The Liberals’ Creed
- Thread starter Gonz
- Start date
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
Gonz said:
How about enlightend?
Les said:
Funny, you being a lib n'all, I wonder if you will be allowed to make a comment of your own choosing. Maybe only libs that meet their criteria are allowed preach the approved message.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
I've got a copy if you want one for posterity.
Prolly best to sweep it under the rug, cant' have the actual facts lying around like that anyway.
- - - - - -
"Bush is crooked and hides all the facts"
Prolly best to sweep it under the rug, cant' have the actual facts lying around like that anyway.
- - - - - -
"Bush is crooked and hides all the facts"
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
markjs said:
. . . but are you surprised?
catocom
Well-Known Member
Since RM's, and my posts don't seem the be debated,
am I to assume the accusations were successfully debunked?
http://otcentral.com/forum/showpost.php?p=343602&postcount=67
am I to assume the accusations were successfully debunked?
http://otcentral.com/forum/showpost.php?p=343602&postcount=67
markjs
Banned
I believe the UN is the best world governing body we have, flawed though it is. I do not believe the UN is the final word, but I do believe its a step in the right direction twords a world governing body,
I believe the UN inspections were flawed. I believe we knew they had the scuds and I believe if any substantial WMD evidence was found it would be worldwide headline news the administration would be all over it.
I believe both actions should have had UN approval but bot actions may have been politically necessary.
No I believe it was somewhat multilateral but it doesn't make it right.
In part the war was about greed and oil but thats not all it is about. Saddam did need to be removed from power and I consider that part of the war a success. I would howver like to know why I, on the west coast, who is only using gas from Alaska oil is paying over $2 a gallon?
It would be ignorant to think that there wouldn't always be stategic objectives in any war. I do think it;s hypocritcal to take out one tyrant when we simultaneously lend economic support to another
I believe that all politicians lie. I believe when the only intelligence you have is flawed you can be justified in making a wrong decision.
Yes I believe that.
I believe it has yet to be proven to my satisfaction the enough WMDs have been found or have been proven to exist, to justify this war.
I believe there are terrorists all throughout the middle east, even Iraq. I do not believe this is any proven Iraq/Al Quaeda connection. In no way do I think we bring terror on ourselves on the scale of 9/11. That tragedy must not go un punished, but going after Bin Laden, and not Iraq would have been more prudent. I believe acts of terrorsim against US personell in Iraq are simpl casualties of war, but they justify engaging the enemy. We do not have the right to torture Iraqis
Rubbish! I believe Saddam's rule was far worse than the torture of Iraqis. The torture however is still wron!
No I don't, no again, and yes.
.
I hope that Bush will be defeated and yes if Iraq goes badly that could have an effect. I wish that no more Americans or Iraqis would be killed in Iraq. I wish our troops would come home. I sincerly hope that casualties are minimal and that Bush is defeated for other reasons.
Does anyone really believe in quagmire? Vietnam and Iraq are totally different conflicts. There are paralells but there is no serious comparison to be made. The most vietnam like thing about Iraq is that there will always be restance fighters in Iraq
No Vietnam was Vietnam, all conflicts are different. Some of the soldiers in Vietnam did indeed kill babys, that is an incontravertible fact. All I know about John Kerry's war record is that he won commendations. I assume he won them for a reason
I believe with is combined military and senatorial service he is qualified. I disagree with the vote against body armor but I do not blindly follow Kerry wherever he may lead.
I believe in freedom of the press. I believe Ted Kennedy is a murderer, and I'd gladly take Clinton back
And that's just one Liberals opinion.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
catocom said:
But didn'cha knoooow that as you expended the effort to reply?
I am sure another outdated C/P, Op/Ed, book promotion, is the only response we can expect, . . . over and over again.
I have yet to see any replies to the three large post I have made based solely on the referenced facts. No doubt, the points I shown to be not true will re-appear . . . . over and over again.
Clinton "ran from the country"? Hmmm--when someone earns a Rhodes Scholarship, that is "running from the country"? But when someone is jumped into the National Guard and fails to meet his minimum requirements, that's okay?
Funny double standard you have there.
I smoked one time in my life--age three, when Big Bro made up a pipe of tobacco taken from spent cigarette butts.
I rarely drink, as alcohol just makes me sleepy.
I have used psychoactive medications ONLY when they were given to me or prescribed by physicians, and then usually stopped using them before I needed to because I couldn't stand how they altered my perceptions or fouled up my dreams.
But I can see that Bush's policies are counterproductive as well as hypocritical.
Strengthening penalties for drug usage only makes more criminals out of people who are primarily hurting themselves and their families. Treatment may help them--sending them to prison won't--just makes them more likely to become career criminals.
Funny double standard you have there.
I smoked one time in my life--age three, when Big Bro made up a pipe of tobacco taken from spent cigarette butts.
I rarely drink, as alcohol just makes me sleepy.
I have used psychoactive medications ONLY when they were given to me or prescribed by physicians, and then usually stopped using them before I needed to because I couldn't stand how they altered my perceptions or fouled up my dreams.
But I can see that Bush's policies are counterproductive as well as hypocritical.
Strengthening penalties for drug usage only makes more criminals out of people who are primarily hurting themselves and their families. Treatment may help them--sending them to prison won't--just makes them more likely to become career criminals.
Gato_Solo said:
Agreed, many children who are in crisis have less than adequate parents--but that is NOT always the case. Have a case right now where a kid is out of control, and it is NOT the parents' fault--the kid has serious biochemical imbalances which they are trying desperately to isolate and offer appropriate treatment for before he does himself or others a serious injury.
Also, in the case of children whose parents are struggling just to stay afloat, such families are often so involved just trying to survive that they have neither time nor energy to deal effectively with their children's needs. And when it is a choice between a book and food, food will necessarily win out.
But Special Education is a federal concern, and I deal with Special Education. The standards I must meet in my work are dictated by the ADA, IDEA, and all the various Title programs that the federal government has put into place. When the federal government places the standards, it also must provide the means to see they are met. But instead we have dropping funding, increased documentation standards, and decreasing practical as well as financial support to see that the new standards are met.
I question the veracity of this statement.
A growing phenomenom in our state is the reality of tent cities for the homeless, most of whom were professionals who suddenly lost all when the businesses they worked for were taken over in mergers, and now the new companies want their own folk in charge or they want younger, cheaper employees working for them without older habits and perceptions that may need to be trained out of them or paid for in the nature of higher salaries. Without financial support all of a sudden, unable to find employment in a market where so many jobs are being shipped offshore to save money and up the bottom line, these folk have lost everything they had. This is a rapidly growing experience across the nation.
I'll tell you what--my own job is now in danger, and I'm not far from being the next candidate for such a new residence. And I owe a lot of the insecurity I face to Bush's simplistic ideas about what education should entail.
That is not true. Most folk who take advantage of Welfare are on it a limited amount of time. Are there abuses? Yes, as the Kid can tell you from experiences he has had with those who do. But most are not just taking advantage of you--they truly need help for a limited amount of time, and most are fully willing to take on a paying job when it becomes available and is sufficient to give them and their families a living wage.
By the way--am NOT and never have been a member of ABB. My one other political discussion group is an email list, and a limited one at that. And there I am seen by those on the left as being to the right while those on the right see me as being a flaming liberal, which the true flaming liberals on the list find hilarious.
Suggest many of you check out WM3.org, btw.
Suggest many of you check out WM3.org, btw.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
(((((((((Larner)))))))))))
catocom
Well-Known Member
Larner, I have to agree with a lot of what you are saying there.
Especially about the schools.
It seem more and more people a "home schooling" now.
Not only because of the funding, and redtape, but because
administrators aren't screened good enough.
In thin area Ga., for from principle on up to the superI, there are
people that just look at is as a job, just don't give a crap, and
even criminal sex offenders in the system....
It's a travisty.
but.....
it all started before bush, and he just hasn't seemed to help the situation,
and it in fact is even worse now than last year. (gets worse every year)
I don't agree with everything the pres. is doing right now (domestically mostly)
but overall I support him.
Thus, my hesitation to vote for him again.
e.g. I thought the "frivolous laws suits act" was going to be a good thing.....
I missed the part where ,
6 months after admittance to a hospital, if you had complications due
to neglect and such, you basically have no case.
It should have been from the release date, not the entrance date.
My dad went in for a simple knee operation, and staff infection set in.
8 months later he lost his leg at mid thigh. Since the laws was changed,
he has no case, and no leg.
Especially about the schools.
It seem more and more people a "home schooling" now.
Not only because of the funding, and redtape, but because
administrators aren't screened good enough.
In thin area Ga., for from principle on up to the superI, there are
people that just look at is as a job, just don't give a crap, and
even criminal sex offenders in the system....
It's a travisty.
but.....
it all started before bush, and he just hasn't seemed to help the situation,
and it in fact is even worse now than last year. (gets worse every year)
I don't agree with everything the pres. is doing right now (domestically mostly)
but overall I support him.
Thus, my hesitation to vote for him again.
e.g. I thought the "frivolous laws suits act" was going to be a good thing.....
I missed the part where ,
6 months after admittance to a hospital, if you had complications due
to neglect and such, you basically have no case.
It should have been from the release date, not the entrance date.
My dad went in for a simple knee operation, and staff infection set in.
8 months later he lost his leg at mid thigh. Since the laws was changed,
he has no case, and no leg.