You Democrats...

[kfson]

what is your idea of the perfect U.S. government/society?

[MightyB]

Star Trek! (not a Dem or Repub, but I couldn't resist contributing to this thread).

[kfson]

Star Trek! (not a Dem or Repub, but I couldn't resist contributing to this thread).

Are you saying democrats and republicans are not fully developed?

"The Prime Directive dictates that there can be no interference with the internal development of pre-warp civilizations, consistent with the historical real world concept of Westphalian sovereignty. It has special implications, however, for civilizations that have not yet developed the technology for interstellar spaceflight ("pre-warp"), since no primitive culture can be given or exposed to any information regarding advanced technology or the existence of extraplanetary civilizations, lest this exposure alter the natural development of the civilization."

[1bad65]

what is your idea of the perfect U.S. government/society?

Cuba is a great example.

They used to have the USSR to admire, but somehow that perfect system of government collapsed upon itself. Just like Ronald Reagan said it would. :D

But Kfson, it is a great question. I'll bet you won't get many answers from them though.

[SanHeChuan]

Meh, I'm not here to proselytize, I just want to debate people. I'll even play devil advocate if no one disagrees with me.

Why don’t you tell us how it should be, and I can tell you why you're wrong. :D

[MightyB]

The elimination of the electoral college so that every vote counts.

A movement to separate business and state just as active as the movement that separates church and state.

A TMZ like expose TV show that follows politicians so that everyone knows when they're acting like sleaze balls.

[MasterKiller]

You won't get many answers because most Democrats, contrary to Fox News, think the one we have works pretty well. Eliminate the lobbyists influence in government, reduce corporate influence in government, provide equal funding to alternative parties, and quit spending billions on Neo-Con idealism and redirect that money back into our schools and social institutions to provide for own citizens.

[Hardwork108]

A TMZ like expose TV show that follows politicians so that everyone knows when they're acting like sleaze balls.

Here is an earlier exposé of what goes on in a place called Bohemian Grove where high level politicians and other elite members of society go to "rest":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_PAqT2JZOw

[dimethylsea]

what is your idea of the perfect U.S. government/society?

I would happily settle for
1.) Complete revocation of corporate personhood.
2.) A complete end to a standing military and offensive wars.
3.) Abolition of the Federal Reserve (it makes wars too easy)
4.) A reworking of the prison laws, so that restitution for non-lethal crimes against victims was the goal, the death penalty for all DNA-substantiated convictions of heinous murders or multiple murders and immediate release of all convicted persons who had were convicted of victimeless crimes.

Obviously this isn't going to happen so I vote Democrat cause they are not *quite* as bad as the GOP on wars and incarceration as a national past-time.

[David Jamieson]

what is your idea of the perfect U.S. government/society?

I's just north of you. It's called Canada. :-)

oh, + Star Trek.

that would be perfection!

[MightyB]

I's just north of you. It's called Canada. :-)

oh, + Star Trek.

that would be perfection!

There's a small group of my friends and I in the TV arts and animation biz that are seriously considering immigrating to Canada in the next couple of years. We're big fans of public health and the subsidies given to film and animation artists. So, maybe soon I'll be flying the Canadian flag, mispronouncing "out", and calling everyone hosers... A.

[MasterKiller]

There's a small group of my friends and I in the TV arts and animation biz that are seriously considering immigrating to Canada in the next couple of years. We're big fans of public health and the subsidies given to film and animation artists. So, maybe soon I'll be flying the Canadian flag, mispronouncing "out", and calling everyone hosers... A.

Better check those immigration laws! Canada's are pretty strict. You can't just up and move.

[mawali]

Because the health of a nation has value, I would rather support a public option as opposed to sending troops to a foreign land and have them stay there for the next 100 years! I want to spend my tax dollars in US and not over by there!

[dimethylsea]

Because the health of a nation has value, I would rather support a public option as opposed to sending troops to a foreign land and have them stay there for the next 100 years! I want to spend my tax dollars in US and not over by there!

Dang right. This is why I stand with the Democrats. The only honest Republican in my view is Ron Paul. He's the one who preaches fiscal responsibility AND then votes accordingly.

He's a man of principle. The GOP in general has NONE. Fiscal responsibility? Yes we support it and let's start two wars without paying for them via deficit spending.

I got no respect for them. At least the Demos say "we are doing what feels most compassionate" and I can say "yeah.. you are voting your principles, such as they are".

To my way of thinking the Democrats are often honest, the few Libertarians are generally quite honest, the Republicans are just corporate shills and warmongers.

Since I have the practical choice of Demo or GOP.. I go with the one who will spend (possibly waste) the money largely at home. Here it might do some good. Killing lots of brown people overseas goes beyond waste.. it's just revolting.

[1bad65]

He's a man of principle. The GOP in general has NONE. Fiscal responsibility? Yes we support it and let's start two wars without paying for them via deficit spending.

But yet when Democrat Obama continues the two wars, and then adds 'free' healthcare to 30+ million people via deficit spending, this is fiscal responsibility?


I got no respect for them. At least the Demos say "we are doing what feels most compassionate" and I can say "yeah.. you are voting your principles, such as they are".

So when Democrats had to be bribed to vote for healthcare, this is "voting your principles"?


To my way of thinking the Democrats are often honest, the few Libertarians are generally quite honest, the Republicans are just corporate shills and warmongers.

Didn't we just send another Democrat, William Jefferson, to prison for bribery, etc? When is the last time a Republican went to prison for bribery?

[dimethylsea]

But yet when Democrat Obama continues the two wars, and then adds 'free' healthcare to 30+ million people via deficit spending, this is fiscal responsibility?


The Demos have always said fiscal responsibility is good, but it is not their highest priority.
And they also have a tendency to state compromise and centrist/gradualist solutions have merit.
I.e. they don't explicitly take the hard line.




So when Democrats had to be bribed to vote for healthcare, this is "voting your principles"?

Again.. Democrats do have to try and get re-elected. They aren't claiming ideological purity but rather a "big tent".



Didn't we just send another Democrat, William Jefferson, to prison for bribery, etc? When is the last time a Republican went to prison for bribery?

Well they are always getting in trouble for bimbo explosions (Mark Sanderford, multiple gay GOPers getting popped etc.). So by your favorite "y'all do it to" I'd say there is plenty of crap to go around.

Again.. I'm not voting Demo because they are perfect.. I'm voting Demo because the GOP is worse. Lesser of the evils.

Fewer dead brown people and such.

[Drake]

Who is continuing the war? Iraq is pretty much over, and Afghanistan may see an advanced withdrawl.

[1bad65]

Well they are always getting in trouble for bimbo explosions (Mark Sanderford, multiple gay GOPers getting popped etc.). So by your favorite "y'all do it to" I'd say there is plenty of crap to go around.

Apples to oranges. Bribery is a felony, while adultery and ****sexuality are not crimes.


Fewer dead brown people and such.

Why did you have to insert that certain word? :rolleyes:

[dimethylsea]

Who is continuing the war? Iraq is pretty much over, and Afghanistan may see an advanced withdrawl.


Who started it?

The GOP. That is something I understand really clearly.. I may very well emigrate somewhere else in the next 10 years.. but I will keep US citizenship, and voter registration.. because I need to vote against the GOP.

For Iraq, for Afghanistan.. the GOP will always get a down-vote. Always. I will never again make the mistake of thinking they are the lesser of the evils.

[Drake]

9/11 started Afghanistan, which is, btw, a NATO operation. Crappy intel work by the CIA and a bad idea started Iraq.

[dimethylsea]

9/11 started Afghanistan, which is, btw, a NATO operation. Crappy intel work by the CIA and a bad idea started Iraq.

Sorry.. according to the GOP 9/11 started the war in Iraq also. Cause of the ties to Al-Quaeda and the WMDs.

9/11 was the pretext the GOP used to start two wars and rape American freedom. They must never be forgiven for it and we must never forget.

Better to have avowed socialists in power than the warhawks. Better us Red, that all those people Dead.

[1bad65]

Blame the GOP all you want. But the truth is that Obama's own Secretary of State and Vice President supported the wars.

Hussein is "a long term threat and a short term threat to our national security" -Joe Biden

"I think Saddam either has to be separated from his weapons or taken out of power." -Joe Biden

Biden is/was also against a pullout: "We can call it quits and withdraw from Iraq (but) I think that would be a gigantic mistake, or we can set a deadline for pulling out, which I fear will only encourage our enemies to wait us out--equally a mistake." -Joe Biden

[1bad65]

Better to have avowed socialists in power than the warhawks. Better us Red, that all those people Dead.

Are you insane?!?!

Look at how many murders socialism is responsible for:

Stalin killed between 4 and 10 million people, not including the famine victims. The famine killed at least another 10 million people.

Mao killed between 50 and 70 million people.

Pol Pot killed between 1.7 to 2.5 million people, approximately 21% of the Cambodian population.

http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/WCR-German_Soviet.pdf
http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/WCR-Scale_Repression.pdf
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Mao
http://hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?1c1d76bb-290c-447b-82dd-e295ff0d3d59
Modern China: The Fall and Rise of a Great Power, 1850 to the Present. Fenby, Jonathan p 351
http://www.yale.edu/cgp/

That's at least 65 million murders! :eek:

Now lets see how many 'brown' people you claim the GOP killed in Iraq. :rolleyes:

[kfson]

Are you insane?!?!

Look at how many murders socialism is responsible for:

Stalin killed between 4 and 10 million people, not including the famine victims. The famine killed at least another 10 million people.

Mao killed between 50 and 70 million people.

Pol Pot killed between 1.7 to 2.5 million people, approximately 21% of the Cambodian population.

http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/WCR-German_Soviet.pdf
http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/WCR-Scale_Repression.pdf
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Mao
http://hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?1c1d76bb-290c-447b-82dd-e295ff0d3d59
Modern China: The Fall and Rise of a Great Power, 1850 to the Present. Fenby, Jonathan p 351
http://www.yale.edu/cgp/

That's at least 65 million murders! :eek:

Now lets see how many 'brown' people you claim the GOP killed in Iraq. :rolleyes:


I was hoping for a comment on that statement.

Should we concentrate only on suffering and make sure it's spread around equally?

[1bad65]

I was hoping for a comment on that statement.

Should we concentrate only on suffering and make sure it's spread around equally?

Well, his statement was the epitome of ignorance. Communism/socialism actually has murdered alot more human beings than even the Nazis did.

Socialism does spread the misery around equally. Well, except for the leaders. While the people starve and are on milk rations, Castro has been on the Forbes Richest List.

[dimethylsea]

Are you insane?!?!

Look at how many murders socialism is responsible for:
:

Conflating socialist democracy with totalitarian communism? Effing pathetic.

My vote speaks for me. Straight line-- anybody but the GOP. Never again. Never again.


And BTW there is a world of difference between Stalin and Mao and our antics.

Neither Stalin nor Mao came to power in free democratic elections. Additionally the majority of the people they killed were citizens.

We've got democratically-elected socialist governments all over Europe.. they don't seem to be leaving huge body counts all over the landscape.

Come election time.. it's "anyone but a Republican" for me.

[Matt Stone]

Blame the GOP all you want. But the truth is that Obama's own Secretary of State and Vice President supported the wars.

But they didn't start them.


Hussein is "a long term threat and a short term threat to our national security" -Joe Biden

"I think Saddam either has to be separated from his weapons or taken out of power." -Joe Biden

At the time, the bad intel was all for Saddam being involved. We know better now.


Biden is/was also against a pullout: "We can call it quits and withdraw from Iraq (but) I think that would be a gigantic mistake, or we can set a deadline for pulling out, which I fear will only encourage our enemies to wait us out--equally a mistake." -Joe Biden

You sound like you know it all... How many deployments have you been on in Iraq? I've just returned from my second tour there. Dems want out because they know we don't need to be there. Pubs want us to stay because of the money to be made. Biden's concern is not because he wants to colonize (like the Pubs do) but because at the time he made those statements, Iraq wasn't ready to protect itself yet. With all the non-serving whiners *****ing about pulling out, all while not being even remotely aware of the real situation, he made a statement regarding the propensity of the enemy to move into the vacuum we'd create by withdrawing too soon.

The fact that you have a Coulter quote in your sig block tells me a lengthy conversation with you about the truth behind both parties' flaws is pointless. Neither party is honest, neither party is pursuing ideals solely for idealism's sake. They both have agendas, and neither agenda is necessarily in the best interest of the Nation.

But believe the crap they feed you on Faux News. They're telling you 100% truthful, unbiased news, fer shure...

[Lucas]

Neither party is honest, neither party is pursuing ideals solely for idealism's sake. They both have agendas, and neither agenda is necessarily in the best interest of the Nation.



qft
4567890

[1bad65]

But believe the crap they feed you on Faux News. They're telling you 100% truthful, unbiased news, fer shure...

At least they don't have guys like Dan Rather saying anonymous faxes from Kinko's are proof Bush lied.

Or getting sued for millions like NBC did when they faked crash tests on GM pickups.

[1bad65]

You sound like you know it all... How many deployments have you been on in Iraq?

I've been on as many deployments as Biden and Obama put together. ;)

Don't try and play that card.

[1bad65]

But they didn't start them.

They voted to start them. Bush did not act unilaterally.


At the time, the bad intel was all for Saddam being involved. We know better now.

So what's Obama's excuse for still being there?

Since you an expert on Iraq, and I am not, I have a question for you. If Iraq was not involved in terrorism, why do we keep killing and capturing so many high-ranking Al-Quaida guys over there?

[SanHeChuan]

Since you an expert on Iraq, and I am not, I have a question for you. If Iraq was not involved in terrorism, why do we keep killing and capturing so many high-ranking Al-Quaida guys over there?

Because they come there looking for us, and to recruit.

Isn't that one of the maxiums of why we are there. Better to fight them in the middle east than in america.

[Drake]

But they didn't start them.



At the time, the bad intel was all for Saddam being involved. We know better now.



You sound like you know it all... How many deployments have you been on in Iraq? I've just returned from my second tour there. Dems want out because they know we don't need to be there. Pubs want us to stay because of the money to be made. Biden's concern is not because he wants to colonize (like the Pubs do) but because at the time he made those statements, Iraq wasn't ready to protect itself yet. With all the non-serving whiners *****ing about pulling out, all while not being even remotely aware of the real situation, he made a statement regarding the propensity of the enemy to move into the vacuum we'd create by withdrawing too soon.

The fact that you have a Coulter quote in your sig block tells me a lengthy conversation with you about the truth behind both parties' flaws is pointless. Neither party is honest, neither party is pursuing ideals solely for idealism's sake. They both have agendas, and neither agenda is necessarily in the best interest of the Nation.

But believe the crap they feed you on Faux News. They're telling you 100% truthful, unbiased news, fer shure...

Welcome back. I heard from my unit which recently redeployed that the mission is basically "Advise and Assist" now. A far cry from how it was in 2005.

[Drake]

They voted to start them. Bush did not act unilaterally.



So what's Obama's excuse for still being there?

Since you an expert on Iraq, and I am not, I have a question for you. If Iraq was not involved in terrorism, why do we keep killing and capturing so many high-ranking Al-Quaida guys over there?

He just got back from there, so he would be the best SME we have right now on this forum. Iraq wasn't involved in terrorism, and in fact, had ideological differences with Al Qaeda, as Saddam was more into self promotion and worship, where Al Qaeda felt that their lives were centered around Allah, and not a single person.

[Drake]

Because they come there looking for us, and to recruit.


There was, for a long time, a large influx of foreign fighters into Iraq. They weren't there before. we also enabled JAM to raise all sorts of holy hell by killing the guy who held their leash.

[Matt Stone]

Don't try and play that card.

And all the posts by Drake illustrate why our deployment experience trumps your Fox News viewing by a long shot.

You just don't know, but you keep talking anyway...

Last time I checked, it was Obama that set the deadlines to force the Iraqis into taking responsibility for their own security, getting US troops out before Obama will have been in office for 2 years... Bush & Co. wanted to prolong our presence for the next century, if I recall correctly. Then Cheney wanted to try and criticize Obama for "not doing what it takes" to end the war!!! The same war that Bush & Cheney sat on for nearly 8 years, doing nothing at their level to bring and end to things...

So, consider the card played and the hand won.

[mawali]

Since you an expert on Iraq, and I am not, I have a question for you. If Iraq was not involved in terrorism, why do we keep killing and capturing so many high-ranking Al-Quaida guys over there?

I am not an expert but when I looked at 9/11 there were no Iraqis involved! They were Saudi. The Bush/Cheney cabal was looking to invade Iraq 2-3 years before the actual invasion so the military industrial complex could take shape as KBR, Halliburton, etc. i.e. what we know now as the private contractor organizational managemental complex.
Iraq allowed for the training of foreign fighters to come together and launch a coordinated training environment to test and watch US strategy.

[Drake]

I am not an expert but when I looked at 9/11 there were no Iraqis involved! They were Saudi. The Bush/Cheney cabal was looking to invade Iraq 2-3 years before the actual invasion so the military industrial complex could take shape as KBR, Halliburton, etc. i.e. what we know now as the private contractor organizational managemental complex.
Iraq allowed for the training of foreign fighters to come together and launch a coordinated training environment to test and watch US strategy.

That's misleading. We've had plans to invade Iraq since Desert Storm, and many say we should've simply invaded right after DS, as we didn't really solve the problem after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.

[1bad65]

You just don't know, but you keep talking anyway...

I know quite a bit actually. I know that since 9/11 and the actions we took, no more successful Al Quada attacks on our soil took place. And I know it was BOTH political Parties that voted to go into Iraq.

While I'm no 'on the ground' expert, and you may be, you cannot place this war on Bush's shoulders alone.

[Drake]

I know quite a bit actually. I know that since 9/11 and the actions we took, no more successful Al Quada attacks on our soil took place. And I know it was BOTH political Parties that voted to go into Iraq.

While I'm no 'on the ground' expert, and you may be, you cannot place this war on Bush's shoulders alone.

The mission in Iraq has absolutely no relevance to the increased yet foiled terror attacks on the US. That doesn't even begin to make sense. I'd attribute our security here more to alert and aware citizens than I would our operations against JAM.

[SanHeChuan]

While I'm no 'on the ground' expert, and you may be, you cannot place this war on Bush's shoulders alone.

Nobody is saying that. Nobody but Jane is saying that. :D

(nevermind this post I just wanted to use that line.) ;)

[1bad65]

The mission in Iraq has absolutely no relevance to the increased yet foiled terror attacks on the US. That doesn't even begin to make sense. I'd attribute our security here more to alert and aware citizens than I would our operations against JAM.

You have to admit killing and capturing these high-ranking Al-Quaida guys are maing the country safer. While they may not have been there before, they are now and our trained military is doing their job. I'd rather our military, the best in the world, are the ones fighting these animals rather than a bunch of unarmed civilians.

[1bad65]

Nobody is saying that. Nobody but Jane is saying that. :D

You must have missed these posts.


9/11 was the pretext the GOP used to start two wars and rape American freedom. They must never be forgiven for it and we must never forget.


Who started it?

The GOP. That is something I understand really clearly.

[Drake]

You have to admit killing and capturing these high-ranking Al-Quaida guys are maing the country safer. While they may not have been there before, they are now and our trained military is doing their job. I'd rather our military, the best in the world, are the ones fighting these animals rather than a bunch of unarmed civilians.

Actually, no it hasn't. There is no shortage of qualified and able replacements for those leaders we kill/capture. I'd say that's likely why fmr Pres Bush changed the mission from capturing Bin Laden, relaizing that capturing/killing leaders is not an effective COIN strategy. We refer to the organization as a hydra, because you cut off one head, and seven more pop up to replace it.

You need to study COIN, because you are falling for the same fallacy that caused us problems early on. You CANNOT kill/capture your way to victory here, because this isn't a conventional battlefield.

[1bad65]

Thanks Drake.

I do still say that the fact Al-Quaida has not launched a successful attack on our soil since 9/11, does say we are doing some stuff right.

[SanHeChuan]

You must have missed these posts.

Well then that would make dimethylsea, Jane then wouldn't it. :p

[1bad65]

Well then that would make dimethylsea, Jane then wouldn't it. :p

Smarty pants. ;)