Tim Daneliuk wrote in
:

wrote:
I think the Bush administration enabled everyone to rachet up the
violence.

Yeah - it was *really* peaceful before Bush came into office. As I
said, I am no fan of Bush, but this is the kind of Lib frothing that
cost you guys the election. Bush is not the center of evil.

Bush effectively disengaged from the peace process and only made a token
effort at a "roadmap to peace." And when the Israelis sent tanks into
the West Bank and Gaza, Bush did nothing diplomatically or financially
to restrain them.

By exerting no pressure or meaningful initiative for peace, Bush
certainly did enable everyone in the conflict to ratchet up the
violence.


He did not cause all
the problems in the world - or any of them actually.

On the contrary, he directly caused our occupation of Iraq.


He is merely
responding to the world as he found it and as he believes will work.
He may be right, he may be wrong, but blaming him for the various
stupidities around the world that precede him by many years is simply
assinine.

Yes, he is seeing the world as he believes it will work. We don't blame
him for the stupidities that precede him -- just the ones that he was
involved in.


The Dems/Left/Libs got shellacked over the last several election
cycles at most levels of government for two reasons: This kind of
"blame our opponent" mentality, and their general sense of elitism
coupled with a palpable contempt for Everyman. And they richly
deserved to lose.

Bull****. The Dems got beat because the Bushies demonized anyone who
was to the left of Jesse Helms. The Bushies made it seem like the
progressives weren't for strong national defense, that we don't have
family values, that we don't go to church, that we don't support the
second amendment, etc etc. Well that's a lot of crap. We are all for
strong defense, too -- we just don't like the reckless way it has been
pursued by the neo-con nuts. You think progressives don't have wives
and children, too? Yeah we do. And a lot of us even go to church.
Shoot, I own several guns and am a lifelong hunter. And yet I am a
Dem/Left/Lib.

You guys think you represent the Everyman. Nonsense. The Everyman
cares about leaving a decent legacy for their children. The Everyman
realizes that hard work deserves fair compensation, and that everyone
ought to have a fair opportunity to prove their skills. The Everyman
will give his neighbor a hand if he's in a tight spot.

On the other hand, you Bushies believe in a dog-eat-dog world where a
helping hand is a waste of "your" tax money on the welfare "bums." You
believe in a world where it doesn't matter if you saddle the next
generation with a staggering debt, as long as your buddies get some tax
cuts today. Where you don't need a real reason to preemptively invade
other countries -- because everyone knows that might makes right and
besides, they've got it coming to 'em anyway.

Pretty soon the country is going to wake up and realize that the
neo-cons aren't really representing the Everyman at all. And then
we'll see who gets the shellacking.


No - he was arrogantly stupid. His failure to open his kimono to a
superpower making threats on his front porch was pure ego and hubris.
The invasion was entirely avoidable up until the last moment. Setting
aside the prudence of the war generally, I think Bush was sincere in
his willingness to stand down our military had SH cooperated as we
wished.

The "everyone knows that he had it coming to him anyway" reasoning.


(silly discussion of "intelligent design" snipped)

....
I challenge you to find a Liberal that doesn't quickly agree that
Saddam Hussein is evil or a neo-con who will admit to any evilness

Ward Churchill leaps to mind. Teddy Kennedy is implictly in the same

Ward Churchill leaps to mind because he's all over Fox News and Clear
Channel. Without Fox and Clear Channel pushing the story, nobody would
even know who Ward Churchill is. But by airing Churchill every night,
they can pump up their ratings and stoke conservative indignation as
well.

With 300 million people in the country you are bound to find an oddity
like Churchill. If you ask 100 people, you may even find one that
agrees with Churchill. But you will probably find ten other people who
are eager to send those people off to Gitmo. I worry more about the ten
than I do about the one.


Lots of liberals will freely admit that perjury about a blow-job
is perjury, even if it's not 'bad enough' to justify throwing the
President out of office. But try to find a neo-con that thinks
torturing prisoners is worth even appointing a special prosecutor.


They weren't "tortured" except in the lexicon of the Left. They were
*humiliated* and placed under *duress*. No permanent physical harm
came to any of them as best as I have read. And "they" in this case,
were

Are you serious? "Lexicon of the Left"? Here's just one example:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6988054/
In May of 2004 the Army had 33 active probes going on for the deaths of
a total of 32 detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004May21.html

....
Lefties that lie, cheat, and steal are wrong too. They typically
do not engage in torture or murder though. That they leave to

No - they usually make nice with the people who *are* torturers and
murderers. As long ago as the FDR administration the US political Left
was openly in bed with avowed Communists. The KGB had people operating
in government with the tacit knowledge of the FDR folks (this is
documented in excruciating detail in "The Mitrokhin Archive").
Communism in its various 20th Century incarnations was responsible for
literally millions of deaths and many more cases of vast human rights
abuses ... but the Left was always in love with it in varying degrees.
The Left also has - at various times - been in love with the human
rights paradises in Cuba, North Viet Nam, Maoist China, ad infinitum,
ad nauseum. No, they don't actually *do* the torture and murder - they
(in some degree) enable the hitmen who do it ...

Similar arguments were used by the supporters of McCarthy to blacklist a
lot of good Americans. I think that as a country, we have a short
recollection of history.

....