1) The modern American “peace movement” is responsible for the deaths of far more people than the U.S.-involved wars its members have protested over the past half century. Why then are so many Americans still convinced that going to war is the worst thing our country can do?
2) Over the course of its existence, our planet has been much colder and much warmer than it is today, having endured periodic ice ages and various cataclysmic natural events. That being the case, why would anyone choose to believe that human beings are responsible for the earth’s most recent, and relatively mild, climatic shift?
3) The Bush doctrine of preemptive warfare would - in all likelihood - have saved tens of millions of lives had it been implemented against Nazi Germany prior to Hitler’s invasion of Poland in 1939. So why do human rights activists today insist that stopping Islamofascists from acquiring nuclear weapons isn’t worth the cost in human life?
4) Monetary transactions between private citizens are what fuel our economy. The government taxes private citizens, thereby removing money from the economy. Since economic growth is dependent upon increased monetary transactions within the private sector, why do Democrat lawmakers routinely propose raising taxes, especially on those citizens who invest the most money in our economy?
5) The word viable - as it applies to human beings - means capable of life or normal growth and development. An unborn human being during every stage of gestation is clearly alive and capable of normal development, unless he or she is genetically predisposed to abnormal growth or is hindered in some way from developing naturally by an external force. That being the case, why do some people argue that unborn human beings are non-viable during the earliest stages of their development, and therefore, appropriate candidates for abortion?
6) The Geneva Conventions’ protocols relative to the treatment of prisoners of war, were created for the purpose of holding the signatories of the various treaties which make up those Conventions to a certain moral standard of behavior during times of war. Any entity, be it a nation, group, or individual, that does not adhere to the standards set forth therein, is not subject to the Conventions’ protections under international law. How then can one justify affording such protections to terrorists, who ignore all of the aforementioned behavioral standards?
Oh, and one last thing…
7) If George W. Bush is as stupid as so many liberals claim, how did he manage to steal an election, mastermind 9/11, cover up his administration’s involvement in that event after the fact, con practically every Congressional Democrat into going to war with Iraq just so he could further enrich his cronies in the oil industry, single-handedly destroy every American’s civil rights via the Patriot Act, and then steal a second election on top of all that? And if he’s really an evil genius, which he’d surely have to be to get away with even half of those things, why aren’t his primary political adversaries in prison on trumped-up criminal charges right now… or dead?
By Edward L. Daley
Owner of the Daley Times-Post
http://www.times-post.com
Rate this post:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Stumble It!
DadWith2Girls said,
When you filter your reality through the ideological lenses you have chosen, what do you imagine that you might see… 100 years from now?
What is your utopian vision?
August 3, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Squiggy said,
August 4, 2007 at 5:32 am
adenium said,
2) The “choice to believe that human beings are responsible for the earth’s most recent . . . climatic shift” is based on observations that the average surface temperature of the earth has been increasing since the beginning of the industrial revolution. For as much good that the industrial revolution did for western society, it also resulted in unprecedented amounts of CO2 being released into the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels– first coal, then oil. Whether that increase is entirely caused by human activity remains to be seen.
3) No one would dispute that preventing any terrorist organization from obtaining nuclear weapons is a bad thing. The problem is that the Bush administration invaded a country that we were all led to believe had nukes or other WMD and was ready and willing to supply them to Al-Qaeda. In the end, neither was the case and the credibility of the President and his doctrine of preemptive warfare have lost credit with the American public– not just peace activists.
4) No one likes paying taxes, but it’s preferable to pay a little for public goods like preventing bridges from collapsing. As for the wealthy, they have more tax shelters than are available to the middle class and routinely pay a smaller share of their income in taxes than do the middle class.
5) I don’t have an answer, other than “Keep your laws off my wife’s womb.”
6) Because we are better than they are, and to lower ourselves to their level only helps their cause.
7) I no longer believe that GWB is a complete idiot– just an idiot. He’s a wealthy idiot, with a wealthy family, and many wealthy and powerful friends. Anything he’s ever accomplished has been with the help of his friends. Dick Cheney and Karl Rove are the brains of the operation, George is the willing mouthpiece.
August 4, 2007 at 12:07 pm
CaptDMO said,
2.Let’s go to the long term soil and ice core samples chet!
3. I, an American, consider post Soviet collapse, and subsequent
boost in black market atomic goodies, along with the vast number
of Middle Eastern folk with an American academic sponsored education
in physics and engineering. I have NOT dismissed credibillity in a preemptive
warfare as an assurance of retribution to ALL potential offenders. Apparently
your pronouncement for “the American Public” is unqualified.
4.How much of the infrastructure, and military resources, be maintained with all that VAWA, illegal immigrant relief, and disingenuous federal law suit cash?. How many folks end up employed with all that “extra” cash that “rich” folks have?
5. Keep your wifes womb out of the “universal health” percentage of my pay check.
6. Wow, Ace of Spades addresses THAT one at length.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/235145.php
“The Toxic Self-Delusions of the Liberal Psychology”
7.Is there simply a lack of the opposing party members with “friends”?
August 4, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Squiggy said,
Thanks man. I love it when posters prove their “intelligence” the very first time I read them. Then I don’t need to wonder.
You’re saying that if someone has a gun to my daughter’s head, it “demeans” me to blow the guy away. It “lowers me to his level”. No you d……s - it happens to be the right thing to do.
I’m going to make a hypothesis here - liberals can only survive when at least half the population is conservative. We may not like them, but we still protect them, whether by going to war (yes, I did) or by keeping libs from absolute power. If they get total power, they’ll destroy themselves and all of us too. And they’ll believe they’re doing good while it happens.
Funny how they’ll believe “survival of the fittest” only when it fits their atheist philosophy.
August 5, 2007 at 4:58 am