+Tailspin 3 Posted July 25, 2008 Its absolutely ridiculous that we are being prevented from drilling in ANWR. The area already approved for drilling is a featureless coastal flat, nearly identical to Prudhoe Bay just down the coastline, and nothing like the "pretty pictures" of southern ANWR the treehuggers use for propaganda. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Typhoid 231 Posted July 25, 2008 (edited) We had a presence in Vietnam well before JFK. Did you know Ho Chi Minh was previously very pro american? He helped us against Japan in exchange for us backing their independance after the war. He based the vietnamese constitution off of ours, then we turned around and backed the french. We were there right after the french got creamed and pulled out. McNamara(slimeball) was the one micromanaging things actually. How is fighting poverty a bad thing? Jimmy Carter, sorry about that, our bad. Not quite sure how a peanut farmer became president, but Gerald Ford's lack of understanding the cold war was a big reason. As for foreign policy, should we have raised tension with the soviets and provoked world war 3? Clinton's interventions.....WTF? 2 interventions are mistakes, but a lack of intervention is also a mistake? I don't hear anyone criticizing Bush's Haiti intervention do I? Kosovo was a UN/NATO action, and we didn't have any boots on the ground. Rwanda, deserved intervention though. Food prices were just fine until the cost of transporting them (oil) skyrocketed. But are you actually criticizing alternate energy when oil is over $120 a barrel? you're drifting pretty far from what I said. don't presume to know what my position is on some of these. I left off Warmonger Clinton (and his undeclared, illegal war and unnecessary wars) simply for brevity. But thanks for proving the opposite of your own point! there was a substantial difference from the Eisenhower Military Assistance team presence in Vietnam and the JFK escalation followed by the massive LBJ escalation. Trying to hang Vietnam on the Republicans or conservatives (many who actually opposed that) is yet another example of liberal historical revisionism. Nice try. energy and food is a whole other topic of which I have written quite a bit about and been published. Your side is dead wrong on those issues. For the record, I favor all kinds of energy development including alternative. I oppose government mandated percentages, restrictions and subsidies which has led directly to our current mess - thanks largely to the obstructionist Democrats and the non-conservative Republicans in Congress (including McCain by the way!). energy deregulation in California, for one glaring example, was deregulation in name only. It actually imposed severe market restrictions and government oversight on prices and supplies and was the direct cause of the energy meltdown there. fighting poverty is best accomplished by opening up opportunity, employment, business development, etc. Perpetual welfare and government dependency is a dead end both for the taxpayers who have to foot the bill and mostly for the new underclass sold into economic slavery of the government welfare system. Edited July 25, 2008 by Typhoid Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+whiteknight06604 934 Posted July 25, 2008 "Typhoid...that first piece was hilarious. Sadly it is also spot on. The nearly religious zeal of those who have fallen for Obama's dog and pony show is beyond rationalization. Obama's campaign is like a beautifully wrapped gift with nothing in the box. The combination of electing Obama (based upon his campaign rhetoric) with Democratic control of Congress will be like giving a crack-head a credit card and expecting him pay the rent. The second is more clearly definable evidence of what we are talking about. The FOX news revelation, IMHO, just supports the notion that newscasters are just paid actors following the script." the problem isnt him so much as "us" He is an empty vessel everyone suffering from Bush syndrom is pouring there hopes and dreams into him.they see anything they "need" to see in him and are blinded to the fact he is no different to every other left of center politition.He is no better or worse than Hillery but he captured the imagination with his skin tone and honney words.First to set the record straight he will not be the first black president he may be president but he is bi-racial and belongs to whites as much as blacks.If I was african american i'd be insulted that the only viable black canidate is not even black.It's almost a religion to the left now he cures the sick he walks on water and no one ever sees his faults.the man isn't a devil he IS a left wing Jr senator and that is ok but to make him into the second comming of JFK or FDR is funny in the extreem and telling of the desperate need of the left for any sort of "hero".Mcain to the right is just a man a man with many good and bad points you won't find zelots ready to fall on their swords or deny the facts.I'm a realist at heart and I would rather take Mcain with all his good and bad over someone who everyone loves but they love for they project into him rather than what he is.On paper the records are the same with Hillery and Obama he one because he could package his good points better and people were blinded to his faults.I have 10 people at work who are fanatics over Obama,while they don't speak for every Obama groupie they could not for the life of them ever once tell me what he stood for other than some nebulus idea of change.when asked what he would change they said he wasn't bush.Sounds like Kerry all over again.all he has thats different is he is infinatly more charismatic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Tailspin 3 Posted July 25, 2008 ........and yet again we are faced with the choice of the lesser of two evils. I don't really like McCain. Never thought much of W either. But, once again, the alternative is not acceptable at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eraser_tr 29 Posted July 26, 2008 I'm not trying to hang vietnam on conservatives or republicans, just answering to neverenough pinning LBJ's increases on JFK. As was the rest of the start of the post. It's not merely the "ooh ahhh" wowing effect he's having on people. It's that he is motivating people to become involved again. People who never knew a word of politics are paying attention now and an active and aware citizenship is the most important thing to a democracy. He's promised to review every executive order by bush and rescind those that overreach presidential authority for one. Renegotiating trade aggreements to help american workers, sorely needed here. Given the international "rockstar" tour, as president, our respect in the world will return (and thus our security and influence) We'll be able to work multilaterally, while McCain will continue the same America does whatever the hell it wants approach. And yes, there should be more drilling, there should have been more refineries built also. The thing about ANWR is that oil companies have plenty of land leased where they could drill, but simply aren't. Once they're using up where they can drill, then we can talk about opening new areas. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Typhoid 231 Posted July 26, 2008 we are obviously never going to agree on these things, so I'm not going to keep going back and forth. Enough already. Permit me before I go, however, to address one key point that you brought up. "The thing about ANWR is that oil companies have plenty of land leased where they could drill, but simply aren't. " do you understand the difference between a lease for exploration and a permit for production drilling? That statement is one of the propaganda points that pelosi and crowd are using and its simply an enormous, back-stabbing lie. Its been pelosi, reid and crowd who have blocked permits for drilling. One of the companies recently sold the lease back to the government because they simply could not afford to keep applying for drilling permits and have them continually denied. Its not an issue of having exploration leases. Its an issue of having drilling leases and the permits to do so. pelosi, reid and company have systematically blocked the Bush energy plan implementation, blocked drilling permits, blocked exploration, etc. We now have food and energy shortages as a result of liberal dnc policies. It is the Audacity of Mendacity to claim the current economic problems are a result of conservative policies when it has been obstructionist democrat tactics that have deliberately and with malice aforethought blocked energy development and converted food crops to fuel crops. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sparkomatic 7 Posted July 26, 2008 "it took five days, but McCain finally found a platform from which he could..." Just saw that on CNN...I f*ing kid you not...un-f-biased? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+whiteknight06604 934 Posted July 26, 2008 "it took five days, but McCain finally found a platform from which he could..." Just saw that on CNN...I f*ing kid you not...un-f-biased? CNN is bad MSNBC is a joke Fox has there moments too but they are by far the closest to fair.The net is a quagmire some sorces are nothing more than hate filled propaganda and others are sot on it's hard to get the truth but if you are open minded and search and do a little resrearch it can be done.I work overnight so I can devote most of the day to reading web articles and the news is on about 10-15 hours a day in my room. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eraser_tr 29 Posted July 26, 2008 Yeah, this is getting too much like ranting on facebook. But don't attribute everything to DNC propaganda (unless you fairly attribute everything you say to RNC propaganda) But they have permission to drill in many areas where they are not, because its not as cheap to extract. They've been pushing for drilling in ANWR for decades, even bush sr. opposed it, there's also the key part of the name: Wildlife Refuge, not Oil Reserve. Obstructionist isn't pursuing alternate forms of energy. The problem is oil and more oil is treating the symptom, not the disease. If you're having chronic pain that can be fixed by surgery, even though its expensive, is it better to just keep a morphine addiction going to avoid the pain and not fix the cause of the pain, and be more expensive and dangerous in the long run? It does go both ways, Bush's vetoes are obstructing any attempts by the democratic congress to address the problems with their plans. So until a new president (I really hope if McCain is elected he'll return to the concept of compromise and won't simply veto everything the democrats do for the hell of it) is elected, nothing gets through unless someone keels over and gives the other everything they want. When exactly do you sleep then? Maybe thats the problem, you're so wound up on caffeine Do at least recognize Fox is just as bad as MSNBC though, just that you agree with it more. And Fox's reporting is pretty bad. I remember a story from a few months ago something dealing with a fighter where they mentioned its infra-red and heat seaking missiles Never occured to them that those were the same thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Tailspin 3 Posted July 26, 2008 Its not about oil vs. other forms of energy in the long run. Its about the here and now, the near future, and our over-dependence on foreign oil sources and how that affects national security. There is a war going on, and no I'm not talking about Iraq specifically. Re: the medical analogy.... Lets say you had a chronic pain that was currently untreatable and morphine was the ONLY drug that effectively permitted you to carry on with your daily life. The Dr. says there is technology on the horizon that would cure you but it may be months or even longer before that technology is available. Do you stop taking morphine until you can be cured? Yes, you are addicted but what is the REAL alternative? Laying in bed writhing in pain? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+whiteknight06604 934 Posted July 26, 2008 "When exactly do you sleep then? Maybe thats the problem, you're so wound up on caffeine " I don't sleep much and except for the ocasional cup of tea I don't get much caffeine.If I drink more than 2-3 cups of coffee in a year I'd be suprised.Last year when I was still playing football I'd work until5-7am then sleep an hour or two then hop a bus to say Scranton for a few hours then play a game until about 10 then drink the whole way home and I'd say I was a zombie all sunday.My old body just can't keep it up anymore. Oh believe me Fox has many issues I see them daily I just don't think errors they make are the same as MSNBC cheerleading for Obama.I see Fox say as much bad about McCain as I do see them say good.As they say opinions are like @ssholes everyone has one and sometimes they all stink. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+NeverEnough 78 Posted July 26, 2008 "The most expensive and needless war in history?" The headline on page A14 of today's LA Times, "Cost of Iraq war is near bill for Vietnam". From paragraph two, "The new report by the Congressional Research Service estimates the U.S. has spent $648 billion on Iraq War operations, putting it in range of the $686 billion, in 2008 dollars, spent on the Vietnam War - the second most expensive war behind World War II, which had a $4.1 trillion price tag in 2008 dollars." As Wrench will agree, the L.A. Times is far from the being unbiased, often times serving as a mouthpiece for the DNC. Be sure to get your facts straight before presenting your case in court! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+whiteknight06604 934 Posted July 26, 2008 "The most expensive and needless war in history?" The headline on page A14 of today's LA Times, "Cost of Iraq war is near bill for Vietnam". From paragraph two, "The new report by the Congressional Research Service estimates the U.S. has spent $648 billion on Iraq War operations, putting it in range of the $686 billion, in 2008 dollars, spent on the Vietnam War - the second most expensive war behind World War II, which had a $4.1 trillion price tag in 2008 dollars." As Wrench will agree, the L.A. Times is far from the being unbiased, often times serving as a mouthpiece for the DNC. Be sure to get your facts straight before presenting your case in court! this statement isn't directed at any in particular but the left has had trouble with facts for a while.look at global warming hype the cult of darwinism ect.while they may be right in the end the facts are being so twisted and anyone who disagrees with them so demonised any statement about the left having a monopoly on freedom of speach is only to be greated with laughter.Just about every time speaks on campus or a recruiter tries to spreak they are verbally and somtimes physicaly assaulted.It's rather funny that failing to come up with any sort of rational argument they just blindly and hatefully attack there is almost no comprimise no give and take it's there way or your evil.lol most grow up and join scocioty but the one that don't become profesors and pass on their hatred and closemindedness. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+whiteknight06604 934 Posted July 26, 2008 (edited) "The most expensive and needless war in history?" The headline on page A14 of today's LA Times, "Cost of Iraq war is near bill for Vietnam". From paragraph two, "The new report by the Congressional Research Service estimates the U.S. has spent $648 billion on Iraq War operations, putting it in range of the $686 billion, in 2008 dollars, spent on the Vietnam War - the second most expensive war behind World War II, which had a $4.1 trillion price tag in 2008 dollars." As Wrench will agree, the L.A. Times is far from the being unbiased, often times serving as a mouthpiece for the DNC. Be sure to get your facts straight before presenting your case in court! Edited July 26, 2008 by whiteknight06604 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites