[Limits To American Power]

I am an American so I am definitly qualified to speak out against the slanted media.

Here most of the "Main stream" media has a decidedly liberal view and go to any length to make sure the John Qs here have that same view.

It has been a long time here that we have seen the big info giants reporting the news. Now we are slamed with the "correspondents" that analize the news. Throw in thier interpretation and do it in a way that makes sure it is your interpretation.

We do have alternatives.

Like FOX, MSNBC, internet news and lets not forget boards like this.

There is a movement to clean up media here. Its just beggining and though I doubt it, Let us hope it takes on life and cans the liars.

[Iraq Connection - Libya Surrenders]

Like every French regime before this one will take a fall and when they do quess who they will call on for help.

The problem now with France is the fact that they have embedded thierselfs with the terror dogs on one side and the EU on the other.

One day they may have to choose and that will be a day Chirac will certainly wish himself dead.

[Which Should Guide Foreign Policy]

Both of you take a fantasy point of view to desribe what is going on.

And neo con is a pathetic term used by pathetic people who have no idea of what they are actually talking about.

It is, in this case, a non word such as homophobic.

Sounds good but means sqaut.

[Who Would You Vote For President]

How in the world can you say that Dean would make us safer than Bush?

Are you drunk?

No time in our history have we been safe when we did not pursue safety and peace through strength.

Dean is another con artist just like the Dems dom, Clinton.

He may be a little bit more moral but he is no more ethical.

And allowing terror to thrive when you have the power to stop it is certainly supporting it.

[Us 2004 Elections]

Nader is insignificant I think.

At least in the political arena.

The same goes for Clark by hisself. Coupled with Dean he would not be insignificant.

On the contrary he would be the blame for Dean losing.

But I do not see that happenning simply because Clark, I think, is a Clintonian.

Dean on the other hand is not.

Of course I will be surprised if Clinton does not pay him a visit some night when they have time for a "talk".

Cant diss the big man as Dean has.

And the dems made no mistake with the recount other than be desperate and pety.

The recount has been done in as much thorough a way as it could be several times now.

The dems want it recounted untill they win. Aint gonna happen. Ever. Get over it.

[Uno Hates The Jews]

Dear Debo,

I feel compelled here to say in all your posts I have read this is the only thing you posted something even close to be right.

All of my posts thus far have been actually left, but also correct.

As in any situation you must develope your view from the picture you do have.

Agree?

I must disagree.

As Mr. Hardner implied, the more complete the picture, the better the understanding. One must NOT 'develop' a view from but one picture. There are two cameras to consider. There is you and also 'the one who is not you'.

All of my posts thus far have been actually left, but also correct.

Not right ideologicaly, silly girl.

Right as in correct.

I must disagree.

As Mr. Hardner implied, the more complete the picture, the better the understanding. One must NOT 'develop' a view from but one picture. There are two cameras to consider. There is you and also 'the one who is not you'.

You must have stepped in a pile of dumb shit.

Of course what you are saying is correct but in no way applies to my post as my post was a reply to a post that was as vague as my reply.

Get it?

You can only form a view from the picture you have.

When someone says you should not form a view untill one has the whole picture.

How in the hell are you supposed to know when you have the whole picture?

The left doesn't want us to form a view untill we have all of the picture they intend for us to accept.

God, are you being thick on purpose or does this over shoot your vision?

[Uno Hates The Jews]

A lot of breezy and overconfident statements being made here.

I'm not convinced that any of you have the full picture, even if some of your complaints are valid.

As in any situation you must develope your view from the picture you do have.

Agree?

[9th Circuit At It Again]

What has happened to our court system down here really is not so much court related as political.

The liberals have found that they can circumvent the Constitution by "illegaly" passing laws that are then pushed untill accepted and intergraded into American life.

I believe they to be using this path to simply do away with the Constitution.

It simply stands in thier way and if they pass enough of these laws they will eventually be able to declare the use of the Constitution unconstitutional.

[Iraq Connection - Libya Surrenders]

All you say makes perfect sense and is probaly right.

I, though, have a problem with giving Gadhafi any kind of credit except that he is smart enough to stay one step ahead of the terror game.

I have tried to find an angle for him to be trying and have failed.

I guess it is possible that he is just scared.

[Democrats And 2004]

I disagree with you on the topic of France. They are one of our closest allies. In fact, we would not have for France we would not have won the revolution and had a country. 90% of the gunpowder we used was French. There were more French troops among our ranks when the Brittish surrendered than Colonists. The president of France was the first international leader to come to the US after 9/11 and offer there condolences. France has more than 500,000 invested in our economy.

None of my business, me being American and all, but things that happened that far in the past have no relevence to France/Canada today.

Chirac is above all a career politician and sides with whatever view will get him to power and keep him there.

If he saw no political or personel benifit to the France/Canada union it would desolve quick.

A relationship that hinges on keeping a worm happy is not a substance filled relationship.

France owed us, sort of, and it meant nothing to him.

You say you owe them, wonder what he thinks of that?

[Uno Hates The Jews]

Dear Derek,

The US doesn't need the UN.

Its just that simple. They slow down the progress of the nation.

While this may be factually true, it is also self-destructive. Human rights laws also slow down the progress of the US. Minimum wage laws, safety standards, and unions also slow down the US. ( I'll go on record as saying unions are a bad thing).

While this may be factually true, it is also self-destructive. Human rights laws also slow down the progress of the US. Minimum wage laws, safety standards, and unions also slow down the US.

I spend alot of time on this sight, most times I do not log in, just read posts.

I feel compelled here to say in all your posts I have read this is the only thing you posted something even close to be right.

And the funny thing is the problems you stated are the results of the unethical, immoral and moronic Libs we have down here.

Kind of like you up there.

NOW.

The less than desirable result of the US pulling completely out of the UN is the inevitable conniving of the EU.

They would definitly sieze the opportunity to take control and expand.

I fully believe this to be part of thier agenda.

If they do this the poorer countries will have no chance. The reason for thier establishment of the EU is totally financial. As the poorer countries are unable to meet the standards they have set:

http://europa.eu.int/pol/enlarg/overview_en.htm

They will inevitably be exposed to some serious political tom foolery.

Also,

KrustyKidd Posted on Dec 12 2003, 07:36 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thed US should leave the UN to do whatever it does best and start a real league of nations

Problem here is everytime the US tries something of this magnitude the other countries start trying to get what they can from us and it goes to crap.

BUT, I am totally in favor of the US pulling out of that anti-semetic, racist, money grubbish, single sighted UN.

[Iraq And Media Hysteria]

I do not care the reasons behind Libyas' sudden about face.

Mohmar tried to have a US president killed and put contracts on the lives of said presidents children.

No matter how nice he makes he knows he can never set foot out side Libya without getting a Patriot missle shoved up his ass.

But, I do suspect that he is smarter than some of the other Middle East head pricks and can read the winds of change a little better.

Remember, he is not a fanatical Allah fearing all hating leader.

Just a terrorist.

[Israel Defends Itself]

You just don't get it. There is no possibility of a negotiated settelment until the Palestinians commit themselves to reform. As it stands, they have no interest in living side by side with the Isrealis. They only wish to drive the Zionist infidels into the sea.

If everyone will search thier memories they may remember back in the 50's/60's or so that Israel had totally whipped the palestinians/terrorist and the palestinians were on thier way out of country. It was Israel that screwed up and allowed them to stay.

I bring this up only to point out that in no conflick, even one this sorted, can there be peace without one side or the other completely dominating the other through war.

The wall is wrong but neccessary.

Wrong because they should not feel like they need it.

Neccessary because of the reasons righturnonred stated.

[The Use Of Torture]

Sleep deprevation and just enough food to keep you alive, maybe playing the Jackson 5's greatest hits in the back ground is cruel but not torture.

Getting your fingers cut off one knucle at a time, having a block lodged between your ankles then smashing them with a hammer are all examples of torture.

The definition today of torture seems to be little more than uncomfortable.

I too think the US showed pictures of Saddam simply so no one could do the accusation game later.

But I'm sure our boys got a little satisfaction out of the humiliation angle and I for one do not blame them.

[Marriage & Family Under Attack.]

Riff,

Nobody is talking about removing rights from gays. They already have all the same rights as straights.

You first made an analogy with blacks, which is invalid.

You then made an analogy with smokers, which is valid. So let's look at that. Smokers still have the right to vote, the right to life and all that, and they still have the right to smoke in private places. But nobody is about to tell the world that smoking is a safe and equal choice.

This is the attitude we need to take towards homosexuality. It is dangerous, it shortens your lifespan, and like smoking it is a behaviour that it is possible to avoid. So if people want to do it in private, let them, but only after you have advised them of the risks. Like smokers. A smoker can't really complain if he dies of lung cancer, since every cigarette packet he ever bought told him he probably would. Similarly, a homosexual who was properly informed of the risks of his behaviour can't complain when he dies of AIDS, as he was informed that he probably would.

Homosexuality is a health risk. There's no need to outlaw it, but let's at least make sure it's an informed risk that homosexuals take.

No greater and more graciously fair a proposal can be made than this.

But I wonder should there be surgeon general warnings on condoms to this effect?

[Gideons Begone! Cal. Hospitals To Ban Scriptures?]

politically correct is an oxzy moron.

And religion having less effect on our every day lives is probaly why there is such dark tidings in the world today. Although I fall into that catagory like most people do I dont understand the fear of religion alot of people seem to have. Are they afraid that if they see enough bibles or hear the word God enough times they will somehow be forced to believe?

Bunch of non-thinkers I think.

[Native Indian Corruption]

I know I am intruding on this as I am an American,but..

I am an American Indian and although it sounds like you may have some excessive wasting of funds there it also sounds like a fair and legit type of system. Contracts made are by rights unbreakable bonds. Unless you are in US that is.

Here ,if you live on a res you are casino rich on some (not mine) or patheticly broke on others. there is middle ground but not much. The US gov doesnt honor thier American Indian contracts now no more than they ever did.

Inflation should apply telling you the price goes up and there it is.

Tell me people, what do you think is fair? No matter your answer you can be countered with a thousand more arguements.Only one counts though, the treaty made should be the treaty kept.

[A Religion Of Love]

today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.  Few examples

1949: Outsiders back military coup deposing elected government of Syria.

1953: Outsiders help overthrow the democratically elected Mossadeq government in Iran (which had nationalized the British oil company) leading to a quarter century of repressive and dictatorial rule by the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlevi.

1956: Israel, Britain, and France invade Egypt. U.S. does not support invasion, but the involvement of its NATO allies severely diminishes Washington's reputation in the region.

1958: U.S. troops land in Lebanon to preserve "stability".

early 1960s: U.S. unsuccessfully attempts assassination of Iraqi leader, Abdul Karim Qassim.

1963: U.S. supports coup by Iraqi Ba'ath party (soon to be headed by Saddam Hussein) and reportedly gives them names of communists to murder, which they do with vigor.

1970: Civil war between Jordan and PLO. Israel and U.S. discuss intervening on side of Jordan if Syria backs PLO.

1973: Airlifted U.S. military aid enables Israel to turn the tide in war with Syria and Egypt.

1973 75: Outsiders supports Kurdish rebels in Iraq. When Iran reaches an agreement with Iraq in 1975 and seals the border, Iraq slaughters Kurds and U.S. denies them refuge. Kissinger secretly explains that "covert action should not be confused with missionary work."

1975: U.S. vetoes Security Council resolution condemning Israeli attacks on Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon.

1978 79: Iranians begin demonstrations against the Shah. U.S. tells Shah it supports him "without reservation" and urges him to act forcefully. Until the last minute, U.S. tries to organize military coup to save the Shah, but to no avail.

1979 88: U.S. begins covert aid to Mujahideen in Afghanistan six months before Soviet invasion in Dec. 1979. Over the next decade U.S. provides training and more than $3 billion in arms and aid.

1980 88: Iran Iraq war. When Iraq invades Iran, the U.S. opposes any Security Council action to condemn the invasion. U.S. soon removes Iraq from its list of nations supporting terrorism and allows U.S. arms to be transferred to Iraq. At the same time, U.S. lets Israel provide arms to Iran and in 1985 U.S. provides arms directly (though secretly) to Iran. U.S. provides intelligence information to Iraq. Iraq uses chemical weapons in 1984; U.S. restores diplomatic relations with Iraq. 1987 U.S. sends its navy into the Persian Gulf, taking Iraq's side; an overly aggressive U.S. ship shoots down an Iranian civilian airliner, killing 290.

1982: U.S. gives "green light" to Israeli invasion of Lebanon, killing some 17 thousand civilians.10 U.S. chooses not to invoke its laws prohibiting Israeli use of U.S. weapons except in self defense. U.S. vetoes several Security Council resolutions condemning the invasion.

1983: U.S. troops sent to Lebanon as part of a multinational peacekeeping force; intervene on one side of a civil war, including bombardment by USS New Jersey. Withdraw after suicide bombing of marine barracks.

1984: U.S. backed rebels in Afghanistan fire on civilian airliner.

1987-92: U.S. arms used by Israel to repress first Palestinian Intifada. U.S. vetoes five Security Council resolution condemning Israeli repression.

1988: Saddam Hussein kills many thousands of his own Kurdish population and uses chemical weapons against them. The U.S. increases its economic ties to Iraq.

1988: U.S. vetoes 3 Security Council resolutions condemning continuing Israeli occupation of and repression in Lebanon.

1991 : Devastating economic sanctions are imposed on Iraq. U.S. and Britain block all attempts to lift them. Hundreds of thousands die. Though Security Council had stated that sanctions were to be lifted once Saddam Hussein's programs to develop weapons of mass destruction were ended, Washington makes it known that the sanctions would remain as long as Saddam remains in power. Sanctions in fact strengthen Saddam's position. Asked about the horrendous human consequences of the sanctions, Madeleine Albright (U.S. ambassador to the UN and later Secretary of State) declares that "the price is worth it.

1991-: U.S. forces permanently based in Saudi Arabia.

1998: U.S. and U.K. bomb Iraq over the issue of weapons inspections, even though Security Council is just then meeting to discuss the matter.

1998: U.S. destroys factory producing half of Sudan's pharmaceutical supply, claiming retaliation for attacks on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya and that factory was involved in chemical warfare. Evidence for the chemical warfare charge widely disputed.

I probaly should leave this alone but can not.

First I dont know how you can say the Jews rule the world by proxy and then slide the US all up in there. The US are the ones directly responsible for holding the Israelies in check, binding thier hands so to speak, keeping them from effectivly fixing the murder daily problem.

Second, I doubt you have convinced Krusty of your view since you give absolutly no proven connection of the things you sight and the old meany jews.

Actually your post reminds me of a speech a Malaysian

Prime Minister once made.

[Bush Doesn't Want To Lend Money To Iraq.....]

You republicans voted for an administration and strong minds around the puppet Bush, you'll didn't vote for a single leader, he's gaining the benefits of his last name.

However, he's done more harm to America than almost any other president before him..........he holds many of the records that people would not want to hold..

If some of you think he's God, then I'm an Athiest, better yet, Satanic!

you my friend live in a dark twisted world made by you not Bush.

Just as there were those that loved that pathetic Clinton (I actually voted for him the first time, to my shame)to the point that he could do no wrong, There are those that hate Bush to the point that he can not possibly do any right.

That is something he can not compete against (your totally hate filled mind) and so I suspect that he does not try.

Those of us that support Bush but are not repub, or old, do so with open eyes. We knowthat he is not going to get it all right but hell who does?

Most of my kind do not agree with Bush. Bush agrees with us. There is a difference.

[American Patriotism]

Once matters reach this point, it no longer matters who was right and who was wrong; slights, insult and injustices of the past no longer have relevance. Theories about 'root causes' become a diversion for air-heads while those of us who have a grasp of reality defend our loved ones and our way of life.

Those ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it. The war on terror is not winnable. You could wipe out millions of "terrorists" but, like Hydra, more would spring up with more motivation to deal death to your innocents. The path you choose, while cloacked in noble ideas of self-defense, will only ensure the death of more innocents.

If someone hits you what do you do?

nothing? okay, now they just did it again. What do you do? nothing again? okay but after ten or twelve times I am sure you will have a repose. And right repose or wrong repose you will strike back with vigor equal to or greater than thier's.

What would you have the US do?Why can our country have at least the same standards?

[Globalization And Jobs]

Hello All,

I just finished reading an article on the job rate in the US which also talked about Globalization and competition from developing nations.

The article is called:

"The threat of the job-is-worth-less recovery"

by Jim Jubak.

You can read it at: http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P62365.asp

Please spare the usual left/right lecture and tell me what you think.

I read the article and although I doubt not the info creditability I do thankfully come away with a bit differing opinion than the writer had.

To say $36,000 jobs are being replaced with $19,000 jobs because of job created vs. job loss is giving the impression that people lose the big one today and take the little tomorrow. This of course, though possible, is not likly. In the better paid sector to many people are allowed to live on the gov for way to long for this scenario.

I personally doubt that these $19000 jobs are being filled by anyone who has worked in the last several months, unless they are moving up.

[Canadians Pay Twice The Taxes As Americans]

I must say that is some sound logic you got going there.

Even your figures seem to be right on. I checked.

But now how much does your theory take into account the vast differs of the US and these other countries?

Not a one of them comes close to having our population and yes the sheer size of it makes some differs. Also the death rate and mortality rate is something you did not mention. Why? Irrelevent?

Seems to me that even in the worst of times for us the life expectancy rate was controlled more by social variables than by quality of health care and if that is case seems to blow your theory. Sorry.

Our system is nothing less than broke. Your system is nothing more than adaquate.

Lawyers are more of a problem in our health care system than any other virus could be.

[Bush Doesn't Want To Lend Money To Iraq.....]

I myself can not understand how Bush haters can spew thier trash and then in the same sentence say they feel he is so powerful and important that he single handedly put millions of people out of work.

That mean old powerful important Bush did not even need modernation and efficientcy, didn't need Clintons drive to destruction of the economy.

I bet he could have done it without the Dems convincing the illegals to accept gov money, free hospice etc.....

Surly he is not as powerful as you libs think.

All Hail God Bush. (just in case he is)

[Gideons Begone! Cal. Hospitals To Ban Scriptures?]

since when do you need to be lectured by some guy in a funny hat to love God?

why does buying a $9.99 bible making you a true follower?

hospitals are for medical science. most of which the bible would deny exists by some modern interpretations.

if someone wants to pray, they have a direct line with God. God never said he would pass over the rooms without the made in china bible in the drawer.

SirRiff

your statements really do not fit the topic.

It seems now that people want all mention of God taken away from everywhere that a non believer might take affence. This is in no way giving anyone but the nonbeliever comfort. Can anyone disagree with the idea of freedom of religeon? But why does anyone think that this must give than the deserves of freedom from religeon.

For them to ban bibles from hospitols they are catering to a small and insignificant sect of society. Doesnt matter if it is Gideon or what. A thing like this has an inerrantness to become the stepping stones of a tidal wave to strip from you your right to worship and inevitably your right not to worship.

For freedom of religeon incompasses no religeon. but when things are regulated and mandated your choices soon dwindle.

[Arnold Wins, Leftwing Smear Fails]

Dear all,

Arnold as govenor shall be as much of a success as Ronald Reagan was. An actor placed in the role (of Governor of California and then President of the USA) firmly directed by big business and lobby groups, with no independent thought required nor asked for.

Reagan was a puppet of George H.W. Bush and there is no reason to think his neither his son nor Arnold will perform otherwise.

If Arny could be as successful as Ronald Raegan than no greater a thing could come of this.

Remember that the worms of the times hated Ronnie and thier fav monacur for him was dummie yet he outwitted every single intellectual and formatted the dismembering of the times greatest threat.

Ronald Raegan was a champion of kids. He never ever had a bad thing to say to anyone. He was at times apologetic to those less fortunate than him. He believed the greatest institution the world had to offer was the love of a man and his family.

I dont care what kind of filthy lib crap you have invested to your mind you cannot find fault with any of this and noone, sadly, will ever again be pres that has the morals, ethics and damn straight greatness of this man.

Alot of things are debatable, this is not one. For to win you must lie.

nothing new though, liberal trying to assinate someones charactor by lieing.