🚀 go-pugleaf

"Dave Thompson" <dav13795@wdmdx1.com> wrote in message
news:uk6lqai7ni02c8@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "gregorio cortez" <sheriffkiller@vivalaraza.net> wrote in message
> news:RcI09.318155$iX5.15927698@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> > It would have been a more accurate title for Ms. Knight's diatribe...
>
>
> It would be even more accurate to call your baseless opposition
> unsubstantial and cowardly.
>
> Not a liberal myself but she does have some points to discuss. Care to get
> specific?
>

I dunno Dave... It seemed pretty stupid to me as well.  Let's go down this
little nugget, point by point:


   Call Me Liberal

   by Rebecca Knight


   I believe that George W. Bush re-invented himself and his Texas record
   in order to gain the presidency.

>> OK, this may or may not be the case (Personally, I think it's an
>>exaggeration of some instances where dumbuya lied), but what does it
>>have to do with being a liberal?

   I believe that the United States Supreme Court selected our president
   in 2000 through partisan prejudices and personal interests. They
   stated that their decision had no precedent and could not be used as a
   precedent in the future.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case,
>> but what does it have to do with being a liberal?

   I believe that George W. Bush meant what he said about wishing he were
   a dictator and Congress makes it easier for him to behave like one.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case,
>> but what does it have to do with being a liberal?  Surely people of all
>> political stripes can again that dumbuya's mouth gets him in trouble.

   I believe that the Bush administration is responsible for failing to
   protect American citizens by connecting the dots of intelligence
   information and warnings given about impending terrorist attacks on
   U.S. soil. Why else would Bush wait eight months to acknowledge that
   he had been given a briefing on the possibility?

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal? Personally, I think this is bullshit. There were lapses
made
>> by several parties, but how the hell do you prevent an act of terrorism
as
>> brilliant as 9/11? Before you drooling idiots get started with your
diatribes
>> about patriotism and mindless "USA! USA!" chants, I call the strike
>> brilliant because it was.  Note I do not call it good, justified, etc.

   I believe that Congress is complicit in knee-jerk reactions to the
   attacks of 9/11 that have given too much power and authority to the
   president and the justice department. The Patriot Act is a threat to
   our civil liberties. The Joint Resolution enacted by Congress on Sept.
   15, 2001 allows Bush to determine which nations, organizations, or
   individuals are connected to the 9/11 attacks and also determine what
   is the necessary force to use against them.

>> OK... Here we have a point that could be construed as having something to
do with "liberalism".
>> I'll give her this one

   I believe that while a new cabinet level department for homeland
   security may be necessary, it is much more critical to uncover and
   correct shortcomings of the CIA, the FBI, and the NSA.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that the proposed TIPS program is fascist and insane. There
   are too many wacko right-wingers who would turn in dissenting
   Americans as traitors. There is no comparison to this program and
   others like community watches. TIPS would have Americans inform on
   other Americans based upon what an individual interprets as the
   meaning of a book read or a word spoken.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal? Here she starts to show her true colors though.

   I believe that the United States should be a leader for peace and not
   war. When a president speechifies about an "axis of evil" without
   documented evidence of specific evils, it is he who is responsible for
   heightening the dangers of violence against America.

>> Ok, the first sentence is just a bit naive.  As the biggest kid on the
block, we
>> will inevitably need to be "a leader for war" at certain points.  Sad?
Yes. True? Yes.
>> However, I will grant her the second sentence.  I believe that sort of
commentary shows the
>> depth of dumbuya's under qualification for the job he somehow managed to
get.

   I believe that the United States already spends enough money on
   defense, if managed efficiently. Our defense budget is already larger
   than all other nations throughout the world combined.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal? It's extremely easy to make this sort of statement when
you have
>> the excellent military analysis skills that come from being " native
Tennessean,
>> who grew up in Nashville, and  currently resides in a small town near
Nashville".

   I believe that the missile defense system is a boondoggle that will
   never work and will waste money better spent on more worthwhile
   projects. Oh, but it will accomplish the goal of enriching the defense
   industry.

>> See above

   I believe that diplomacy, a coherent foreign policy, and efficient
   intelligence agencies combined with military strength is the right
   path to dealing with terrorists. A show of military strength alone
   makes us bullies.

>> See above.

   I believe that the military actions taken against the Taliban and Al
   Qaeda resulted in unnecessary civilian death and destruction. The
   stated mission to get bin Laden was not accomplished.

>> See above.  Not only is she simply voicing opinions that have nothing to
do with
>> "liberalism", she is also making statement she cannot prove based on
facts she does not have.

   I believe it highly suspicious that most of the areas the Bush
   administration believes harbor terrorists also control vast oil
   supplies.

>> Like Afghanistan? Or North Korea?  Really, I know what she is attempting
to say,
>> but I don't think she does.  It's more about the opportunity to transport
oil to free
>> shipping lanes than it is about oil itself.
>> Again, what does it have to do with  being a liberal?

   I believe that former weapons inspectors, such as Scott Ritter, who
   spent seven years in Iraq, have the best insight into the true danger
   posed by Saddam Hussein and Iraq. Mr. Ritter recently stated this:
   "The Bush administration has provided the American public with little
   more than rhetorically laced speculation. There has been nothing in
   the way of substantive fact presented that makes the case that Iraq
   possesses these weapons or has links to international terror, that
   Iraq poses a threat to the United States of America worthy of war."

>> I believe she may be quoting out of context, as the fact that Iraq has
had weapons
>> of mass destruction is well established.  Just ask the Kurds.  And since
when has Scott Ritter been
>> an authority on what the U.S. deems worthy of war?  He does bring up a
good point though.
>> "The Bush administration has provided the American public with little
more than rhetorically laced speculation"
>> Again, what does it have to do with  being a liberal?

   I believe that going to war against Iraq would be a gigantic mistake
   and increase the instability of the entire Middle East region.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal? It's extremely easy to make this sort of statement when
you have
>> the excellent military analysis skills that come from being " native
Tennessean,
>> who grew up in Nashville, and  currently resides in a small town near
Nashville".


   I believe that the United States should lead by example in treatment
   of prisoners of war. Our standards should be based on fair and humane
   practices.

>> Which we do, and again, what does it have to do with  being a liberal?

   I believe that the father of the sitting president should not be
   connected in any way with corporate conglomerates that profit from
   war.

>> As do I, but again, what does it have to do with  being a liberal?

   I believe that Bush and Cheney allow energy companies too much power
   in determining U.S. policies and this will be proven through the
   lawsuits against Cheney.


>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that Bush and Cheney practiced unethical, possibly illegal,
   chicanery while involved in the private business world.


>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that there is more than enough information available about
   Bush administration corruption to warrant a detailed investigation
   leading to possible impeachment.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that were the current president a Democrat and circumstances
   involving corruption were identical to Bush's, the Republicans would
   already have just such an investigation under way.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that the Democratic Party is being far too lenient in
   questioning actions by the Bush administration. However, I also
   believe that there is enough trouble for the Republicans on the
   horizon to shift control of Congress to the Democrats this fall.
   Perhaps it is politically expedient to focus on that goal right now
   and leave the investigating until after the elections.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?  May have something to do with being a Democrat, but the
to are not always the same thing.

   I believe that both major political parties are too closely associated
   to corporate conglomerates that lobby to influence legislation.


>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that corporate corruption is rampant and is in large part
   due to the relaxing of government oversight as promoted by the
   Republican Party, which overrode the Clinton veto of a
   securities-industry bill that made it more difficult for investors to
   sue corporations, stopped Clinton's Treasury secretary from cracking
   down on offshore accounts, and stopped Clinton's Securities and
   Exchange Commissioner from barring accounting firms from working as
   both accountant and consultant.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal? Sounds like pining for Clinton to me (Though I couldn't
blame her for that.  I miss the guy too)

   I believe that corporate corruption is directly responsible for the
   decline in the stock market and Bush's attempts to encourage stability
   in the market has caused exactly the opposite due to his own alleged
   corruption with Harken Energy.

>> Really? Prove it.  And again, this may or may not be the case, but what
does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that the only way to have elected officials be accountable
   to their constituents and not the corporations, is to totally overhaul
   campaign financing. Public funding of campaigns may be the only
   solution.


>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that the expense of corporate welfare is far more
   detrimental to the U.S. budget than social welfare.

>> Eh, I guess this would have something to do with liberalism.... OK.

   I believe that corporate conglomerates do not need nor deserve more
   tax breaks. It is a fallacy that these tax breaks result in the
   creation of more jobs.

>> Eh, I guess this would have something to do with liberalism.... Though
her conclusion is
>> arguable

   I believe that "trickle down" economics has never and will never work.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that the Bush tax cut enacted last year was truly created
   through "fuzzy math" and merely a pay back to his rich buddies for
   supporting his campaign. It used up 43% of the surplus and helped
   return deficit spending and national debt.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that it is wrong to pile up national debt that our children
   and grandchildren will some day have to pay off.

>> Hell, she sounds conservative here.

   I believe that it is outrageous to deplete the Social Security trust
   fund.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that racism and sexism still exist in America and that we
   must teach our children more about cultural diversity and acceptance.

>> Eh, I guess this would have something to do with liberalism....

   I believe that the government has no right to tell a woman what she
   can or cannot do with her body. Reproductive choices are hers alone
   and should be based on her beliefs and faith.

>> Eh, I guess this would have something to do with liberalism....

   I believe that we should spend more on public education, not less. We
   should hire more teachers, invest in technology, and invest in
   modernized school buildings.

>> Eh, I guess this would have something to do with liberalism....

   I believe that vouchers for private schooling are simply welfare for
   the rich and will siphon funds from public schools.

>> Eh, I guess this would have something to do with liberalism....

   I believe that the minimum wage should be raised and executive pay
   should be lowered. Why is it that those who oppose raising the minimum
   wage have no problem with outrageously high executive compensation as
   if a corporation cannot afford to pay employees fairly, but the
   salaries of executives are necessary expenditures?

>> Eh, I guess this would have something to do with liberalism....

   I believe that all Americans should have access to affordable health
   care and that funding for medical research should be a priority.

>> Eh, I guess this would have something to do with liberalism....

   I believe that establishing a federal repository for nuclear waste is
   a disaster waiting to happen.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that rational environmental policies should be a priority,
   especially when for the benefit of public health.

>> As opposed to irrational ones?  Sorry, you gotta provide more detail than
that.

   I believe that corporations should be held financially responsible for
   correcting environmental problems they cause.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I believe that the United States is facing a leadership crisis of
   unparalleled proportion.

>> Again, this may or may not be the case, but what does it have to do with
>> being a liberal?

   I also believe that were the rightful man, Al Gore, sitting in the
   White House circumstances would be vastly different and for the
   better!

>> OK, that may be a liberal point of view... As stupid as it is.  There is
no way to know what would
>> have happened if Al Gore was president.

   And there you have it! Call me whatever you like -- a dreamer or just
   plain crazy -- but these are my beliefs and I stand behind them.

>> How about if I call her someone who simply wrapped her own opinions with
>> the label "liberal" in order to get others to read them, even though the
vast majority of them
>> were simply uneducated armchair critiques of the Bush administration and
other conjecture?