The pace at which events are occuring are very questionable. There are several separate controversies that have occured in American politics contiguously:
1) The 2000 presidential election controversy. VP Al Gore leads the election polls by a hair for the entire process until the state of Florida supposedly seals the election for George Bush.
2) The 9-11 tragedy. Media attention is led away from the president's economic policy to his militaric policy. Bush's good status in the opinion of the public skyrockets.
3) The 2002 congressional election controversy. Senator Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota), a vocal antagonist of the Bush administration is killed in a plane crash. The republican party sweeps the congressional seats.
4) The war on terrorism. The United States begins bombing Afghanistan citizens, in hopes that one (?) will land on Osama bin-Laden. No updates on whether this objective was met. "Terrorism" is transposed onto Iraq as a possible hiding place for bin-Laden in January of 2002. By March of 2002, "terrorism" is weapons of mass destruction. By April of 2002, "terrorism" is a secondary issue and liberating Iraqis takes primacy.
5) The coincidence that all militaric turning points which "lead to" the Middle East -- including the fall of the Towers -- coincides with the Bush presidencies.
Today at 04:03 PM Mother Vashti said this in Post #40
Hi Magnum,
The pace at which events are occuring are very questionable. There are several separate controversies that have occured in American politics contiguously:
1) The 2000 presidential election controversy. VP Al Gore leads the election polls by a hair for the entire process until the state of Florida supposedly seals the election for George Bush.
2) The 9-11 tragedy. Media attention is led away from the president's economic policy to his militaric policy. Bush's good status in the opinion of the public skyrockets.
3) The 2002 congressional election controversy. Senator Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota), a vocal antagonist of the Bush administration is killed in a plane crash. The republican party sweeps the congressional seats.
4) The war on terrorism. The United States begins bombing Afghanistan citizens, in hopes that one (?) will land on Osama bin-Laden. No updates on whether this objective was met. "Terrorism" is transposed onto Iraq as a possible hiding place for bin-Laden in January of 2002. By March of 2002, "terrorism" is weapons of mass destruction. By April of 2002, "terrorism" is a secondary issue and liberating Iraqis takes primacy.
5) The coincidence that all militaric turning points which "lead to" the Middle East -- including the fall of the Towers -- coincides with the Bush presidencies.
This is not all hunky-dory. As Christians, we know that fighting and bloodshed are not options to us. Our sword is our Bible, our tools for survival are faith, hope, and love. Honestly Christians, where is your love? The only way we will keep our lands secure and our freedoms in tact is by confronting the perversities in our global policy which enrage world citizens.
Today at 08:00 PM jseek21 said this in Post #43
Crazyfingers, I am not talking about your particular views on the war. If I was, you would have to explain to me what they were, and then I could respond to them. I was responding to the sentiments and views set forth by many liberal leaders, including Tom Daschle, Hillary Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and a myriad of other politicians.
If these are not their viewpoints, and not the running viewpoints set forth by left wing politicians and leaders, then why are these reasons the only ones coming out of their mouths?
As for false witness, how can I bear false witness when I am quoting?
I am not going to point fingers, but I believe that which for I have been accused I have been accused in kind.
2: That the extra hate against the US in the rest of the middle east will generate more terrorism in the long run.
And yet there is already a large level of hate against Americans.
It comes to a point where you will be hated for doing what is right.
And thankfully at this point in the war those who hate us are diminishing because they see the freedom their brothers are being granted, and now understand what this was for (until now they had the Iraqi propoganda minister telling them lies. Now they are watching the truth before their very eyes).
Which brings another point. Now that these other arbian countries with dictatorships see that the Iraqi's have freedom, will that not give them renewed courage to fight against their oppressors?
As for if I trust George Bush, yes I do.
He is a Christian man (saved by grace through faith alone!) and to date I have not recorded a lie he has set forth.
Now on the other hand I believe our last president stood before a federal court and told the American people, "No I did not have sex with Monica Lewinski." Which is the bigger liar?
-Dr. Jonathan Morgan
Today at 05:03 PM Mother Vashti said this in Post #40
Hi Magnum,
The pace at which events are occuring are very questionable. There are several separate controversies that have occured in American politics contiguously:
Today at 07:01 PM jseek21 said this in Post #44
Wow! And stereotypically, right wing radicals are the only conspiracy theorists.
Sometimes I wonder if people many times think there is much more to our world than there really is.
Yesterday at 08:52 PM jseek21 said this in Post #33
Did we give Saddam Hussein weapons of mass destruction? Yes, we did. We did that because it was the right thing to do then. He was our ally, he was a good guy. He was helping us against Iran. So we supported him.
He was our ally, he was a good guy.
There are good lefties and bad lefties. I call them as I see them.
Let us not be prideful about the left being proved wrong (or anyone being proved wrong) but let us remember these things that have happened and think twice when we hear the next piece of liberal propoganda.
Yesterday at 10:11 PM jseek21 said this in Post #48
The US is a rogue superpower when a Republican sends American troops to war... But when Clinton sent troops to Haiti, Albania, Iraq, Mogadishu he's a hero. I see how it goes. Good game, let's play again!
Today at 12:42 AM Doctrine1st said this in Post #49
"As long as this mindset exists, if our leaders do wrong, then in support, it means that *we* are wrong, and they are defended by their supporters no matter what, because after all no one whats to be wrong."
Today at 09:04 AM jseek21 said this in Post #52
And my comparason of Britain was a viable one. To us, during the revolution, Britain were savages who had oppressed us for years. And yet things changed. I have nothing against Britain, in fact I have a British flag hanging in my house.
-Dr. Jonathan Morgan
[]11th April 2003 at 01:01 AM jseek21 said this in Post #44
Wow! And stereotypically, right wing radicals are the only conspiracy theorists.
Sometimes I wonder if people many times think there is much more to our world than there really is. [/B]
Hi Magnum,[]11th April 2003 at 02:55 AM 357magnum said this in Post #47
It was so bad that I thought it was a joke at first. Then, I realized she tried to tune her TV in the Outer Limits. For the young folks, the happy meal went AWOL. [/B]
[]11th April 2003 at 02:43 AM 357magnum said this in Post #46
OH!, I see, the Bush Conspiracy.
Bush somehow rigged the 2000 election. He hired the folks in Florida to hang those poor chads, and the chads were innocent.
Let's see, he hired the terrorists to crash into the World Trade Center to get the public's mind off of a recession that was caused and started by Clinton.
NAW!, I can't seem to get past here. I can't stretch it any further. This one won't fly: it won't even get off the ground.
You need to spread this one quickly before all the facts are in. It will sound worse as the days and weeks roll on. UM?, I wonder if there were any mighty warriors among the children of God in the Bible.
The US is a rogue superpower when a Republican sends American troops to war... But when Clinton sent troops to Haiti, Albania, Iraq, Mogadishu he's a hero. I see how it goes. Good game, let's play again!
[/B]
Yesterday at 10:08 PM Mother Vashti said this in Post #54
I am NOT a right-wing radical. Nor am I liberal. I am a plain Christian woman who stands five-foot seven.
..Besides, I have a hunch that the democratic party killed Senator Wellstone. During his eulogy at University of Minnesota, the speaker said something very inappropriate: "Let's continue Paul's [Wellstone's] vision and vote for [the democratic candidate for Minnesota]." Furthermore, the story swept the nation and sympathy for the democrats ensued.
The party, I think, clearly knew that the tide of public opinion was in the republican favor, and they assassinated their own Goliath in some twisted sort of "he-who-lays-down-his-life-for-his-friends" greater cause. The sympathy was not enough, but it made for one dramatic race for congressional seats.
Yesterday at 10:13 PM Mother Vashti said this in Post #55
Hi Magnum,
Goodness, do you kiss the cross with that mouth?
Resorting to ad hominem remarks reduces your credibility and argues my points further.
Yesterday at 10:38 PM Mother Vashti said this in Post #56
Lastly, I don't understand what you mean by "hang those poor chads". [/B]
Yesterday at 09:38 PM Mother Vashti said this in Post #56
I can see partisan politics is a very emotional topic for you. In the interest of your own credibility, I would suggest you figure out a more intelligent reply to those who disagree with you. Your rolling eyes are not particularly persuasive.
First of all, the U.S. is a rogue superpower in this situation for two reasons:
1) War was declared on the nation of Iraq. War was not declared on Haiti, Albania, Iraq, or Somalia in your examples. Our troops were on peace-keeping missions, not a war effort.
2) The United States declared this war without the consent of the United Nations. It was declared without its consent, because the US would not have received its consent. This event has rendered the real authority of the United Nations non-existent.
I would have agreed with you that "democrats tend to reap where republicans sow", but you are forgetting that Clinton served two presidential terms, and we were able to see the full scope of his policies during his presidencies, not Bush's. From 1992 - 1996, the United States considered itself "in recovery" from the Gulf War. Welfare and healthcare were hot issues, because rumors were circulating that national benefits in these areas would be cut. Clinton slaughtered the American welfare system and enhanced healthcare. This method -- kill one wolf instead of maiming them both -- did, admittedly, lead to an economy boost.
My point is, I don't understand what you mean by "a recession that Clinton started". The economy during that era was excellent.
Lastly, I don't understand what you mean by "hang those poor chads".