Re: OT-War history repeats itself

On May 21, 1:11 pm, "Herbert Cannon" <hcanno...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
----Intel contrary to the Iraqi war was shouted down and suppressed.

Oh pooh the Demos got shouted down and voted that way because they were
shouted down. Get real. That is a novel excuse.

----Shouted down within the Administration. You missed the point
again.

The Dems within the administration in congress were shouted down and
suppressed?

------No! Contrary intel reports were shouted down within in the Bush
administration, and the diseminated to congessional committees.

Dems in congress were within the admin - that has to be a first.



----Gee, it seems you're conservative heros don't think we're locked
in the struggle they tout, if they don't have the guts to try to
bring measures that would turn this thing in a true global war to
exterminate Muslims an d seize the oil. That's the "strategic" plan,
ain't it?

Speak for yourself. I am not interested in saving you from yourself. I will
simply wait until you wake up.

The rich are getting tax

*cuts*. In ww2 the top 10% had a 75% income tax rate.

Yes and it was not the right way to go either.

----Well of course it was. Even with that, the war was bankrupting the
country.

Really that most be why the US govt has collected more taxes this year
than
it ever has before in its history.

----There's more people now than ever before in it's history.

But according to you they are all poor and cant pay taxes..

---I'll make it simpler for you. There are more *rich* people than any
time in American history. Yuor buddy Reagan began the wholesale
transfer of money to the wealthy.




Actually the rate you are touting rose to 95%. Kennedy turned that
around.
Someone woke up and said gee we are really killing initiative here.
If you raise the rate back then you will be hitting small businesses most
of
which are sub chapter S corporations. You will be killing the very people
you do not want to.
But then I dont expect you to abandon your mantra that the rich are the
problem. Every political movement must have it scape goat. With Hitler it
was the Jews - with the Democrats it is the rich.

----Nice touch, equating Dems with Nazis.

Maybe it was a mistake. Maybe I should have equated to it Salin and his
wealthy Kulaks.



The hilarious thing is the
number of multi millionaires and billionaires that are democrats.
Kerry - billionaire, Kennedy - billionaire, Feinstien - 50 million,
Gore -
millions, Clinton - ?, Edwards - 30 million and on and on. Then there is
your leader Soros keeping his money offshore and tax free and calling for
higher taxes.

----Hmmm, all self made men with the exception of Kennedy, and Gore.
I have no problem with rich people that seek to support the less
fortunate.

Do you really all those rich democrats are going to tax themselves? If you
do you need some lessons in tax shelters. And of course there is your hero
Edwards, who loses an election and lands a $480,000 part time job as a
consultant to an investment firm that keeps its hedge fund in the Caymans as
tax shelter for its clients. Doesnt sound much like supporting anything but
himself to me. And what did he campaign on - let me guess - why it was
against the use of offshore tax shelters. Shades of your leader George
Soros.

----Are we going to play duelling villans and hypocrites here? You
will surely lose.


Tax and spend never did work and let me tell you why.
You see you raise my taxes where it is too punishing for me to invest my
venture capital then I merely put it into govt tax free bonds. To get to
that stream of income you would have to fight off every municipal, county
and state govt. The rich are here to stay no matter how much class
warfare
you try to generate.

----Sure, with people like you genuflecting to your lords and masters,
never questioning their motives, ect.
Positively un-american.

Tch like your master George Soros who had his billions in offshore tax
shelters while wanting to raise my taxes? Investment is never genuflecting -
you go with the market or you get punished by it.

----Oh, you want more than going with the market. You're on record
here as supporting the theory that the rich need pay no taxes at all.


---I believe during a time of war; ans this is a war for cultural
survival is it not?

Is it? You tell me.

-----This is what the Administration and it's supporters tells us.
Yet, the only sacrifice is made by volunteer troops.
No draft, we can have both guns and butter, no rationing, ect ect. Why
don't they tell the truth?

Which is?

-----The Iraq war was the seizure of the second largest oil reserves
on the planet. A hedge against oil's eventual loss. 9/11 dropped into
the neo-cons lap, making it easier to justify the war.


That the rich are best able to support such a war,> as the poor can't.
But they're not. No sacrifice at all from the top
10%, hell, they're making out like bandits.

They made out like bandits during WW II.

----While paying 75% income tax. Thanks for proving my point.

You missed mine. The rich are here to stay just as the poor are. No matter
what is done we will always have the nasty old rich and the poor old poor.

----So, let's get the rich to fund the war at the same rate as WW2.
The stakes are the same, ain't they?


> ----Come now. I have never read anything by you respecting *any*
Dem.

"We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry
every night. Well, that was probably true. They were all on a diet."
Ronald Reagan, TV speech, October 27, 1964

Really who told us that ?Who was able to count with such efficiency and
what
did they throw into the counting pot?. Sounds like political propaganda
to
me.

---Ah, anything that diminishes your heros is "propaganda".

Anything that diminshes my heros with you is not propaganda but the
"gospel."

-----OK, you're free to post anything that shows these cites are lies.



"Reagan's only contribution [to the subject of the MX missile]
throughout the entire hour and a half was to interrupt somewhere at
midpoint to tell us he'd watched a movie the night before, and he
gave
us the plot from WarGames, the movie. That was his only
contribution."
Lee Hamilton (Representative from Indiana) interviewed by Haynes
Johnson, Sleepwalking Through History: America in the Reagan Years

Oh really. Quote someone other than a politician please. Sorry I will
take
Stephen Ambrose's assesment over Lee Hamiltion's any day.

---So, Lee Hamilton deliberately lied. Typical Reaganite.

Yes the Reaganites lied their way to stunning presidential victories.

----Stunning. A three way race with Carter hobbled by the hostage
crises.

But of
course when Republican's win it is a lie.

------Republicans win by lying.

I look forward to those truthful
Democrats buying votes with the dole.

----Let's hope so. Seems Republicans would rather see kids starve than
pay a dime to government to feed them.


-----I find it funny that the conservatives would like to put the
"amiable dunce" on Mt Rushmore.

Like I said two stunning Presidential victories over those brilliant
Democrats.

----Good, The Actor goes up, Clinton goes up. Two stunning victories
over the brilliant Republicans. The first one against an incumbent
fresh off a successful war. Yup, if that's your yardstick, Clinton
beats Reagan by a country mile.

The guy from Mass was
most un impressive. So was Clinton.

if the press had treated the Clinton affair as they did with JFKs
little trysts, Clinton would have gone down as a great one.

Nasty old right wing press. What was it old Chet said " Four more years of
bull***."

---------So, the left wing press didn't ignore Clinton's affair? Why
didn't they protect him if they're left wing?




JFK was a bona fide war hero. Clinton was a bona fide draft dodger.
----As was GW Bush.Daddy getting him a billet in a Champagne unit
where he didn't even show up half the time
makes him a draft dodger in my book .
Clinton's a self made man, GW and his ilk has everything handed to
them on a silver platter.
Give me the self made man over the silver spoon.

You were comparing Clinton to JFK. What happened? Did your ill fated
comparison fall apart?


----As I compared your conservative hero to JFK as well.

Let's
try to stay on track here. Yes I do prefer, " Ask not what your country
can
do for you. Ask what you can do for your country."

----Which the rich are studiously avoiding. Off shore tax shelters,
ect.

George Soros and Edwards seem to be studiously avoiding it like other rich
democrats. As for me, I already said dont expect me to save you from
yourself.

-----Shall we play duelling hypocrites? You'll surely lose.


Instead of " Gimme gimme
gimme." Your vote for the dole.

----Some people need a hand up.

Some people need the back of a hand.

You'd prefer starvation and homelessness so the fatcats can make even
more money.

Oh you mean those homeless that did not exist when Clinton was president?
You mean the ones the press made disappear when Clinton was President by not
reporting on them. and the homeless that magically re - appeared when Bush
won? :Let me tell you about the homeless. 1/3 are substance abusers, 1/3 are
mentally ill and will not stay on medication, and 1/3 pass through to a
better life. The mentally ill used to be institutionalized. A liberal
Supreme court decision in 1964 put them on the street. You cannot hold a
mentally ill person for more than 72 hours in a mental hospital. I know. I
had a boss with a shizophernic son. He had a terrible time getting one to
hold him.
If you look at the old institutions you will see there are large areas shut
down. That is where the 1/3 homeless that are mentally ill use to be. How do
I know. I watched it. There was no safety net ( ie: sheltered work shops).
However, that did not matter because you could not have forced them into a
safety net environment.
So you are trying to save 2/3 of the people from themselves. Sorry I dont
cry about them.

You're a willing footstool, aren't you?

Nope. I am the foot.

The repubs

spend millions with the special prosecutor, and millions from private
sources (Scaife and Coors)to bring Clinton down and the best they
could get was a little affair that was over until Linda Tripp
convinced Lewinsky to start it up again so she could trap him.

Bah if Clinton had half a brain, instead of committing perjury, he could
have simply said, " yes I did that." " Now what is your next question."
Half
the reporters would have believed him. The other half would have thought
he
was lying, as usual. He could have turned to Hilary and said, " If I had
not said that they would have hounded me to death over it. That is how
easy
that was. To think a Rhodes scholar could not figure that out. Tch. It
was
not the blow job that got him, it was the statement about " is."

----Which was technically correct.

Thanks for the laugh. That has to be the most desparate defense of a
pathetic statement that I ever heard.

----Don't have a clue about law, do ya?


As was the definition of "sex."

Imagine GW Bush in that situation, I know you think he's some kinda
saint and it could never happen, but there's no way he could have
defended
himself as well as Clinton. Imagine Reagan in the same situation.
No, your heros pale intellectually to Clinton, and you know it.

Your problem is old stupid George and old stupid Reagan were never in that
situation. Which makes them, as far as that situation is concerned, a hell
of a lot smarter than your hero Clinton. Are you so desparate about this you
have to create fictional uinverse.

-----Makes Clinton even more brilliant. Hounded by Republicans and
personal scandal, he *still* triumphs. Thaqt's what really irratates
you conservatives. Hell, if Clinton ran for Prez, he'd win, and you
know it!


We had a Gov down here who handles that sort of thing magnificently.
Indicted 10 times he finally went to federal prison. And they almost
missed
him on the 10th. He used that ploy numerous times. Clinton should have
taken
lessons from him.

----All those millions of dollars over eight years, and all you fucks
got was a sleazy little affair, I'd not be suprised
if Tripp was in communication with the Scaifes about it.
Repubs spent millions of the taxpayers money, and came up dry.

Naw they came up with a guy who hanged himself with perjury. Like I said he
should have taken lessons from the guy that was the Democrat's Gov down
here. He handled those situations with one hand tied behind his back.

Yet people like you begrudge a family fallen on hard times food and
shelter.
What tools you are.

Nope. I begurudge you trying to take my money and giving to the able bodied,
who are unwilling to work for food and shelter, so you can buy votes.
Believe me I have seen of those failed programs down here.
How much you try to lean on us tools without working for your compensation.



----Gosh, you don't read the paper? Oh, that's right, you don't.

No only three papers. Dont have time for more.

-----Why do you read them if you think they're liars and traitors at
worst, and irrelevant at best.

Same reasons I read news mags. For laughs and to see if how much they get
right and what slant they try to put over. It is really quite easy to do.
All you have to do is realize they are not spouting the gospel.

The Democrats got back in power by
recruiting blue dog democrats not raving liberals to run on their
tickets.

But that is not what took the election. It was Rahn Emmanuel
and the blue dogs. Go read about it.

----Don't need to read about it. I witnessed it. You can put any
conservative spin on it you want,
the people were sick of conservative politics as usual.

Conservative spin? Why gee it was pretty much reported that way in all the
news mags. Oh I know they got it wrong. It must be a widespread right wing
conspiracy. You actually ran wide eyed liberals.
But dont believe me go look at your own winners. Gosh Va Tech comes along
and congress is quiet about gun control. Cmon if you had wide eyed foaming
at the mouth liberal up there they would be foaming at the mouth. Even that
liberal rag Time Magazine commented on it.

----Nope, we could have applied a complete blockade on Japan and
starved them out.

Now there is a real humane move. Let's see you just got over 300,000
allied
pows killed and Japan would have starved her women and children to
feed
her
soldiers.

----The soldiers were already in rags.

Not to mention the enormous, cost, time, and effort.

----Wouldn't have taken long at all. Blockade, offer food and supplies
in return for surrender, the soldiers themselves would have staged a
coup and turned over the top generals.

Really. Funny after we dropped the first A bomb the ruling council of
Japan
voted three to three not to end the war.

----They thought we only had one.

Clairvoyant are you?



It took another to end it and the
emperor's intervention.

----They then thought after the second one, that we had more. We
didn't.

It would not have been too hard for us to get another. We had the technology

The emperor was a mere figurehead, he had no real power in Japan.

You are a nut case if you believe that. He was revered figurehead and
probably should have been indicted for complicity in the war. There have
been books written on it. I have one.



And you are going to blockade a total island country
raised on fanatical devotion and think they are going to wave a white
flag
right away. That is most foolish stupid thing I ever heard.
You are now totally wasting my time with liberal hand wringing. BYE.

-----I know. In your world, there's no such thing as a military coup.

There almost was a military coup. It was directed against the emperor in an
attempt not to have him broadcast a surrender to all the Japanese. But wait
a minute he was just a figure head. So why did the military try a coup?
Confuing for you.

All the Japanese were stupid, blind devotees.

Yeah in your make believe world places like Okinawa etc, with those stupid
blind devotees that fought to the death, did not exist either. How many of
those starving Japanese surrendered? Damn few.
If your strategy was so simple why assault those islands? Oh I know your
Marine Generals were not in charge and were shouted down by the Republicans
and conservatives.

All the Muslims are stupid, blind devotees.

Well I see you base that statement on your vast knowledge of the situation.
Which amounts to zero.Tch I even recommended a book to you that gives some
hope that is not the case. But not a hell of a lot. " Now They Call Me
Infidel." However, a lot of it might destroy your complacency too. After all
the writer did spend the first 30 years of her life living in Egypt so she
might have a somewhat better grasp of the situation than you. But then I
already told you I am not in the business of saving you from yourself
anymore. I am in the business of looking out for myself.

They need to be incinerated.
It's a war against civilization, but the rich need not contribute, in
funding or blood.

Well why should they contribute to something that you think is fiction. Gee
you see you need to convince the rich that this needs to be done so you can
tax them. After all the Clintonians never believed that Saddam had WMDs.
They were just lying all that time.

In fact, they should pay no taxes at all.

'
Now there is a program I can support.

More conservative claptrap.

" About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in
1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of
Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some
2,000 years prior:
' A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a
permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until
the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts
from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for
the candidates, who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with
the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal
policy which is always followed by a dictatorship.' "
No wonder you liberals want my guns so badly.
Or
"From bondage to spiritual faith
From spiritual faith to great courage
From courage to liberty
From liberty to abundance
From abundance to complacency
From complacency to apathy
From apathy to dependence
From dependence to back into bondage."
Tax and spend! The power to tax is the power to destroy.


.

Loading