Subject:
|
Re: Finally--a use of public funding that I can really get behind!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 20 Aug 2003 15:53:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
604 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
You’re welcome. And I notice that you didn’t attempt to refute my answer.
|
What’s the point? You dislike Bush, I think he’s doing a decent job, there’s no
common ground on the issue to make it worth discussing.
| |
My point in including the Rove quote was to demonstrate his perception that
increased education leads to liberalization of viewpoint, which is to say
that a liberal viewpoint can be indicative of greater education. If Rove The
Puppetmaster feels this way, I wonder how many other Conservative feel the
same.
|
Red herring--bringing up a quote by one conservative and attributing it to all.
It is pretty funny, though, because it reminds me of some professors that I had
in college who were educated to the hilt with multiple Ph.D.s who could not have
possibly functioned outside academia.
| |
Anyway, if you’re going to make snide comments about liberal arrogance,
please brace for the tidal wave of conservative arrogance, beginning, for
example, with the Texas Republican legislature seeking to lock its hold via
redistricting. We could also discuss the Bush doctrine of
do-what-I-say-without-question or you’re a traitor (or his Cowboy Diplomacy
in general, which typifies the not-inaccurate worldwide perception of the
Ugly American.)
|
Then you can explain why the Democrat-controlled Tennessee legislature got Mr.
Gerry Mander to make my district stretch from just outside Nashville to just
outside Memphis. (Hint: it goes from right-across-the-border-from-Fort-Campbell
Clarksville through highly-Republican Nashville suburbs Brentwood and Franklin
to highly-Republican Memphis suburb Germantown, see District 7 at
http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/info/CongMaps/Cstate.htm.)
As for cowboy diplomacy, I fully support it, as long as it follows this
guideline: “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we
shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend,
oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” If
we have to do it alone, we will.
| |
You’re complaining, in essence, that you’re too full of...
|
Great line from Mallrats: “Haven’t I made it abundantly clear... that I don’t
know (you guessed it)” ;-)
| |
Again, you’ve given a fine summation of the Dubya administration in general
and the Ridge/Ashcroft machine in particular, whereas I thought that you were
speaking out against Liberals. What’s your point?
|
Actually, my beef is primarily with bureaucrats and government employees (who
tend to the liberal side; just look at the DC-area voting records) who think
they know so well what is good for us. Good example: seat belts. I wear one
because I know a bit about both physics and safety statistics. If I don’t wish
to wear one, why should the government give a rat’s patootie?
| |
I should reject your point on the grounds that you deliberately confabulate
9/11 and Saddam Hussein, in fine Conservative lockstep (ie, witnessing). And
let’s not forget that Reagan and Bush Sr. provided the gas that Hussein later
used on the Kurds. Apparently WoMD are fine, when dispensed by
Conservatives.
|
I associated Bush’s presidency with making efforts to stop 9/11 attacks from
happening, not with Hussein. And let’s not forget that most of the world
community--Germany, France, Great Britain, et al., supported Iraq in the
Iraq-Iran war; really, up until he invaded Kuwait. In fact, Germany, France,
Russia, Bosnia, Syria, and others were still supporting him, through sales of
arms, airplane parts, chemicals, etc. (good collection of links:
http://www.stimson.org/exportcontrol/?SN=EX20030326526)
The world would be a better place today if Iran and Iraq had managed to
obliterate each other in their war. The US pursued a policy of supporting the
lesser of two evils; the only problem is that when you get rid of the greater
you’re still stuck with an evil.
| |
Regardless, you are in essence saying that Bush should be in office because
he’s not quite as god-awful as certain anecdotal examples of more dire
circumstances. The fact that you or I can name worse alternatives to our
terrible, appointed president is hardly a glowing endorsement of his
performance.
|
No, I’m thanking my lucky stars that it’s Bush in office instead of Gore!
| |
What is the intent of injecting a statement of pure propaganda in
what is nominally a serious debate?
|
To rile you up, of course! (ducks)
Best regards,
Carl
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
34 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
