ARS on Twitter
RSS
I’ve made it…
Posted by Duncan on July 6th, 2008
That’s right folks, I’ve been officially designated as Sadly, No’s New Wingnut of the Week 
YES!
Ofcourse, the author of the post who bestowed this wonderful honor upon me, Clif, does a pretty lousy job of fisking me.
Duncan hails from Texas and has this to say about himself:
I am a conservative first and foremost. …. I believe that the U.S. Constitution is the best governing document that has ever been created by man, and I believe that the liberal left (and increasingly the Big Government Republicans) have been eroding what the Founding Father’s intended, which was not a huge federal government that continuously stomps on areas reserved for individual states.
Notwithstanding his hatred for the federal government, it hasn’t dissuaded him from taking a paycheck from the federal government for his entire career:
I served in the U.S. Air Force for 8 years as a C-130 pilot and as a primary instructor. I got out and now work for the federal government as a civilian protecting our nation. I reconcile the fact I work for Uncle Sam in that both jobs I have held were Constitutionally mandated, not the creation of some politician looking to spend more tax dollars.
Please discuss amongst yourselves what civilian job that Duncan could possibly hold is “Constitutionally mandated.”
First off, the douche-nozzle (apologies to all actual douche-nozzles) thinks I hate the Federal Government. Anybody else see the “hate”? Simply stated, I don’t believe in the nanny-state, cradle-to-grave liberalism that Clif and his ilk propose. And that being stated, I have had no problem working for the federal government in areas that are, what I believe, Constitutionally mandated and harken back to the very creation of this nation itself. I know he is trying to find some hypocrisy there… perhaps he is just projecting….and being the typical liberal, it probably annoys him to no end that I served in the U.S. Armed Forces… surprised that he didn’t take a strike at me as a baby-killer or the such..
Duncan’s bio concludes with a stunningly inane mixed metaphor:
I have a wife and two beautiful children. And I want those children to grow in a country not swirling down the socialist toilet bowl of mediocrity and misery that the left seems to be pushing this country towards like little lemmings following each other off a cliff.
Inane. Matter of opinion I guess. Mixed metaphor. Sure. But if the shoe fits….
And now for Duncan’s award winning post:
I am really starting to get annoyed with all of the global cooling er.. global warming.. er Climate Change bull crap.
My irritation started today when I bought tickets for my family to fly out to visit me in California while I am out there for some training. There was an option on Orbitz.com for me to purchase, since I was having my girls fly on a big-bad-evil corporate airline, some CARBON-FRIGGIN-OFFSETS! I shi’ite you not. I could buy some carbon credits in order to offset the carbon emissions to make myself feel better. I honestly could not believe my eyes. I almost wanted to look elsewhere for tickets, …
Will Duncan have the courage of his convictions and find his tickets elsewhere? Or will he send an outraged email to Orbitz customer service? Will he buy the credits with a stolen credit card? Will he decide to idle his SUV in the driveway for six hours to offset the offsets? (Cue drum roll.)
Maybe I confused him as he continued to project his values upon me. See, that’s why I love the free market, because if I was indeed offended enough, then I could go look elsewhere. Had orbitz mandated that I buy such carbon offsets, then yes, I would have looked elsewhere. I was simply commenting that yet another commercial organization has joined the eco-chic community and is pushing Sales of Indulgences Carbon Credits upon the thoughtless masses who’ve been told they’re evil because of the carbon footprint..
then realized that this was a pretty good deal and I could not pass it up.
Well, as those stinky-cheese-loving Socialists in that swirling toiled bowl called France say, quelle surprise!
Yep. I guess I am just a hypocrite. Ya know, the kind who tells people to do one thing, but then does something completely different. Because those people who love the environment are doing so much to protect it themselves….
Actually, I truly feel sorry for professional wingnuts like Duncan who can scarcely open their eyes and crawl out of bed in the morning without succumbing to outrage over this or that liberal indignity. Gays on the TeeVee! Carbon credits at Orbitz!! No more trans fats at McDonalds!!1! Al Gore is still alive!!!111 Para español, oprima el dos!!!!!1!1!one! No wonder Duncan probably spends his spare time in a small funky room with shades drawn reading a survivalist manual stained with Ranch dressing and Pop-Tart crumbs.
A Professional WingNut eh? Almost makes me want to go and make it my pseudonym. I find it somewhat humorous how Clif likes to paint me with such a broad brush. And typical of his ilk, he would like to portray me as some sort of redneck or social retard (more projection by Clif?) who hates illegal immigrants undocumented border crossers and homosexuals.
All because I haven’t bought into man-made global cooling global warming climate change.
I was under the impression that Sadly,No was somewhat of a humor site, like IMAO.us. Guess I was wrong, especially when I read this comment from Alec:
Of course, none of that absolves some fucking parasite who goes from plodding around bombarding random villages on CIA orders to bombarding random villages on CIA orders for $500,000 raided from GI scholarships per year.
Christ, these people make me so fucking angry. I get hives
But please… don’t question their support of our troops…
July 6th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
What does “don’t question their support of our troops ” even mean? Liberals support the troops far more than conservatives. We don’t think they should be put in harm’s way for spurious reasons, or kept there to help politician’s save face.
And, before you belittle my opinion, I served my country for four years in the Navy. I support the troops, and I do it with more than a magnet on my SUV.
July 6th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
We are indeed like IMAO, except that, you know, we’re actually funny.
And re: supporting the troops—I don’t think you have any room to talk about that on this blog. Unless you’d like to reiterate that PTSD suffering Iraq veterans are just a bunch of welfare leeches.
July 6th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Jacob,
Thanks for your service in the US Navy. I agree that war should not be fought for “spurious reasons” or to “save face”. That’s why we are supposed to have a Congress that controls the purse strings (and is supposed to declare war), but they’ve apparently failed… and they’re Dhimmicratically controlled at the present.
And many of the troops probably (and I can only speak for myself but I feel comfortable in saying this) wouldn’t appreciate the kinda support that resembles retreat and failure masked in a “Bring Our Troops Home Now!” banner. Call me crazy…
July 6th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Simba,
Guess one man’s trash is indeed another’s treasure….
I am not a medical professional of any kind and I have no current position on the diagnosis of PTSD in our soldiers. I think you are referring to a post by Raven. She is much more qualified than me to defend her reasoning behind her post. Nice try though.
July 6th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
AH Duncan…you’ve pissed off the soft kneed, limp dicks of the left who like to think they’re funny: The SadlyNo! crowd. A bunch of losers- every one of them.
What did they all do on July 4th? Betcha they sat around drinking, stuffing their faces and having a good time. Meanwhile:
July 6th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Oh and Duncan: These are liberals who graze the green pastures at SadlyNo….remember they are like little children who need constant re-direction and reminder to stay on topic. To focus. To pay attention to the task at hand. Often they allow themselves to become scatter brained and can’t defend their own thoughts, so they bring up irrelevant things from the past. It’s not a nice try…it’s how liberals think and process.
As for THAT post, how dare someone question a veterans’ dx of PTSD?? How dare someone take to task the things she has seen and simply attempted to compare, and then question. How unAmerican of me to do that. Course had I been defending a proud veteran without PTSD I would have been called a blood thirsty wing nut. These liberals could care less about a true case of PTSD because it goes against everything they believe in; they only pretend to care when it suits their cause and agenda. Mind you, I don’t bore myself by visiting blogs such as SadlyNo to see if they ever post on such things as PTSD (my post being the exception of course, since I asked the question liberals don’t ever think to ask…)
July 6th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Oh and Simba please do tell us how you support the troops since you like to ask us and bash me for questioning. What is it YOU have done in support of any member of the US Military? Nice try indeed.
July 6th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
I’ve made it…
Yes, we know that you secretly admire us and want to be like us. It’s ok, really.
July 6th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Noen,
Yep. You hit the nail squarely on the head. :wink:
July 6th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
both jobs I have held were Constitutionally mandated
I was unaware that “Mall Ninja” was Constitutionally mandated. Who knew?
July 6th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Duncan, your blog sucks ass, and you write like a homeschooled eighth grader, which is to say not very well.
You deserve all the ridicule that’s being heaped upon you and more.
July 6th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
[...] UPDATE: The fun continues. [...]
July 6th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Actually, most of us at Sadly, No! spent the holiday drinking tequila, snorting Bolivian blow, and forcing evangelicals to have gay abortions. It was probably all the blow that made our dicks limp and killed our appetite, but a good time was still had by all.
July 6th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Ohhh. Linda.. OUCH! Stop.. I think I feel a tear developing (/sarcasm)
July 6th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Noen…
is this your website? I guess you must have sparkling eyes and glam of gold?
July 6th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
Ok. I’ll admit, I think I got a little chuckle out of that. But that’s the last time…
July 6th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
then realized that this was a pretty good deal and I could not pass it up.
Yeah, I know what you mean, Duncan.
I’m strictly vegan, but whenever Denny’s offers them two-for-one baconburgers, well! Who could pass up a deal like that?
July 6th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
The fact is, liberals have got hate and nothing else.
July 6th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
It’s not worth your time to hang out with the misogynist Obots over at Sadly, O!, who would deny the true blue heart of Appalachia, that sound foundation of Reagan Democrats and hard-working Americans, their democratic right to have the person they want elected and the person they want elected alone be elected, because their delusions have outweighed any sort of reason I have attempted with their dark, sexist hearts, so I choose to walk away from the Democrat Party and will vote for John McCain or, that not being an option, Fred Phelps.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Oh COME on, you nuke all of us but keep friggin Gary Ruppert? Not fair, man.
————————————————-
Actually, the posts from your IP address are going to moderation. Behave and your comments might post. Worthless junk is going to get flushed.
-CT
July 6th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
To Recap the past 6 years for wingnuts (warning – spoiler):
The war was a lie. The President is a war criminal. You have been played for fools.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
” areas that are, what I believe, Constitutionally mandated and harken back to the very creation of this nation itself.”
You BELIEVE are Constitutionally mandated? It isn’t a faith, dipstick. The Constitution is very clear in what it mandates, and isn’t a faith-based ideology open to whatever truthiness you feel about it. Christ, it’s no wonder wingnuts are so eager to evicerate the Constitution. They don’t even know what the hell it is.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Duncan? I apologize for telling you that most visitors from SadlyNo are intelligent people. I was wrong. As you can see through their comments, they are anything but intelligent.
Typical leftards. All whine; no substance.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
And the Air Force is Constitutionally mandated in what article or amendment to the Constitution? I find no mention of an “Air Force” in that document.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Duncan, no that isn’t my website. I don’t have one but if I did I wouldn’t write such god awful craptastic marketing copy like that.
BTW, how do you rationalize hating carbon trades and then the next second going “Oh!, good deal!”? Doesn’t make any sense if you ask me.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Look Duncan: Some visitors come here from the land down under, using their governments computers and probably wasting time doing this:
New Zealand
patrick172-woa.natlib.govt.nz (192.122.171.11) [Label IP Address]
andrightlyso.com/
andrightlyso.com/2008/07/06/ive-made-it/#more-5102
http://www.sadlyno.com/
July 6th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
I think Raven is another secret admirer of teh Sadlies.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Very strange comment coming from someone who probably agrees with Roe vs. Wade that found a “right to an abortion” as well as the words “separation of church and state”, which we all know are no where in the Constitution.
By belief I meant interpretation of the words, not a religious belief you douche, though your feelings about religion are displayed through your venom.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Gary Ruppert,
So is hate better then rightwing fear of terrorist/brown people/whatever God’s President George W. Bush/FNC says we should fear? Wait isn’t stormfront/KKK/skinhead psychopaths big Republicans? Aren’t those folks called hate groups? So wouldn’t it mean you have your share of hate as well? So you beat us! We leftie douche-nozzles only hate Bush, the Iraq War, and the no-bid contract warprofiteering that come with this President and his war of choice, you on the other hand hate us and fear us. YOU WIN!!!
lol
July 6th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Dam…uh, darn, are you young. Suppose I should give you some handicap points, whether or not you’d accept them, tho in your case I’m wagering you’re not the type to gain wisdom with age.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Didn’t take too long for someone to invoke “Godwin’s Law. Way to win the discussion dave.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
“By belief I meant interpretation of the words”
Ahhhh, you mean a living constitution then. Nice to have you on board.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
What do you mean? I believe people who buy carbon credits are getting swindled by snake oil salesman. And the purchase of said carbon credits has nothing to do with the good deal I thought I was getting on the plane tickets. I was simply stating that I thought it pathetic that Orbitz was offering its customers the option to purchase the snakeoil, but not pathetic enough that I didn’t want the good deal. Just because I think they’re stupid doesn’t mean I am not willing to business with Orbitz at this time. Ofcourse, the douchenozzles who are crazy, rabid leftists, like White Male above, seem to think I should go climb a tree in Berzerkly or march on Washington or set myself on fire in protest or I’m a hypocrite.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
Duncan, this comment thread is a perfect example of the attention spam of the average liberal.
Really…take note of this and note also that very few here have stayed on topic. Instead they resort to sock puppet arguments and other distracting tactics.
Now we know why our country is going down the tube so fast.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Living and breathing.. nope. That’s what amendments are for, not judicial interpretation according to international law or the such..
Here are the words of the Constitution dealing with the military:
Pretty obvious that the Constitution mandates/allows for the creation of the Armed forces.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Raven,
Yeah, I think Noen is the only one who has somewhat of an argument and something resembling an active, human brain. The others… they’re the types of pseudo-intellectuals who think they are independent thinkers… when they can’t explain their positions on certain subjects and issues.. they strike off into ad hominem attacks and the such… so sad and pathetic..
July 6th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
This:
There was an option on Orbitz.com for me to purchase, since I was having my girls fly on a big-bad-evil corporate airline, some CARBON-FRIGGIN-OFFSETS! I shi’ite you not. I could buy some carbon credits in order to offset the carbon emissions to make myself feel better. I honestly could not believe my eyes. I almost wanted to look elsewhere for tickets, then realized that this was a pretty good deal and I could not pass it up.
Does not make that clear. In fact it pretty much implies that you did purchase the carbon offsets. At the very least it’s ambiguous. Anyways… I support carbon cap ‘n trade or even better direct taxation with reimbursements. And we’re running rapidly out of time.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Dear Duncan: A few words of advice. I, too, am an Air Force veteran, serving four years, eight months and fourteen days during and after the Korean War. When honorably discharged, I took advantage of the GI Bill (good old Public Law 550) and went to college, got a degree in journalism, practiced the craft for 15 years, then taught the subject at the university level for 16 years. Point? The quality of your writing undermines the arguments you are trying to advance. Why not enroll in a writing course or two and sharpen your prose? You might also want to take few basic courses in political science. Your unfortunate yoking of the words “socialism” and “misery” utterly destroys your cred. See Denmark and the surveys branding the Danes the happiest people on earth since 1982. Sad, perhaps, but true.
God love you for thinking and engaging us all.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
I think Noen is the only one who has somewhat of an argument
Actually I think that MzNicky knows more than I do about quite a few things. She’s just more pissed off and doesn’t think it’s worth her time to engage you. We’re all kinda pissed off. We gave you the keys to the car and you totaled it. The GOP is going down big time and with any luck it’ll be another 40 years before anyone lets you even near the garage again.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
Noen,
I made the statement that it was an option for me to purchase the credits. Based on how I stated I felt ’bout such an option, I guess I made the assumption that the reader would realize I would not purchase said credits. And I made the statement that I thought ’bout looking at another company for tickets, but the prices I felt could not be beat for what I was looking for.
And I disagree as far as cap-n-trade is concerned. I couldn’t disagree more. Who gets to decide the amount to cap? What happens to the production because companies are being capped? What happens to the jobs lost because companies can’t produce due to the caps, and then don’t have the capital to pay their employees so there are layoffs, etc, etc. The law of unintended consequences will come and bite us in the ass, all in the name of the chicken little cries that the sky is falling…..
July 6th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Noen, I must disagree on carbon-caps or on direct taxation. Let me just highlight, since the whole discussion is rather complex.
Carbon caps will first increase the end-user price as manufacturer will pass the cost on. However, the greatest danger is that the supply and allocation of the credits will be set by political lobbying, which will mean that those industries with the most effective lobbying power will game the system to punish their competitors and/or gain them underserved giveaway at no cost to them (paid by tax payers like us). Over all, this will subsidize inefficient users at the expense of more efficient users.
Carbon credits will also inhibit the ability of new industries and new technologies to gain a market share as they will be forced to take on a premium cost (purchasing carbon credits) because the supply of credits is artifically restricted, and this premium that they will be forced to pay will subsidize their competition. This is not good public policy.
Indeed, Europe is moving away from this approach, if I recall correctly recent articles that I’ve read, because they find that it isn’t accomplishing the goals they want and its hurting their economies in the process.
I’ll tackle direct taxation in my next comment
July 6th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
“The GOP is going down big time and with any luck it’ll be another 40 years before anyone lets you even near the garage again.”
You are probably right, err.. left. Anyways the GOP is dying, I agree. They are more like New Deal Democrats now than Republicans. Ofcourse, what made this country great is not the ideals of socialism which you on the left push, but of hard work and the opportunities capitalism brings with it. And the GOP, if it does not return to its values, will die just like the Whigs did before. And I disagree with your totaling the car analogy. This car is still moving along and in decent shape, considering all. And it isn’t government programs or carbon-caps that will sustain its momentum. They only serve as drag devices…
July 6th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Just what is the point of this site?
Isn’t this ground already covered at Redstate and Freeperland?
July 6th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
Oh. I am so sorry Labradog, I didn’t realize that those are the only two websites allowed to exist? Man. I didn’t know. Raven, dear, we’d better go and cancel our hosting, we’re not allowed to give our own opinions, apparently….
July 6th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
Please don’t think just because this site leans right, that it’s post authors agree with the GOP of today. Hardly…most of us are fed up with our leaders- for many reasons. Duncan is correct when he says the GOP is dying…but not the fundamental beliefs of true Conservatives and Republicans. No no…we’re pissed off at our leaders for going to far to the left vs. doing the right things for the country.
I see a third party uprising soon. And I will be a part of it if the GOP doesn’t get it RIGHT this time.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
Duncan isn’t that what the Left would like to see? As many independent web sites and thinking people be silenced?? Why yes…Red State and Freeper speaks for ALL of us.
:roll:
July 6th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
Noen, make direct taxation my next comment after this.
I’m not sure where you’re coming from (Libertarian?) but you’ve nailed it on the head that too many of our Republican congress critters have betrayed conservative, small government principles for their thirty pieces of
silverpork.I think we all at ARS would agree with that. I have no dispute if the Republican party gets punished with a larger Democratic majority – that might wake them up. They deserve a rebuke. However, do acknowledge that some of our Congress people have fought the good fight and are remaining faithful.
However, I do greatly fear for the consequences if we also end up installing Obama as President. The consequence of one-party rule will do irreversible harm to our country, given the way that they will take over the courts to perpetuate their power by changing the Constitution via a judicial coup. We’re only one SCOTUS vote away from that situation, but a flood of liberal judges at lower federal court levels will do tremendous damage that even a favorable SCOTUS can’t control.
In such dire circumstances, I believe we must do all that we can to divide control the Branches by electing a Republican President, which means that if one lives in a competitive state, one must forgo the luxury of a protest vote for President, one that would be reasonable in less dangerous times.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Hi Duncan
I think it’s really mean of the leftards to rag on you. After all, what intelligent person would not dismiss out of hand climate change when there is so little evidence for it that you can barely muster a roomful of scientists to agree it’s real, and lots of people who are only coincidentally clueless rightist nimrods think we’re imagining it. Keep fighting the good fight, buddy.
If I could just correct you though: “Ofcourse, what made this country great is not the ideals of socialism which you on the left push, but of hard work and the opportunities capitalism brings with it.” Well, mostly what made your country great was its abundance of natural resources, which lay under the land occupied by the natives, whom you killed in huge numbers; development behind tariff barriers (so much for free trade!); and huge government support for industry and agriculture, alongside thieving the industrial developments we made without compensating us for them. All that and you still haven’t managed to create a universal healthcare system! Well done, bros and sos.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Herr Gutkraut,
Thank you for your service in the US Air Force. I have an education and I do know how to write. However, I believe you are implying that my writing style is not active and engaging, and perhaps the sentence structure is not as well built as it could be. I am sure that if I put the effort into writing a piece in rough draft, and then “bleeding” all over it several times, then perhaps I would pass your muster. Yet more often than not I am simply writing my thoughts and arguments without the benefit of editors…
July 6th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
CivilTruth, you haven’t tackled anything honey. My preference:
Carbon Tax and 100% Dividend — No Alligator Shoes!
It has to be done sooner or later so why not adapt now? But if you really don’t believe in AWG, even Bush does, then there’s no hope for you and the rest of the 23 percenters.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Civil Truth, you put it well, but I have got to disagree on the bulk of what you said.
2000 aside, it’s called “electing”.
2000-2006 aside…oh, never mind.
Re: “judicial coup”, see my note about “installing” and “2000″ about two lines up. But on the rest, you are at least a little close. It was the Justice Dept., not the Judiciary Branch that is doing its damndest to do irreversible harm. See Gonzales, Alberto; Goodling, Monica; et al.
Yes, because it’s not like Republicans have been appointing federal judges for 20 of the past 28 years or anything. And Google “Clinton” and “blue slip” before you respond.
Oh and:
2006 called. It says hi.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
For security purposes you should really upgrade this blog to WordPress 2.5.1 Quickly!
The WP 2.5 that you are using now is very open to many well known hacks. :evil:
Good luck.
{editor’s note: Thanks for the veiled threat. I am sure you are looking out for us.}
July 6th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
However, the greatest danger is that the supply and allocation of the credits will be set by political lobbying, which will mean that those industries with the most effective lobbying power will game the system to punish their competitor
This makes no sense. Competitors are in the same industry. GM does not compete with Coke.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Fred Thompson? Mittens Romney? Dear God!! By the way, Obama isn’t a socialist. Despite what National Journal says, there are a bunch of Senators more liberal than Obama. Hell, there is one admitted socialist in the Senate and it isn’t anyone from the Midwest.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
What happened to free speech? Why are comments moderated?
{Ed: Comments are moderated if they get picked up by the anti-spam bot. Fixed}
July 6th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
I think the personal attacks on both sites in question are pretty petty and ridiculous as well as undermining to your respective positions. The problem is that I see the debate from one side devolving into personal attacks MUCH more frequently…leaving that particular viewpoint carrying a whole lot less weight when it comes to me. I leave it to you to decide which side that is.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Noen, the problem with a direct tax on energy first is that it will harm the economy by reducing economic growth.
Second, it introduces the inefficiencies of determination of tax rates and the costs of assessing and collecting the tax moneys (think IRS and all the costs associated with computing taxes and the whole IRS bureaucracy that is paid for by these taxes, accountants etc.).
Third, if you’re think returning money back to the taxpayers, then you’re obviously thinking redistribution of the money, since if you just return it pro-rata, you’ve just essentially burned money in overhead without any benefit. But if you redistribute, then we now introducing a political battle where politicians will pick winners and losers, with all sorts of lobbying and donations to incumbent politicians, etc. I think you can predict who’s going to get the shaft.
Fourth, that assumes that the politicians actually want to return any of the money to people (or more than a pittance). What actually is going to happen (and indeed if you’ve read proposals put forth by our Democratic legislators already you’ll see this is the case) is that this tax will be a money tree for politicians pet projects, such as government health care or pork or other big money projects that we can’t afford now – which will again set up a huge lobbying frenzy that again will put money in the politicians’ pockets from donations from beneficiaries of this money.
Fifth, once the taxing structure is in place, inertia will keep the tax from being dismantled – and rather it will be an easy source for taking money from taxpayers’ pockets and sending more money to the government by raising the tax rates even more (just like the IRS and the income tax). And meanwhile, productive economic activity will be stiffled by increasingly onerous taxes.
Sixth, as I mentioned above, very little will actually be dedicated to environmental remediation. However, the bigger problem is that there is no way to measure the benefits of such remediation projects, or indeed whether there is any environmental benefit at all – and certainly no way to determine if such benefits outweigh the obvious and measurable costs.
Seventh, again we have the opportunity loss from such a tax, lowered economic activity that hurts everyone, including perhaps preventing the development and implementation of technologies that will mitigate the putatitave damage of CO2 emissions.
I could go into much deeper analysis of the whole global climate change debate, but that would be excessive in this forum.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Herr Gutkraut,
I looked all over the web and could not find the government of Denmark listed as socialist.
Not Wikipedia.
Not the CIA Factbook.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
I’m not sure where you’re coming from (Libertarian?)
Progressive liberal. Single payer health care, strong public schools, strong unions, heavily regulated industry, tough environmental law, equal rights for all ethnic and sexual minorities, and of course gay abortions. Oh, and bring back the fairness doctrine.
Also, instant death penalty for running dog libertarians. :wink:
July 6th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
Joe, regarding moderation: Free speech or 1st Amendment does NOT apply because we are not the government. Since this blog is our private property, with the bandwidth paid for privately, we get to set the rules on speech and debate. We pay the piper; we call the tune. Same as on any other blogging site.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Dude, “fisking” — as a term, not as a practice — is so 2002.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
CT,
I think you meant to say the the 1st Amendment does NOT apply here at ARS due to it being a private entity.. :mrgreen:
——————————
Completely correct Duncan, and I’ve changed my comment accordingly.
-CT
July 6th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Thanks Scarshapedstar.. I so appreciate you keeping me “hip”… :roll:
July 6th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Seriously, you might as well start calling people “Idiotarians” and post your Rachel Corrie Pancake Recipe.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
SSS,
I guess you are a fan of Misha’s.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
civil truth — doesn’t matter, we have to act and act now to get CO2 between 325 and 350 ppm. And a direct tax with refunds to those who use the most CO2 will be a powerful incentive. Yes, it’s wealth redistribution, that’s the whole point. While we’re at it I agree with Hanson that we put the energy CEOs on trial, and after a nice trial we hang them by the neck until they are dead. Think of it as another incentive.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Rightards:
1. Was invading Iraq and letting Osama Bin Laden go free a good idea?
2. How did the GOP-controlled Senate, Congress, and White House were in any way fiscally responsible, respectful of the Constitution, or in any other have kept their word and are worthy of your support.
3. Bonus question: please admit the ways in which the Liberals were actually right about this current President and his policies.
The last is a question that will do you the most good. It will actually enable you to be honest with yourself, so we can all actually move forward as one country, towards what we all really want, Left AND Right: the best possible future for our country, and all our children, with honor.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Noen,
We should really go out sometime and get a beer/double-shot latte, non-fat and a hamburger/tofuburger sometime….
July 6th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Lots of comments here, and lots of extra chromosomes in many of them.
Dunc, how’d you manage to piss off all these folks?
July 6th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Typo above; should read:
‘2. How were the GOP-controlled Senate, Congress, and White House in any way fiscally responsible, respectful of the Constitution, or otherwise worthy of your support?’
But you get the point. Preview is my friend.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Jim,
First of all, if we had focused SOLELY on Bin Laden, would you have been for the invasion of Pakistan? Hmm? Somehow I doubt it. You were probably on the sidelines with Micheal Moore calling the invasion of Afghanistan an evil deed up until it didn’t turn into the bloodbath you libtards had wanted.
Second, the GOP controlled senate, house and WH all screwed up by the numbers, to the point it seemed that the Dhimmicratic party pretty much still ran the entire government. So yeah, they don’t have alot of support at the moment.
And the bonus question, liberal being right.. no pun.. There is so much hate-filled rhetoric towards this administration that I find myself unable to find any legitimate arguments…
July 6th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
“Dunc, how’d you manage to piss off all these folks?”
Oh, it was probably the allegiance to a non-fact-based ideology that did it…
July 6th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Weebs said:
Breathing… and taking any political view to the right of Lenin….
July 6th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
“Oh, it was probably the allegiance to a non-fact-based ideology that did it…”
As opposed to Jim’s “reality”-based ideology…. :roll:
July 6th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Noen, I agree with Duncan that you’d actually be someone worth having a leisurely conversation with. So far, I diametrically oppose almost everything you’ve said, but unlike most of the left-leaning people I encounter (and I live in probably one of the most purple communities in the country, at least by voting statistics, so I encounter many of them) you actually make an effort to engage in reasoned debate. I mean that sincerely.
Though I must say that organic vegetarian pizza and Free-Trade cocoa while listening to acoustic Irish music sounds a lot better to me… :smile:
July 6th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Now I know why MzNicky left. ick.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Noen,
Hold on, have you considered the trade-offs? When you choke off economic activity and take money from other government expenditures and private funds to fund your tax (the overhead for administering the collection and redistributing the tax money has to come from somewhere else), that means we don’t have that money to spend on other pressing issues facing humanity, such as food shortages (compounded by the corn biofuels disaster, but that’s another topic), AIDS and other infectious diseases, air pollution, water pollution and sanitation, waste disposal, land utilization, ill-effects of increasing urbanization, other impacts of population increase, genocides…there’s a whole litany of problems that need attention in this world and money.
So we need to weigh and prioritize the issues and problems facing our world, and frankly, in terms of time lines and the power to effect changes from this intervention, reducing U.S. CO2 emissions via a carbon tax ranks low on my scale. There are so many other areas we can get a bigger bang for the buck.
By the way, check out the Copenhagen Consensus, which ranked Climate Change as 23rd, 37th, 38th, and 40th on a list of the world’s 40 most pressing challenges. (Follow the PDF link under “Outcome of the Conference”.)
July 6th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
I have had no problem working for the federal government in areas that are, what I believe, Constitutionally mandated and harken back to the very creation of this nation itself.
What the hell does this even mean? Do you have any expertise in this area? Perhaps a Ph.D. in American History with a specialization on Framing and Founding era history or a Con Law expert and Legal Historian? If you knew anything about the time and period and the original intent of the framers and founders your head would probably explode.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Noen,
Sorry, I wasn’t trying to be icky. I guess my humor goes awry sometimes. However, it is rare to find someone from the left who engages here in good faith argument. That statement still stands.
I didn’t really follow what happened with MzNicky earlier, so I don’t know what that reference was to. I’m not used to seeing so many comments at one time here at ARS.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
I have a wife and two beautiful children. And I want those children to grow in a country not swirling down the socialist toilet bowl of mediocrity and misery that the left seems to be pushing this country towards like little lemmings following each other off a cliff.
And that has to be the dumbest thing a semi-intelligent person would write for public consumption. There are actually valuable resources for educating yourself on the internets that don’t even come from “evil liberal” websites!
Try This:
Online Library of Liberty – Forrest McDonald, The Founding Fathers and the Economic Order
http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?Itemid=267&id=177&option=com_content&task=view
Guess what? None of them were capitalists! George Orwell, on the other hand, was a socialist until the day he died. Look it up.
And wrap your brain around this, just for drill. The footnotes alone will teach you more about history than you ever learned or will ever forget.
http://www.law.utk.edu/FACULTY/4thamend.pdf
It might keep it from flushed out the dumbed down American toilet it is swirling around …
July 6th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Guess I can’t read things for myself. Nope. Can’t havean opinion on a subject, even if I have read The Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers. Nope. Need a diploma…. a piece of paper.. so all of you on the left who don’t and never have served in the military, please refrain from discussing any military matters.. please, only let those of us who have been in combat actually talk.. go, here are some crayons.. go color..
July 6th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Um, Noen… we weren’t looking for a date… it was simply an acknowledgement that we held you in a higher regard… that you were someone that outside the impersonal realm of the blogosphere, where hate and invective are spewed forth anonymously and with joyous vigor, that in real life, we’d think you were someone we could hang out with dispite our differences… hell, half the people here are not as bitter and hateful as they’ve come across…
July 6th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Jim,
First of all, if we had focused SOLELY on Bin Laden, would you have been for the invasion of Pakistan?
Thanks for responding. Let’s break that down.
a) If “by focusing solely on Bin Laden”, we mean “not invading Iraq at least until Bin Laden is caught”, then he would not have escaped us at Tora Bora and gotten into Pakistan in the first place.
Because, as we all know, Bush outsourced the job to local warlords and later said “I’m really not that concerned about Bin Laden.
b) *However*, if Bin Laden **HAD** escaped us to Pakistan, then YES, I would support going into Pakistan – but we wouldn’t have had to invade Pakistan, because Pakistan and it’s head Musharraf were our ALLY.
c) But even IF Pakistan’s government would not have allowed us to go in and get Bin Laden, and in fact been ecstatic because we would be helping them solve a warlord problem – yes, I would have supported invading Pakistan to get Bin Laden.
Now – was invading Iraq a good idea to get Bin Laden? Yea or nay?
You were probably on the sidelines with Micheal Moore calling the invasion of Afghanistan…
Nope, I was not. I was and am in support of the invasion of Afhganistan, for the stated reasons: capturing Bin Laden, breaking the back of Al Qaeda, and eliminating the grip of the Taliban.
Second, the GOP controlled senate, house and WH all screwed up by the numbers, to the point it seemed that the Dhimmicratic party pretty much still ran the entire government. So yeah, they don’t have alot of support at the moment.
Interesting theory!
Screwed up by what numbers?
And please explain how these numbers meant that the GOP COngress and Senate didn’t even TRY to lower any of Bush’s budgets. OR why Bush didn’t veto ONE SINGLE pork-filled budget bill.
And the bonus question, liberal being right.. no pun.. There is so much hate-filled rhetoric towards this administration that I find myself unable to find any legitimate arguments…
Hmm. How does illegitimate arguments, make it impossible to see legitimate arguments?
I mean, we certainly can agree that Bush has made quite a few mistakes, can we not? How about attempting to appoint Harriet Miers to the SCOTUS with a whisper-thin resume? How about trusting Putin after meeting him and “looking into his soul”? How about making it impossible for the government to bargain with pharmaceutical companies for lower prices – thus REMOVING free market pressure and with one stroke hugely inflating the entire medicare expenditure?
Those are all mistakes, wouldn’t you agree?
July 6th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
“Douche-nozzle” is not “teh funny.”
July 6th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
He would not have escaped us at Tora Bora? Crystal-ball much? Bush didn’t outsource the job, the generals did. Put the blame where it is due, on the shoulders of those in control of the tactical situation.
Um. Bin Laden apparently did escape to Pakistan. And Musharraf still hasn’t got ‘em for us. And he’s our ally. So, um.. not getting your point on that one.
So you’d invade a sovereign country to capture and probably kill a single man who has attacked American forces repeatedly… but its wrong for us to invade Iraq for the same reason.. Hmm. And you wouldn’t be crying and screaming with every dead and maimed U.S. service member coming back from the mountains of Waziristan? Not saying I don’t agree with you.. just find it interesting what you’d support and wouldn’t support…
Well, we agree on something.. atleast we have that.
You just answered your own question.
Uh, yeah. Why do you think Bush’s approval rating is in the mid-30s? Its not becauge 65 percent of Democrats don’t like him. Because a portion of Republicans/conservatives don’t like what he has done either (other wise his approval rating would be closer to 50%)… and contrary to popular belief (of the left) it ain’t all ’bout Iraq. He’s done plenty of bone-headed things that don’t quite fit the conservative movements ideals.
Government negotiating, or dictating? Any sentence with government and free-market in it immediately raises my eyebrows…
July 6th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Jericho… thanks, you and SSS are doing just a bang-up job of keeping me “hip” and “funny.”
July 6th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
You say that your work for the government protects our country and is Constitutionally mandated. Well, what do you do?
July 6th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
breaking the back of Al Qaeda……
They HAVE been smashed for all time.
Their troops dead, their leaders dead or captured, their safe houses gone…the Iraqis have turned on them and handed them one of the most stinging and enduring defeats in modern history.
Their morale is broken,. and whatever friends they had have long since abandoned them…their tactics made them pariahs and outcasts, and even their sympathisers have had a gutful.
Even now the Iraqis and the Coalition are sending the last of them packing, the Awakening had finally had enough and decided to send these bastards to the Hell they richly deserved.
Iraq became a crucible into which Al Qaeda found themselves thrown..Iran’s hand was exposed and Ahmedinajad will have a hard time extricating himself from that little trap.
He wanted Iraq destabilised to found their own little state, Dar Es Islam,..what he got was the steel capped boot of the US Army and the naked steel of the US Marines..they wanted a stand up fight?
They got one..and LOST in bloody fashion.
In five years expect to see a stable and strong Iraq, in ten years you will all be blessing President Bush and thanking him for having the guts to stand and stick with it, when all others wanted an other Vietnam and another political defeat.
The Taliban are putting up a stiff fight, but even they can see the writing on the wall. The US is coming for them. Soon.
Iraq is won…Afghanistan is next.
GIVE ‘EM HELL.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
I love the theory that if we didn’t go into Iraq we would already have Bin Laden, that is easy to say, no basis for it though. I mean we have serial killers, pedofreaks and kidnappers RIGHT here in the US that haven’t been caught for over 20 years, they don’t have near the resources of a Bin Laden, yet we would have him if we didn’t go to Iraq.
Iraq, the dividing line between libs and republicans. Conservatives are not happy with Iraq either, but most of them don’t want to leave it. Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, and they know WE as a country broke Iraq, Dems, Libs, Reps Conservs. all of us had a hand in it… Hillary, Bill, Reid, Pelosi and ALL the Repubs (Except 1) voted to give the power to the Pres., once granted WE OWN IT’S outcome.
Liberals don’t understand that concept.. Personal responsibility is almost like asking them to work for a living rather than expecting the gubmint to provide everything for them.
The best thing we can do is provide support for the guy in charge (the Gen.)and hope the Iraqi’s want to succeed as bad as we want them to.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
He would not have escaped us at Tora Bora? Crystal-ball much?
You asked a hypothetical question. I’m giving an answer that includes what I think is probable. Feel free to prove me wrong with your own interpretation.
Bush didn’t outsource the job, the generals did.
Well, does the buck stop at Bush’s desk or not?
Bush is the Commander in Chief. If Bush was on top of the situation and truly cared about getting Bin Laden, he would have demanded a full commitment of US troops to Tora Bora, to achieve our number-one stated objective – capturing Bin Laden and breaking Al Qaeda.
But let’s say Bush was not responsible for Tora Bora. What did Bush do afterwards? Did he THEN order the military to make getting Bin Laden their number-one priority? No. As we all know, he instead ordered the military invade a country that was absolutely no threat to us – and turned a one-front war into a two-front war.
Um. Bin Laden apparently did escape to Pakistan.
Yes, he did. And instead of going after him, we got mired in Iraq.
And Musharraf still hasn’t got ‘em for us. And he’s our ally. So, um.. not getting your point on that one.
My point is, we wouldn’t have needed to “invade” Pakistan at all. They would have willingly allowed our troops to go there. We’d be cleaning up their own warlord mess in the process, which they would have been quite happy with.
No invasion would have been necessary.
You just answered your own question.
I really don’t see how. So here, let me clarify my question a little more:
How, even with these “numbers” of which you speak, could the GOP in both houses **pass** legislation Democrats didn’t want, **block** legislation Democrats did want – but this same GOP wasn’t even able to limit a Bush budget?
I mean, are you saying the Democrats were FOR the Bush budget, and the GOP was helpless to say no to Bush, in the face of how much the Democrats loved him??
And how does that explain Bush not even vetoing a single budget bill?
Government negotiating, or dictating?
For Medicare, it would be negotiating. And if the price the government demands is too low, then Pharma companies could just refuse to sell it.
Why not? Why should Sam’s Club be able to get a lower price, but Medicare pay whatever bill pharma companies present them?
July 6th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
So you’d invade a sovereign country to capture and probably kill a single man who has attacked American forces repeatedly… but its wrong for us to invade Iraq for the same reason..
Huh?
Why are you lumping this together? This interests me.
You do know that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, right? And you do know that Iraq was **opposed** to Al Qaeda, right?
And you do know that our invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda, and in fact Al Qaeda didn’t even EXIST in Iraq as an organization until **after** we invaded, right?
So, to sum up: I oppose the invasion of Iraq because it had nothing to do with Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, or the Taliban, or in fact terrorism in general…AND, as predicted by the majority of non-partisan experts (and common sense) it INCREASED the power, prestige, and recruitment of Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Don’t you know that it’s smarter to let the bees swarm and sting you a little bit at time for the rest of your life, than to blow up the nest with whatever will get the job done? The liberal mentality just gets me rolling sometimes.
The issue is not Iraq, the issue is how Iraq was handled. Invading Iraq had its positives, and like it or not WE have not had an attack on our soil in 7 years.. THAT is something that hasn’t been accomplished in a LONG time.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Damn, I’m gonna turn wingnut and get the liberal/Democratic blogs to ding me. That way I might get some traffic. I’ve about had it with the Democrats, so why not?
July 7th, 2008 at 12:05 am
They HAVE been smashed for all time.
Wow.
I wish that were true – but wishing doesn’t make it true. And this ISN’T TRUE based on OBSERVED REALITY.
My sources for this info? The US government.
2007 NIE: http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20070717_release.pdf
2008 Intelligence Agencies report: http://armed-services.senate.gov/statemnt/2008/February/McConnell%2002-27-08.pdf
And for a nonpartisan review by nonpartisan experts:
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/08/terrorism_index.html
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,642825,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/oct/16/politics.alqaida
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3756650.stm
So – if they were weaker, and they’re now stronger, then they haven’t been destroyed, right? Wouldn’t you agree?
Compared to their status when we invaded Iraq, Al Qaeda is now THRIVING. They are a worldwide organization that is now securely based in Pakistan, while we are mired in a two-front war.
July 7th, 2008 at 12:07 am
OK, let’s enumerate the occupations that are “constitutionally mandated:”
* Article 1, Section 2:
Member of the House of Representatives
* Article 1, Section 3:
Member of the United States Senate
* Article 1, Section 8:
Lots of government jobs would be covered here, including people who work for:
The Federal Reserve
The various departments charged with screwing over the Indians
La Migra, and the Bankruptcy courts (yes, the constitution does lump those together)
The Mint
The Post Office
The Patent Office
The lower federal courts (ie, not the Supreme court, but not state courts, either)
The anti-sea-pirates corps
The armed forces
* Article II:
The President (also the vice president, after some amending)
* Article III
The Supreme Court
And that’s it.
Seriously, that’s all the constitution tells us, as far as government jobs go. So which constitutionally mandated government job does Duncan hold? It seems pretty clear: he works for the post office. Why is this clear? Well, for one, because the postal service is by far the largest federal agency by count of employees. More tellingly, though, if you go through that list of constitutionally mandated jobs, you’ll see that there’s only one that a boastful sort would refer to as a “constitutionally mandated position,” rather than simply stating the agency of employment. Every one of them apart from the postal service would be a source of pride beyond “constitutional mandate.”
Now, this doesn’t mean that Duncan is stuffing mailboxes in some undisclosed Zip code, as there are plenty of postal service jobs less menial than that of the lowly, determined postal carrier, but at the same time he sure doesn’t seem to be willing to tell anyone what exactly the Constitution of the United States has mandated for him.
Duncan, don’t be ashamed of being a postal worker. The postal service turns away thousands of applicants every week, and there’s nothing at all to be ashamed of in having made the cut.
July 7th, 2008 at 12:15 am
Don’t you know that it’s smarter to let the bees swarm and sting you a little bit at time for the rest of your life, than to blow up the nest with whatever will get the job done?
Actually, whenever our family found a bee or wasp nest too close to the house, we would spray the nest with bug-killer and then go inside. Then we’d come out again, and keep spraying until the queen was dead and the hive destroyed.
The issue is not Iraq, the issue is how Iraq was handled. Invading Iraq had its positives,
No, the issue is actually both.
There was no need to invade Iraq for the reasons Bush stated; invading Iraq has hurt US interests both short and long-term, everwhere – or do you like a rampaging budget that’s forced us to borrow from the Chinese to maintain the dollar, and who now have us by the short hairs? ; AND the Bush administration has screwed up Iraq at every turn.
For what positives? A disarmed eunuch of a dictator has been hung, and now we are trying to force 3 groups who’ve hated each other from centuries to try Democracy – at gunpoint.
Oh, but at least the price of oil has gone down, and the occupation has paid for itself.
The issue is not Iraq, the issue is how Iraq was handled. Invading Iraq had its positives, and like it or not WE have not had an attack on our soil in 7 years.. THAT is something that hasn’t been accomplished in a LONG time.
We haven’t had an attack here – instead our soldiers are being blown up. So, 4000 dead US citizens and over 20,000 wounded, many for life. Great.
Oh, and not one prosecution for the WTC bombing that killed 3000 + people. And the living perpetrators still at large, plotting against us more.
Not a success.
July 7th, 2008 at 12:31 am
But Jim, you just said Paki is our ally.
Make up your mind. An ally wouldn’t allow AQ to set up house in it’s borders.
That’s where your argument falls apart. Paki was never a real ally; they barely allowed us any flyovers when we went into Afghanistan.
We had to strong arm that process. That, and the thin thread that keeps Musharaff in control is not a given. At any moment he could be wiped out and then what? AQ is not thriving. They are in a mess and given the right tools (a liberal world view such as we held prior to 9-11) will allow AQ to grow and mature into something much worse than we know now. AQ never would have had the power it had if Clinton had the balls to take action…9-11 probably would not have happened.
And now we wait. For the next attack that will come guaranteed if a liberal becomes the next President. Haven’t you read the news where Muslim American hating nations are cheering on and rooting for Obama? Does that not bother you at all? It sure bothers me. They rooted for John Kerry as well. Thankfully he wasn’t elected- it gave our country some more time to get done what needs to get done.
America is doomed, as is the free world, if this liberal cookies and milk, lets-hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya variety of diplomacy sets in.
July 7th, 2008 at 12:36 am
Jim, can you really be this stupid? please son get outside and step away from under your professors desk.
“Our soldiers are being blown up” “4000 dead” 5 years of war on 2 fronts.. and you are ready to surrender? I mean I lost a friend in Afghanistan, I have lost a kid we used to babysit in Iraq… And I know that number “4000″ is a lot and its painful, and it hurts… BUT damn boy do you have any idea what war is? do you know that the 4000 men who sacrificed all because they were called do not need you to “Justify” your feelings about the president for them? Do you know that you are WAY more helpful to those killing our guys than you are helpful to them? Do you know if you were anywhere near my AO and said anything like the shit you are talking here I’d tear your damn heart out and piss on it in front of you? You ignorant little piss ant.
July 7th, 2008 at 12:45 am
Make up your mind. An ally wouldn’t allow AQ to set up house in it’s borders.
There’s nothing for my mind to make up. I’m describing reality here.
The government of Pakistan is not in full control of its tribal regions – any more than Saddam was in full control of the Kurdish regions of Iraq. The Pakistan government *wishes* it was, but it simply does not have the military resources or political stability in their own country to make this happen.
This is why they would back us if we were able to go in and clean up the mess – it would be in their own best interest instead of ours. Unfortunately, we are **already** mired in two other military occupations and stretched thin because of it.
AQ is not thriving.
I know it’s more comfortable to believe this, and I wish it were true. But our own intelligence agencies do not agree with this assesment. Please read the reports I linked to in above comments.
AQ never would have had the power it had if Clinton had the balls to take action…
I seem to remember Clinton taking action, and the GOP shouting “Wag the Dog!!” As for blaming 9/11 on Clinton – what did Bush do about Al Qaeda, in the 8 months he had in office before 9/11?
Let’s see, he:
- made no response to the bombing of the Cole
- closed Richard Clarke out of all cabinet meetings and put no terrorism expert in his place
- completely ignored a comprehensive terror plan created by Clarke and others, and put nothing in it’s place
- did not hold one single meeting on terrorism before 9/11
- took an unprecedented month-long vacation
- while clearing brush on his magical playtime ranch-without-animals, completely ignored a PDB entitled “Bin Laden determined to attack US”.
So, you’re saying Clinton didn’t do enough – but Bush did less than Clinton, and in fact actually did nothing AND ignored reports. Then 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch. But 9/11 is somehow Clinton’s fault?
As for what causes other nations to cheer OR jeer, I could give a crap. I care about what works, period.
July 7th, 2008 at 12:45 am
Robert, thanks for your active participation and for standing up for our troops. I would have liked to participate in this discussion of Bin Laden and Iraq, but my mind has turned to Swiss cheese from “putting out fires” on too many fronts at the same time.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:10 am
Four federal workers (postal workers in fact) and others were killed or injured in terrorist attacks in this country AFTER 9/11/01. Remember?
July 7th, 2008 at 1:10 am
I don’t think anyone at Sadly, No is “pissed” at you. Rather they seem to be merely laughing at you and pointing out your limitations, which are considerable.
Defending misplaced loyalty and fealty to a bunch of war profiteers by calling it “supporting the troops” is an example of your inherent limitations. Iraq is an immoral clusterfuck that should never have happened, and it’s fun to watch you conservatives dancing through hoops, trying to pretend that none of it has anything to do with you, and that because you love a man in a uniform, you’re a superior American.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:12 am
No problem CT, Folks like ol Jim the libtard here (we have a better word for him but it’s a fairly clean blog) are the type of folks that will cause the demise of our nation. They stand in AMERICA, TAKE ALL AMERICA HAS TO OFFER, Whine and complain about AMERICA, while the government pays for their education in ways to undermine AMERICA. Sounds like a typical libtard upbringing to me, Welfare parents or too rich to take time and hug little Jimmy, maybe he just wasn’t loved enough as a kid or maybe loved too much :-|
Ether way these a-holes need to STFU until our guys get home then maybe they can find something else to bitch about.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:16 am
Bill, its funny? whats funny is watching the successes happen and you clinging to your “Blood for oil” and “illegal war” issues. I am waiting for one of your friends, you know the ones Bill, Code Pink types to try to blow something up so they can say “See Iraq didn’t help” but you need to tell them to hurry there Bill, you faux intellectual Iraq is going to be success eventually, disspite your best efforts snatch defeat from victory.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:19 am
Killer:
I’m sorry, but no, I don’t remember four postal workers “killed or injured” in terrorist attacks within the US after 9/11/01.
I’m pretty curious, though, because I do follow the news and worry about these sorts of things and I’m pretty sure I would have remembered that. What terrorist attacks in the US are you referring to?
July 7th, 2008 at 1:56 am
Not sure where you got your list from. It doesn’t seem to be an official U.S. Gov site or a major news organization. However, Many government officials were terrified of the US mail when people started dieing of ANTHRAX poisoning (others died). Ringing any bells yet? If you find that the State department does not list these attacks on the US government as “terrorist” I will costand rrected.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:56 am
oops “stand corrected”
July 7th, 2008 at 1:58 am
here’s a link from CDC
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwR/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5045a2.htm
July 7th, 2008 at 2:11 am
I suspect Killer may have been referring to the anthrax letters attack in 2001, although that resulted in five deaths, including two postal workers (not four).
While current thinking views Muslim extremists as the most likely perpetrators, this attack was never definitively linked to an identifiable terrorist group, although a lot of speculation at the time was floated regarding international or domestic groups.
Interestingly, the press reported just this past week that the government had reached a multi-million dollar settlement in the civil suit filed by Steven Hatfill, the person whom the FBI had publically named as a “person of interest” but never ended up filing charges against him.
The commentaries discussing this settlement seem to agree that the investigation was badly bungled, including the erroneous identification of the anthrax as being a “weaponized” strain, such that the perpetrators will never be definitively identified.
July 7th, 2008 at 2:13 am
Killer:
“my” list is just the first one that popped up on Google. Might not be good enough for you, that’s OK, we all choose our sources to at least some extent.
Do you have a link to something showing the anthrax poisonings were definitely terrorism? Last I heard, those crimes were unsolved, and the cases had gone cold; I’m pretty sure I would have heard about it if some arrests had been made, or even a motive established?
Also, I’m pretty sure only two postal service employees were killed in the anthrax attacks, not four, and five people total were killed, not four, if that’s what you were getting at, and if you want to enumerate the seriously injured, then the figure is 11, not 4. Not really a huge issue, but it’s better to get your facts right when you’re trying to make an argument.
July 7th, 2008 at 2:44 am
That’s why it said “or injured”. I suppose it is possible that weapons grade anthrax that originated in US military institutions was used to kill Americans as a prank or as a part of some other type of criminal act. Some government agencies don’t think so.
“Since November 7, 2001, CDC and state and local public health agencies have identified no new cases of bioterrorism-related anthrax. As of November 14, a total of 22 cases of anthrax has met the CDC case definition (1); 10 were confirmed inhalational anthrax, and 12 (seven confirmed and five suspected) were cutaneous anthrax.”
That is from the CDC link I posted.
Maybe you guys have another idea about what motive there was for the several letters sent to different facilities? You ask if I have a link showing definite terrorism. No. I will say that whatever the motive, terror was created. I don’t have an agenda here exept that I believe that whoever did this meant to terrorize this country and it’s Government and people died and I don’t want them to be forgotten in our haste to support political positions or ideologies.
July 7th, 2008 at 2:45 am
Man I screwed that up. Bold is mine, but I meant to close it after “related”.
—————————————–
I’ve fixed the html coding screw-up
-CT
July 7th, 2008 at 2:57 am
Robert, I am restraining my response to you in order to stay within polite discussion.
… and you are ready to surrender?
Here’s the deal: stopping a march forward into a meat grinder is not “Surrender”. How can it be? There is no one even to surrender to! Do you understand that? There is not a single enemy to defeat in Iraq; what there is instead is a brewing civil war. We could wipe Al Qaeda entirely out of Iraq, and there would STILL be a brewing civil war. Three different religious groups are trying to dominate and kill each other – and two of them are trying to kill us, because we are in the way of them killing each other.
I WISH the fact that brave US soldiers who trusted their leaders and died bravely in battle, could justify this war. That could then mean their lives were taken for a higher purpose. Then this would not be a tragedy.
But their lives are being spent on a war that does not help America. This is tragic and it is painful – but it is FACT.
The war in IraQ has:
- made it possible for Bin Laden to escape, Al Qaeda to rebuild, and the Taliban to resume power
- increased terrorism and hatred of the US worldwide
- weakened our economy
- stretched our military thin
- enabled our government to excuse eviscerating our Constitution more than ever before
If I’m going to live in the REAL WORLD – as opposed to the way I wish things were – then I have to acknowledge these realities.
I mean I lost a friend in Afghanistan, I have lost a kid we used to babysit in Iraq…
I’m very sorry for them, and I’m sorry also for your loss.
It’s especially tragic in that Afghanistan would almost certainly be much more peaceful now, if we weren’t sucked into an unnecessary two-front war in Iraq. Those resources in Afghanistan would have made quite a difference. They might have even saved your friend’s life, and made the kid you used to babysit not be exposed to what killed him.
do you know that the 4000 men who sacrificed all because they were called do not need you to “Justify” your feelings about the president for them?
Sure, I know that.
I also know that they are dead. And that they probably would not be, if we hadn’t invaded Iraq.
And I also know that people can believe in what they’re doing – AND STILL have their bravery and honor be pointlessly squandered by a government that does not care.
Do you know that you are WAY more helpful to those killing our guys than you are helpful to them?
Do YOU know that YOU are fighting more kids to DIE POINTLESSLY?
Do YOU know that YOUR actions are leading directly to someone else’s father, son, brother, sister, or daughter being blown up so Shiites and Sunnis can continue their pissing match?
Do YOU know that this war is also HURTING AMERICA? That it’s increasing terrorism, increasing the power of Al Qaeda, and putting the future of our country in the hands of the Chinese for God’s sake?
Do you know if you were anywhere near my AO and said anything like the shit you are talking here I’d tear your damn heart out and piss on it in front of you?
Here’s the deal:
Please tell me what I have said that is factually wrong in any way.
Now: if I haven’t said anything that is factually false, why would you try and kick my ass?
It feels great to be tough and macho and throw threats around. But you are not saving lives this way. You are ensuring that more kids you know and more friends of yours will die FOR NO REASON. You – not me – are ensuring that their nobility, their honor and their heroism is being SQUANDERED on an occupation that is making us more unsafe as a nation, every day that it continues.
July 7th, 2008 at 3:06 am
..our good neighbours to the south have all the hallmarks of what has been called a “mixed economy”, since the sixties. But in American terms, all of Scandinavia is basically some sort of Maoist cult: strong education system, healthcare, government sponsored jobs and even housing in the outback, income tax as well as direct taxation on services, government regulation on environmental issues that might be challenging the ethical sense of our corporations, labour law and mandated benefits that would make americans have fits of various kinds (depending on social status), a system where unemployed people have the right to claim a certain amount of money from the government based on your earlier income while you’re looking for a new job – culture, youth clubs, and so on sponsored by tax- money – it’s an outrage to even think about letting corporate money sponsor more than small parts or specific projects on our universities, a government sponsored news- channel (i.e., so they wouldn’t be dependent on ratings or corporate sponsors) – etc.
So yeah, they’re socialist. Even if their government supported the Iraq disaster in the beginning, for some unfathomable reason. And do print cartoons of Mohammed in Christian papers that no one would’ve read otherwise, and if it wasn’t for the entire MOOOSLEM BAD! COME TO EXPLOIT UR BENEFITS! AND KEEL OUR WOIMEN IN DEEIR BEEDS! – thing that’s so popular in the danish equivalent of the GOP.
:roll: ..what am I saying – they don’t read papers.
July 7th, 2008 at 3:08 am
Grampaw wrote: “Do you have a link to something showing the anthrax poisonings were definitely terrorism?”
They were pretty clearly terrorism of *some* sort, whether from an actual Islamic terrorist group, or from Cheney’s office trying to use limited terror to gin up a casus belli against Iraq instead of bin Laden. (Given Cheney and Addington’s belief that the executive can do literally anything regardless of law, and how few deaths there were, I have little doubt that they would consider a few dead innocent Americans to be acceptable collateral damage.)
The anthrax was clearly intended to terrorize, and appears to have been intended to appear to be from an Islamic terrorist, although the goal that the terrorizing was supposed to achieve remains unknown.
July 7th, 2008 at 3:12 am
FYI, Robert:
I grew up in a lower middle class family, from lower middle class roots. Everyone in my family has worked hard for every single thing we have. There’s no welfare, no inheritances and no trusts funds. They built their own houses. They worked hard their whole lives and made everything they had with their own bare hands. Got it?
Another thing you should know is: my father volunteered for Viet Nam, from College. Why? Because he thought the US government wouldn’t send men to die for no good reason.
Then once we was in Viet Nam, he saw other good, brave, honorable and trusting men killed in order to allegedly “democratize” foreigners in the middle of a civil war, who all hated him just because he was there. Sound familiar?
What he saw over there, and how he was unceremoniously dumped back into civilian society when he was used up, changed his life forever. And he was one of the very lucky ones.
Were you in Viet Nam? Maybe you know a story just like his. That’s the REALITY of wars that are bad ideas.
Just because I oppose ONE war, does not mean I oppose ALL wars. But some wars are good ideas, and some wars are bad ones. I **support** the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. I **support** doing whatever it takes to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden. The war in Iraq is a bad idea.
Is that clear enough for you? Do you get it now?
July 7th, 2008 at 3:20 am
“Is that clear enough for you? Do you get it now?”
I doubt he gets it.
If he was Argentinian he’d probably be blogging about how great an idea it was to start the Falklands war.
July 7th, 2008 at 3:31 am
John H,
Cut the ad hominem crap right now along with unsupported insinuations of criminal activity by our Vice President.
Check our Disclaimers Etc. link at the top of every page if you’d like more explanation. Further attempts to sabotage genuine debate here will not be tolerated.
July 7th, 2008 at 3:50 am
“Cut the ad hominem crap right now along with unsupported insinuations of criminal activity by our Vice President.”
The VP is just a politician, a bureaucrat, and a temporary office holder, not some kind of princess. I don’t believe in treating him or the President like royalty. This is America, after all.
Any claim they might have had to being treated with civility and given the benefit of the doubt was forefeit as soon as they tasked John Yoo with producing legal nonsense to justify the use of torture. That pretty much clarified what kind of men are in this administration, and how low they’d stoop.
I apologize if you’d rather ignore this and pretend it never happened.
I note Robert’s use of ‘libtard’ and other ad-hom doesn’t meet with any complaints from you.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:00 am
I linked over from SadlyNo, and I must admit, other than the posts from Robert the discussions here seem as civil as anything I’ve seen in quite a while.
“Douche-Nozzle” is a little over the top, but not bad in context…see Robert.
I’m generally prog/lib, and I believe we’re seeing (in our economy and foreign affairs) the results of misdirected one-party rule. I served in the Navy in Nam; I’m a bleeding-heart liberal who’s killed people. There are a lot of us.
It’s been a while, but I have pretty vivid memories. I believe it is best for our troops to get them out of harm’s way. They have accomplished the military objective; Saddam is gone, and there in a new government in place. We need to get our men and women out of there.
As for other posts here about global warming; there seems to be an almost reflexive reaction to “job loss” or “economic slowdown”. We already have both, and we have not, as a nation, addressed climate change. Should we? Do we need to consider the world we’re leaving to our children or grandchildren? If we’re not considering it in terms of our economy or foreign policy, it’s at least consistent to ignore global ecology.
I’m just saying…
July 7th, 2008 at 4:06 am
Jim,
The merits of our going into have long been debated, and certainly for a season, Afghanistan was the central training ground for Al Qaeda. We certainly missed an excellent opportunity to catch Osama at Tora Bora.
However, it is also clear that the Islamic terror networks was then and is now much more extensive than just Al Qaeda. 9/11 was a wake-up call.
Iraq was a logical target for us to attack the larger network of Islamic terror groups. The invasion was a military success, though Turkey’s refusal at the last minute to let us send force to N. Iraq helped enable much of the Saddam’s people to escape into what was then friendly territory.
We also made serious mistakes in the early occupation and did not change course quickly enough to forestall what almost all observers now recognize had almost became a full-blown civil war.
However, with Rumsfeld’s departure and the ascension of Gen Petraeus and the initiation of the Surge strategy (coupled with overreaching by Al Qaeda and other terrorist elements), we have achieved an unprecedented reversal in Iraq in a remarkably short period of time, especially when you look at the history of counterinsurgency campaigns and the duration that they take. And while 4,000 soldiers plus the thousands of injured troops are a great cost, compared to Vietnam casualites and other major wars, these numbers are relatively modest.
Though that comparison is not much comfort to one who believes the war was a mistake to have commenced – and I respect that conviction.
And I do feel that the Bush Administration was inexcusably derelict when, having obtained Congressional authrorization to go to war, they decided that they did not need to continue justify the war to the American people.
This all said, we have not only put out military credibility on the line in Iraq, rightly or wrongly – we have also put the lives of many Iraqis on the line who have put their trust in our promises to remain in Iraq until we have established a stable governing structure that can defend itself and keep peace among its peoples.
Having done so, we have the obligation to keep our word, especially given the clear progress that is being manifested. The point at this point is not to focus on who was right or wrong at various junctures in the past, which controversies will not be resolvable for years if ever – rather, my desire is that we endeavor in so far as it is in our power to yield an honorable conclusion.
And we have the obligation to act in accord with present facts, rather than holding on to outdated positions. Bush did change course with the Surge when he saw that the prior direction was heading to defeat; are today’s critics willing to entertain the possibility of a successful outcome (as I outlined in two paragraphs above)?
July 7th, 2008 at 4:13 am
From Civil Truth:
“Having done so, we have the obligation to keep our word, especially given the clear progress that is being manifested.”
I wasn’t aware we had given our word. What did we agree to do, and to who?
Seriously, did Bush cut some deal with someone in Iraq?
July 7th, 2008 at 4:17 am
John H,
Again, read the Disclaimer Etc. link, which defines the ground rules here. I try to be fair in my mind, but I don’t have to defend to you the boundaries that I or the other adminstrators here choose to set.
That said, your last comment indicates to me that you appear capable of behaving yourself here.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:29 am
PetaMike,
It’s really late to start to start a thorough discussion about global climate change. Let me just say that, laying aside the issue of the how much impact human actions are having on global temperature compared with natural variations, my concern is that the actions we take should have measurable impacts so that we know what if any difference out actions are taking, and we also need to assess the costs versus the benefits of such actions, taking into account the opportunity costs of not devoting resources to other more pressing issues (such as hunger, sanitation, water supplies, air pollution, to name just a few). Not to mention that shrinking out economic activity further may forestall our ability to conduct research in or take advantage of future technological advances in the area of climate change because we less money to allocate. The proposed “solutions” to date do not meet these criteria.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:40 am
PetaMike,
Regarding Iraq, I think all of us will welcome the opportunity to draw down our troop committment in Iraq as the situation on the ground presents itself. Premature withdrawal would be an error in Iraq (as it also is in lovemaking). I feel confident in letting our commanders on the ground determine out need for trooops.
As far as my comments about committment and “giving our word”, I’m not talking about a political “deal”. What I’m referring to is that a lot of ordinary Iraqi citizens in the tens of thousands at least, have put their very lives on the line by supporting the actions of our troops in Iraqi, along with various tribal leaders and other political leaders. These people have stood up against the threats of terrorists and other forces wishing to tear the society apart by their taking actions such as denying aid and refuge to terrorists, taking leadership positions in the emerging central government and its tribal allies, joining the military and police forces, or just going about their daily lives and building an economy through business activities in defiance of terrorist threats or extortion attempts.
The whole fabric of the emerging post-Saddam Iraq society rests upon our promise to stand with them as they create a society and government that will work to enable a functioning society, protecting them from harm as they create their own structures of self-defense.
This is what I mean by giving our word.
July 7th, 2008 at 6:31 am
Charles Bukowski worked for the postal service and he could write…
July 7th, 2008 at 6:40 am
“socialist toilet bowl of mediocrity”
Duncan, my question is why you think: 1) socialism, or more appropriately in this case, a more cooperative social system since the left in the U.S. is not near socialism, leads to mediocrity and 2) why you think a cooperative social system is bad in the first place?
I live in Sweden, where there is a very cooperative social system. I pay nothing for education, ever and a maximum of about $120 a year for health care. I can live here for one quarter of my take home pay in the U.S. and have the same standard of living. And, trust me, there is no more mediocrity around me than anywhere else in the world, in fact, I find Sweden to be about the same as the U.S. except that is it much safer and cleaner in the big cities here.
So again, my question to you: Why do you feel this way?
July 7th, 2008 at 8:19 am
Grampaw,
Nice attempt at a back-handed compliment, especially since you would think that I would feel working for the USPS would be somehow beneath me, which I don’t. Those guys have some of the best benefits of all the employees of the federal government. But atleast I know how YOU feel ’bout them. As far as my actual job, when I was in the USAF, I sure as hell didn’t give out my Squadron, Base and Commander’s phone # for some random nutjob to try and harass me at work, why in the hell would I do it now. You made a list of the jobs… figgur it out yourself…