i love liberals!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Bichons are lovely little dogs.

Yep they are little cuties!

They're like little people, except with fur.

yep they are like little 3 year olds

Not going to scare a burglar away - that's for sure though.

[isleta521 5]

Bichons are lovely little dogs.

Yep they are little cuties!

They're like little people, except with fur.

yep they are like little 3 year olds

Not going to scare a burglar away - that's for sure though.

But they sure will let you and burgler know when they have entered. Thats when I come in to scare Burgler away (or make him go away).

[Carol&Marc 0]

Bichons are lovely little dogs.

Yep they are little cuties!

They're like little people, except with fur.

yep they are like little 3 year olds

Not going to scare a burglar away - that's for sure though.

But they sure will let you and burgler know when they have entered. Thats when I come in to scare Burgler away (or make him go away).

they wake us up and burglar get .45 cal bullet as a gift from yours truly!

is this turning into a pet thread?

Edited October 3, 2006 by Carol&Marc

[isleta521 5]

Bichons are lovely little dogs.

Yep they are little cuties!

They're like little people, except with fur.

yep they are like little 3 year olds

Not going to scare a burglar away - that's for sure though.

But they sure will let you and burgler know when they have entered. Thats when I come in to scare Burgler away (or make him go away).

they wake us up and burglar get .45 cal bullet as a gift from yours truly!

is this turning into a pet thread?

Now thats what Im talking about!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

is this turning into a pet thread?

I guess it might as well seeing as you have twisted, spun, bellyflopped, nit picked and parsed your way out of addressing the following:

In response to:

why do you have the freedom of speech?

Because, as Steven pointed out, a bunch of people in the eighteenth century decided that would be a good thing. Why did they decide so? Because they read a bunch of mostly French books explaining how a good society balanced individual freedoms with communal responsibility, meaning idea of freedom is based on the idea of reciprocity between governing and governed.

However, while this principle was enshrined in the bill of rights (not the declaration of independence or the constitution), it was abridged by the governing authorities as early as 1797. Why? Because the governing authorities viewed popular dissent (particularly by supporters of the opposing party) as a threat to their unabated power. Interestingly, rather than telling people they didn't have the freedom of speech anymore, the Adams administration just called everyone who disagreed a foreign spy, hence the moniker Alien and Sedition Act. Most shocking fact in this context: Th. Jefferson himself was accused of posing a threat to the government and Americans and was sought for trial by some town in Connecticut.

how did this right come about?

See above. The right came about because of the insufficiencies of the constitution. Importantly, it is an outgrowth of the French enlightenment. The revolution itself has nothing to do with it, as it was primarily fought over taxation and imperial expansion (no the British did not want their colonial subjects to move west of the thirteen colonies).

How many died for this right?

Lots of people but not during official battlefield actions. The Freedom of Speech has been abridged way too often and every time people (many of whom are unnamed and still branded traitors) died. What is happening now is just another episode of oppression in the name of patriotism.

were you born in the U.S.

No, but I live here. And I do consider this question an insult because it suggests that only native born Americans have the right to free speech or to speak their mind. But as the Alien and Sedition Act and all the other incursions on free speech demonstrate, this move is typical of a certain brand of people who do not understand the right to free speech as reciprocal.

Do you love America? If yes why?

Yes, I do, but not in the same way you do. America happens to be my work, and I am heavily invested in preserving the spirit of the constitution in everything I do.

For me, American is not some thing that only lives in symbols, such as the flag, the pledge, the larger-than-life images of the founders (all of which are meaningless because they obscure the beauty with a bunch of empty phrases). No, America is the here and now, the blood spillled by those excluded from the political process, and the past which is rich and more than just a list of military victories.

Is president Bush EVIL ?

How do I know, I haven't met him. I also don't consider people to be plain evil. I believe Bush is acting against America because rather than focusing on the communal good and communal responsibility he furthers individual interests, thus abolishing the central tenet of reciprocity so dear to the founders. The word "evil" oversimplifies the complex nature of the problem.

Why is President Bush like HITLER? if yes HOW?

Dude, that is possible the least appealing of your questions because it attests to your indoctrination. The answer is fairly simple. No, Bush is not like Hitler. For one thing, he lacks the intelligence; for another, Hitler was a decorated war veteran who defended his nation in WW I. There are, however, certain parallels concerning their understanding of national security (to secure a nation you need to abridge the rights of its inhabitants) and of their office (the leader of a country should hold as much power as humanly possible; hence democratic process are deemed dangerous and information that needs to be accessible to the general public to ensure democratic dialogue is classified)

But since I have just answered your questions, I'd like to hear your answers to the following:

1a.) What is a liberal? And please don't give me some blanket answer but take the time to provide your own personal explication together with some concrete examples.

1b.) Why are liberals endangering America?

2.) Why was it ok to impeach Clinton over a stained dressed but not ok to even question Bush's decisions in the aftermath of 9/11?

3.) What does the Patriot Act have to do with Patriotism if it defeats the tenets of the founders?

4.) If we assume the War of Independence and the War of 1812 was fought to ensure liberty to Americans, then how can we defend any war that abridges those liberties?

5.) Why do we always need to blame foreigners for everything that is wrong with this country?

6.) Why do we view America as an anti-imperialist nation and a champion of the oppressed around the world? What does the colonial legacy tell us about America's colonialism?

You said:

Answering questions with more questions isnt an answer!

and

They are not answers! they are simple anti american opinions!

Care to comment?

Edited October 3, 2006 by erekose

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Bichons are lovely little dogs.

Yep they are little cuties!

They're like little people, except with fur.

yep they are like little 3 year olds

Not going to scare a burglar away - that's for sure though.

But they sure will let you and burgler know when they have entered. Thats when I come in to scare Burgler away (or make him go away).

they wake us up and burglar get .45 cal bullet as a gift from yours truly!

is this turning into a pet thread?

tee hee.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Care to comment?

I guess not then.

[Carol&Marc 0]

I dont feel like wasting my time, I could write a 1000 page thesis on the subject and all you would do is twist,spin,bellyflop,nit pick,parse, your way out of it and end with another question! so sorry not gonna take your BAIT!

How do you know? So far you haven't made a single point that was not ripped from some neo-con publication and entirely your own.

Also, there's no need for 1000 pages. All it takes is a few self-conceived sentences.

and commonplaces.

Fish said: "ripped from some neo-con publication and entirely your own."

These are QUOTES ripped from an article! and they are TRUE! The statements I cut and pasted are ones that I agree with strongly! you can interpret them however you see fit. It seems anything coming from what you conceive to be from anything resembling the right you start adding words such as neo-con to put a negative conotation to it!

Fish said:" I honestly would like to have a serious discussion, but that is impossible if all that is coming back is a barrage of stereotypes"

Personally I havent seen much of barrage of anything! you refer to Bush as Bushie, you said he was unintelligent, he maybe! I dont know him personally and I'm sure you don't either. So if you would just enlighten me on one thing who the hell put you in charge of JUDGING intelligence! If I started refering to you as Stinky fish I'm sure you would'nt appreciate it much at all! So when you got the Democrats out there calling him school yard names is just ridiculous! The only reason I think they do it is because in some sick way it makes them feel good! Oh and i'm sure all your info comes from ligitimate places only you know about!

READ THE ABOVE erekose

Im sure the sarcasm will be coming shortly!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Sarcasm? Not at all - just wondering if you will:

(i) answer the questions you were asked, after someone else took the time to answer yours.

(ii) explain which of their answers to your questions amount to "simple anti-american opinions".

Care to comment?

BTW - where did Fisch refer to Bush as Bushie? Or is that more assumption? Similarly where did he/she question his (bush's) intelligence?

Edited October 3, 2006 by erekose

[PsychoKat 0]

These are QUOTES ripped from an article! and they are TRUE! The statements I cut and pasted are ones that I agree with strongly! you can interpret them however you see fit. It seems anything coming from what you conceive to be from anything resembling the right you start adding words such as neo-con to put a negative conotation to it!

Fish said:" I honestly would like to have a serious discussion, but that is impossible if all that is coming back is a barrage of stereotypes"

Personally I havent seen much of barrage of anything! you refer to Bush as Bushie, you said he was unintelligent, he maybe! I dont know him personally and I'm sure you don't either. So if you would just enlighten me on one thing who the hell put you in charge of JUDGING intelligence! If I started refering to you as Stinky fish I'm sure you would'nt appreciate it much at all! So when you got the Democrats out there calling him school yard names is just ridiculous! The only reason I think they do it is because in some sick way it makes them feel good! Oh and i'm sure all your info comes from ligitimate places only you know about!

READ THE ABOVE erekose

Im sure the sarcasm will be coming shortly!

Or...maybe members of our government are empathically feeding off of the actions and responses of each other and digressing intellectually back to their grammer school days. Based on this accounting it appears that digression into school yard name calling and such is not one sided

I apologize for the length but on the upside it is humorous in some areas....and maybe a bit scary in others

The U.S. news media always makes light of George W. Bush’s tendency to put down others through disparaging comments about their personal appearances or by assigning them silly nicknames. It’s just the “inner frat boy” coming out, we’re told.

So, when U.S. News cited “a top insider” describing how Bush likes to fart in the presence of junior White House staffers as a joke on them, the item was given the boys-will-be-boys title: “Animal House in the West Wing.”

According to U.S. News, Bush was just “a funny, earthy guy who, for example, can’t get enough of fart jokes. He’s also known to cut a few for laughs, especially when greeting new young aides.” Bush was described, too, as someone who “loves to cuss [and] gets a jolly when a mountain biker wipes out trying to keep up with him.” [u.S. News, Aug. 20, 2006]

But Bush’s behavior could be viewed in a less sympathetic light. Given his famous thin skin whenever he feels slighted, his eagerness to demean others could be interpreted as a sign of his dynastic authority, a modern-day droit du seigneur in which he can humiliate others but they can’t return the favor.

Indeed, this tendency to assert his superior position over others by subjecting them to degrading treatment has been a recurring part of Bush’s persona dating back at least to his days as an “enforcer” on his father’s presidential campaigns.

In 1986, for instance, Bush spotted Wall Street Journal political writer Al Hunt and his wife Judy Woodruff having dinner at a Dallas restaurant with their four-year-old son. Bush was steaming over Hunt’s prediction that Jack Kemp – not then-Vice President George H.W. Bush – would win the Republican presidential nomination in 1988.

Bush stormed up to the table and cursed Hunt out. “You ###### son of a ######,” Bush yelled. “I saw what you wrote. We’re not going to forget this.”

Later in the campaign, when Newsweek ran a cover story with the image of George H.W. Bush on a boat with the headline, “Fighting the Wimp Factor,” a furious George W. Bush enforced a year-long punishment of Newsweek by barring the magazine’s reporters from access to key campaign insiders.

‘Don’t Kill Me’

Sometimes Bush’s sense of entitlement had an even nastier edge.

As Texas governor, Bush would mock people on Death Row. In a famous interview with conservative pundit Tucker Carlson, Bush imitated condemned murderess Carla Faye Tucker’s unsuccessful plea for clemency. “Please don’t kill me,” Bush whimpered through pursed lips, mimicking the woman he had put to death.

In another example of Bush’s put-down humor, the Texas governor lined up with a group of men for a photo and fingered the man next to him. “He’s the ugly one!” Bush laughed, before realizing that the incident was being observed by a reporter. [NYT, Aug. 22, 1999]

Other times, Bush showed how prickly he can be when facing criticism. During a campaign stop in Naperville, Ill., Bush groused to his running mate, ####### Cheney, about what Bush considered negative coverage from New York Times reporter Adam Clymer.

“There’s Adam Clymer – major league ####### – from the New York Times,” Bush said as he was waving to a campaign crowd from a stage in Naperville, Ill.

“Yeah, big time,” responded Cheney. Their voices were picked up on an open microphone.

During a presidential debate in 2000, Bush was back to making light of Texas executions. While arguing against the need for hate-crimes laws, Bush said the three men convicted of the racially motivated murder of James Byrd were already facing the death penalty.

“It’s going to be hard to punish them any worse after they’re put to death,” Bush said, with an out-of-place smile across his face. Beyond the inaccuracy of his statement – one of the three killers had received life imprisonment – there was that smirk again when discussing people on Death Row.

Bald Guys

Bush’s demeaning humor carried over into his presidency as he enjoyed razzing people about their looks, often in public when they could do nothing but blush and look down at their feet.

At a press conference at his Crawford ranch on Aug. 24, 2001, Bush called on a Texas reporter who had covered Bush as governor. Bush said the young reporter was “a fine lad, fine lad,” drawing laughter from the national press corps.

The Texas reporter then began to ask his question, “You talked about the need to maintain technological …” But Bush interrupted the reporter to deliver his punch line:

“A little short on hair, but a fine lad. Yeah.”

As Bush joined in the snickering, the young reporter paused and acknowledged meekly, “I am losing some hair.”

Bush’s joy in mocking bald men didn’t stop with reporters.

At a joint White House press conference May 16, 2006, with Australian Prime Minister John Howard, Bush slipped in a couple of zingers about Howard’s bald head and supposed homeliness.

Bush joshed, “Somebody said, ‘You and John Howard appear to be so close, don’t you have any differences?’ And I said, ‘yes, he doesn’t have any hair.’”

Getting a round of laughs from reporters, Bush moved on to his next joke: “That’s what I like about John Howard,” Bush said. “He may not be the prettiest person on the block, but when he tells you something you can take it to the bank.”

Howard played the role of gracious guest, smiling and saying nothing in response to the unflattering comments about his physical appearance.

Neck Rub

Besides publicly embarrassing people about their looks – while they are in no position to return the favor – Bush also demonstrates his power by invading personal space, cupping his hand behind a man’s neck or – in the case of German Chancellor Angela Merkel – giving her an unwelcome neck rub at the G-8 summit in St. Petersburg, Russia.

In a generally flattering portrait of Bush in the 2003 book, The Right Man, former Bush speechwriter David Frum acknowledged that Bush often used sarcasm to dress down his subordinates as well as his political opponents.

Bush is “impatient and quick to anger; sometimes glib, even dogmatic; often uncurious and as a result ill informed,” Frum wrote. When referring to environmentalists, Bush would call them “green-green lima beans,” according to Frum.

Other times, Bush’s harsh humor has complicated U.S. foreign policy, including the tense relations with North Korea. During a lectern-pounding tirade before Republican leaders in May 2002, Bush insulted North Korea’s diminutive dictator Kim Jong Il by calling him a “pygmy,” Newsweek reported. The slur quickly circulated around the globe.

While many Bush backers find his acid tongue and biting humor refreshing – the sign of a “politically incorrect” politician – some critics contend that Bush’s casual insults fit with a dynastic sense of entitlement toward the presidency and toward those he rules.

Dynasty

The Bushes show no modesty about their extraordinary political dynasty. At family events, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush wear matching caps and wind-breakers emblazoned with the numbers 41 and 43, identifying their presidencies.

George W. Bush also relished the fawning news coverage that followed the 9/11 attacks, complete with suggestions from the likes of NBC’s Tim Russert that Bush’s selection as President might have been divinely inspired.

In a round-table discussion on Dec. 23, 2001, Russert joined New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and First Lady Laura Bush in ruminating about whether divine intervention had put Bush in the White House to handle the crisis.

Russert asked Mrs. Bush if “in an extraordinary way, this is why he was elected.” Mrs. Bush disagreed with Russert’s suggestion that “God picks the President, which he doesn’t.”

This hagiographic treatment of Bush might have been intended to boost his confidence in the face of a national crisis. But the flattery instead seems to have fed an egotism that devoured any remaining self-doubts.

The swelling of Bush’s head was apparent in his interview for Bob Woodward’s Bush at War, .which took a largely flattering look at Bush’s “gut” decision-making but reported some disturbing attitudes within the White House.

“I am the commander, see,” Bush told Woodward. “I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being the President. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they need to say something, but I don’t feel like I owe anybody an explanation.”

So, Bush had come to see himself as beyond accountability, much as ancient royalty viewed their own powers as unlimited under the divine right of kings. In the traditional droit du seigneur, a nobleman had the right to deflower the bride of a male subject on their first night of marriage.

Now we’re told that George W. Bush has another way of demonstrating his supremacy over subordinates: when new White House aides are brought in to be introduced to the President of the United States, the President farts.

Source

[Carol&Marc 0]

PsychoKat said:

Or...maybe members of our government are empathically feeding off of the actions and responses of each other and digressing intellectually back to their grammer school days. Based on this accounting it appears that digression into school yard name calling and such is not one sided

I apologize for the length but on the upside it is humorous in some areas....and maybe a bit scary in others

I agrree about the digression on both sides, I think the dems are more guilty of it though.

I have never seen Bush even respond to these comments! thank goodness.

[PsychoKat 0]

PsychoKat said:

Or...maybe members of our government are empathically feeding off of the actions and responses of each other and digressing intellectually back to their grammer school days. Based on this accounting it appears that digression into school yard name calling and such is not one sided

I apologize for the length but on the upside it is humorous in some areas....and maybe a bit scary in others

I agrree about the digression on both sides, I think the dems are more guilty of it though.

I have never seen Bush even respond to these comments! thank goodness.

Well I can't verify any of what is in that article other than the part about Naperville.....cause here I am in Naperville

I do feel it is coming from both sides myself. I have to say for myself, between the one thing that happened here, and his much publicized statement I believe it was at calls for Rumsfield to be relieved of office ..."I am the decider" ..I find things a bit scary

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think the dems are more guilty of it though.

No surprise there then

[PsychoKat 0]

You know whenever the subject of Bush comes up it's quite obvious that a good many people have negative opinions of the man and his actions in office.

I myself question the motivations behind some of his action and can't say I would trust him on a one on one basis at this point...but in the midst of negativity I got to thinking about something rather positive about a member of his family so to balance things out I'll share some good

In 2004 I lost my youngest sister to cancer. When she was diagnosed in 2002, she was the "breadwinner of her family of 4, her husband was disabled, not only legally blind, but he also was somewhat crippled after being hit by a truck resulting in a crushed knee. As the cancer and 3 very debilitating rounds of chemotherapy sucked the very life out of her she eventually reached a point where she could no longer work and applied for social security.......and they turned her down (I have to say I was outraged at this) In desperation she turned to the governer of her state...Florida and Jeb Bush to help and he also was outraged at this decision and worked very hard to resolve this quickly.

I can't begin to tell you how grateful our family was for this, you can't even imagine what she felt like when they turned her down, worrying obout her children going hungry as she herself was dying.

So there's some good to balance the bad.

(a tiny bit of oddness to this.....although no relation to the presidential family...my sister's married name was Bush)

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Carolandmarc seems to think that a debate does not involve participating in discussion and an exchange of ideas

The evasion/silence speaks volumes.

Jenn we are having a little debate here,and I would never call you a Liar and a loser! So to do that would pretty much negate anything else I had to say!

Shame that logic doesn't apply to calling people "anti-american" and then refusing to back it up.

I dont feel like wasting my time, I could write a 1000 page thesis on the subject and all you would do is twist,spin,bellyflop,nit pick,parse, your way out of it and end with another question! so sorry not gonna take your BAIT!

Hmmmm... Doesn't feel like wasting time, but clearly feels compelled to continue posting on the topic regardless. This is the guy who complains about being baited after first asking clearly loaded, emotionally hysterical questions such as Why is President Bush like HITLER?, something that noone has claimed here.

Which reminds me:

Wimp Lo, you must be careful. Your confiidence is disproportional to your abilities. You think losing is winning.

Heh? Uh, uh-- Huh?

Edited October 4, 2006 by erekose