Congress fights him on it, a man who believes in the Constitution strictly, does not deviate from it, and is not afraid to stand firm upon it. I want a candidate who loves God and Country, believes in smaller government and lower taxes, privatized healthcare, government at the local level, and an equal balance of power among the branches. Most importantly, I want a President who does what he says he's gonna do and believes what our Founders believed, because if they could look at America now, they'd be turning over in their graves.

Well, I wasn't here for the other wars, but I very well remember the big demonstrations in 2003 and those were definitely not from the conservative side. As you pointed out traditionally the republicans have been isolationists, until the neocons who were the ones in charge of making policy at that time. And I really think they just ran their social experiment because they've believed in it for so many years and now they had the opportunity.

It is true that some democrats in congress voted in favor (may be Clinton would be a president if she didn't), but from what I saw the Iraq war was definitely driven from one side only.

As far as involvement goes, the thing is that democracy is extremely inefficient, so those Council meetings are very frustrating. Dictatorship is the way to get things done (that's why business is so hierarchical). So at the end of the day it's a matter of finding a working balance, but that requires more intelligence and reason, and less ideology.
I know there are a lot of americans that are intelligent and reasonable, but there are a lot that are not and those are very easy to manipulate.

For example the responsible thing was to bail out the banks, but then the responsible thing was to enact more comprehensive regulation that would prevent them from engaging in the same type of risky business (and they'll likely find a different way to do it). Instead what we saw was big outrage over the bailout, but when it came to regulations and prosecuting the crimes nobody seemed to care. I watched some of the congressional hearings and it was an embarrassment to watch senators accuse bankers of stuff that the government did, instead of the stuff the bankers did. To me they didn't look tough, just stupid and most certainly incompetent.

I'm also sick of hearing how businesses need more tax breaks to create jobs. When you look at the numbers they've got plenty of profits and more free cash than ever, so obviously that's not their problem.

One question that I keep wondering is whether it's really possible to have a system that's less corrupt than the current one. Because if it's a systemic issue (which I am more and more leaning toward), it doesn't matter whether you vote in morons, smart people, corrupt, or honest, the result is more or less the same once they get in. Or perhaps one has to pick corruption and relative stability or incompetence and chaos.

So that's gets me back a bit closer to the original post.

Originally Posted by Jimbo7

No apologies necessary; you're correct. I absolutely do not want to pay for that! However, you are guilty of this yourself, too. I think saying that "the conservatives" don't mind spending federal money on Iraq is a rather large generalization, and not as correct as it once may have been.

My statement was meant to be tongue-in-cheek and not specifically directed towards healthcare. It was directed to a fundamental difference in opinion on many things.

+1. You are correct.
People tend to do this almost automatically.

Originally Posted by AFDavis11

A degree in economics.

Ross Perot quotes:

Ross Perot Quotes - BrainyQuote

* I believe our nation made at least two political mistakes in the past: That's when we elected Lyndon Johnson over Goldwater(1964), and when we ignored Ross Perot in the 1992 election....

Originally Posted by Christian2100

Most importantly, I want a President who does what he says he's gonna do and believes what our Founders believed, because if they could look at America now, they'd be turning over in their graves.

I don't disagree with you wanting a morally upstanding president, but between the founding of the US and now, there are a couple hundred years in which some things changed dramatically for the better, and which almost certainly would not appeal to the founders.
If the founders had been against slavery or believed in equal rights for women, they would have mentioned something about it in the constitution I think.

Originally Posted by Bruno

I don't disagree with you wanting a morally upstanding president, but between the founding of the US and now, there are a couple hundred years in which some things changed dramatically for the better, and which almost certainly would not appeal to the founders.
If the founders had been against slavery or believed in equal rights for women, they would have mentioned something about it in the constitution I think.

Actually the founders were uncomfortable with slavery and some of them were absolutely against it. Because of the agrarian society in the south slavery was the 'third rail' of politics of that day and time. They never would have gotten the Articles of Confederation agreed to and signed had they taken on abolition at that time. We fought a terrible civil war over it a hundred years later.

Washington freed his slaves and even Jefferson freed some of them in his will. Not Sally Hemmings but that is another story. Jefferson was a compulsive buyer whose debts were so burdensome that he had to keep slaves to maintain his standard of living which was always beyond his means. Thomas Paine, the author of 'Common Sense', Rights of Man and the Age Of Reason, wrote a treatise on the evil of slavery in 1774.

As a Minnesotan, I'm fairly fed up with the government at the state level, too. Luckily I bought my fishing license yesterday morning

But I believe America is the best place around. I've been to a handful of other countries and enjoyed them but I don't think I'd ever consider leaving the US of A.

It's Independence Day soon! Can't we remember what this little experiment was all about? If anyone can turn it around, I'd put money on us.

Edit: you guys and gals from elsewhere please don't take offense to an inbred redneck like me! I just love my country and encourage you to love yours as well.

Originally Posted by Jimbo7

Edit: you guys and gals from elsewhere please don't take offense to an inbred redneck like me! I just love my country and encourage you to love yours as well.

Nothing wrong with that. I love my country too, warts and all. Just like you.
No country or government is perfect.

Originally Posted by Bruno

Nothing wrong with that. I love my country too, warts and all. Just like you.
No country or government is perfect.

Yes but you have one advantage .... the Belgian coticule .... all we have is the Arkansas ...