quote:

Originally posted by KKL:

quote:

Originally posted by Coriolanus:
And she blasted the junta, saying the lack of warning before a deadly cyclone hit on Friday was the latest example of "the junta's failure to meet its people's basic needs."

How is she not right?



"The people’s plight is not helped by the disposition of their Government. Running the country on a combination of internal repression and xenophobia, the junta seems not to have made up its mind that this is a tragedy that it cannot remedy on its own.

It certainly was not too concerned when the cyclone approached the Burmase coast. A spokesman for the Indian Meteorological Department revealed yesterday that it had given Burma two days’ warning of Cyclone Nargis. “Forty-eight hours before Nargis struck, we indicated its point of crossing \, its severity and all related issues to Burmese agencies,” he said. Weather systems in the Bay of Bengal are tracked by India by satellite."

I don't dispute the veracity of what she is saying. I take exception to the fact that she is saying it and not the president. Second, Bush et al are in no position to criticize another government for not meeting "basic needs" based on what happened during Katrina.

Can't wait to get a REAL conservative in office -- John McCain.

quote:

Coriolanus

I haven't seen any evidence that John McCain will be different than GW. The fact that his rhetoric is so wildly different than 4 years ago when he was considering running with Kerry tells me that he's received the requisite restraint and whipping by the neocon Republican cross-dressing dominatrix machine before being allowed a bid for president. Back in 2000 when he was a budget-hawk old school conservative, his own party was running a campaign against him.

quote:

Originally posted by Peer Gynt:

quote:

Coriolanus

I haven't seen any evidence that John McCain will be different than GW. The fact that his rhetoric is so wildly different than 4 years ago when he was considering running with Kerry tells me that he's received the requisite restraint and whipping by the neocon Republican cross-dressing dominatrix machine before being allowed a bid for president. Back in 2000 when he was a budget-hawk old school conservative, his own party was running a campaign against him.

Look at his record over the past 20+ years.

The person you should be concerned about is Obama. He has absolutely zero experience. I mean, one year in the senate? Please.

quote:

Originally posted by Jack White:

quote:

From Rogers72
This administration did a GREAT job with Katrina ...

I had to read that a couple of times to determine if you were just being ironic or facetious. If you weren't, I think you'd have a difficult time finding a single other person in the country who'd agree with you, including anyone in the administration. Our government's response to Katrina is the single biggest shame of this President's 7 1/2 years, and one of the biggest debacles in our history.

By the way, did you actually favorably compare the war conduct of George W. Bush and Abraham Lincoln in your post??

I think there are many people out there who would agree with me that the federal government is not required to be there to give me all of the aid that I could ever desire within an exact and very prompt time frame. Please define how quickly and to what level the federal government should have swooped into New Orleans to rescue the people that were too ignorant to leave a city that should not be inhabited in the first place. Tell me what you would expect from our government if you were one of the morons who did not get out of that city. What would have made you happy from our federal government to have given you for living in a city that should not be there in the first place? Me? I can help myself and would not have been there in the first place. If I was there, I would have gotten out well in advance of that storm. I would not expect one ounce of aid. If I needed something, I MAY have accepted it if it was a necessity to keep my family healthy but I would have been very grateful for anything that I recieved and not expected or felt like I deserved it. I guess that is the difference between you and me Jack.

In regards to the War, I know this administration as a whole has made some mistakes. There have been mistakes made by every administration in every war in American history. I do not place the blame for those mistakes squarely on the shoulders of one man. I stand by my statement firmly that the war has been handled better by this administration than it would have been by the list of idiots in my post. Lincoln is responsible for the greatest blunder in American history. No other President in history has had such disregard for our Constitution.

quote:

Lincoln is responsible for the greatest blunder in American history. No other President in history has had such disregard for our Constitution.

You have my attention. Please elaborate.

quote:

I guess that is the difference between you and me Jack.

Oh, no, there are others.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Jack White,

'

quote:

Originally posted by Rogers72:

quote:

Originally posted by Jack White:

quote:

From Rogers72
This administration did a GREAT job with Katrina ...

I had to read that a couple of times to determine if you were just being ironic or facetious. If you weren't, I think you'd have a difficult time finding a single other person in the country who'd agree with you, including anyone in the administration. Our government's response to Katrina is the single biggest shame of this President's 7 1/2 years, and one of the biggest debacles in our history.

By the way, did you actually favorably compare the war conduct of George W. Bush and Abraham Lincoln in your post??

I think there are many people out there who would agree with me that the federal government is not required to be there to give me all of the aid that I could ever desire within an exact and very prompt time frame. Please define how quickly and to what level the federal government should have swooped into New Orleans to rescue the people that were too ignorant to leave a city that should not be inhabited in the first place. Tell me what you would expect from our government if you were one of the morons who did not get out of that city. What would have made you happy from our federal government to have given you for living in a city that should not be there in the first place? Me? I can help myself and would not have been there in the first place. If I was there, I would have gotten out well in advance of that storm. I would not expect one ounce of aid. If I needed something, I MAY have accepted it if it was a necessity to keep my family healthy but I would have been very grateful for anything that I recieved and not expected or felt like I deserved it. I guess that is the difference between you and me Jack.

In regards to the War, I know this administration as a whole has made some mistakes. There have been mistakes made by every administration in every war in American history. I do not place the blame for those mistakes squarely on the shoulders of one man. I stand by my statement firmly that the war has been handled better by this administration than it would have been by the list of idiots in my post. Lincoln is responsible for the greatest blunder in American history. No other President in history has had such disregard for our Constitution.

Let's see... Every poor bum in New Orleans did not have a chance to get out. Big city = Public Transportation = a lot of poor people without cars to get out on their own... Not to mention the elderly.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: jimschn,

quote:

Originally posted by Jack White:

quote:

Lincoln is responsible for the greatest blunder in American history. No other President in history has had such disregard for our Constitution.

You have my attention. Please elaborate.

x2 - I'm quite curious as well...

quote:

Look at his record over the past 20+ years.

The person you should be concerned about is Obama. He has absolutely zero experience. I mean, one year in the senate? Please.

Over the past 26 years our country has gone from a respectable democracy to a whorehouse. It's no wonder Eliot Spitzer hung out with high-priced prostitutes--they had a lot in common.

I prefer the candidate who has the least experience in the last 25 years please. We need to run the country more like a nation and less like a pinata--whoever f---s it up the most gets the biggest prize.

quote:

Originally posted by jimschn:
Big city = Public Transportation = a lot of poor people without cars to get out on their own...

That makes no sense.

quote:

Originally posted by sobek:

quote:

Originally posted by jimschn:
Big city = Public Transportation = a lot of poor people without cars to get out on their own...

That makes no sense.

Sure it does.. He was asking why people did not get out of the city before the hurricane hit New Orleans...

quote:

Originally posted by jimschn:
Sure it does.. He was asking why people did not get out of the city before the hurricane hit New Orleans...

Not really.

Most of the people here in NYC do not own cars...a place where the average apartment price is somewhere near 1 million.

If anything, a city with public transportation would be the best chance for people to get out if they did not own cars.

quote:

I prefer the candidate who has the least experience in the last 25 years please. We need to run the country more like a nation and less like a pinata--whoever f---s it up the most gets the biggest prize.

Then pick some numb-nuts off the street to run the country. Experience matters. And I don't think you can point to McCain and say he was a part of the problem. He is a guy who has always thought for himself -- I respect that. Obama has cozied up to anyone who could do something for him, hence Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers.

quote:

Obama has cozied up to anyone who could do something for him, hence Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers.

Uh-huh. Like John McCain did with Rev. John Hagee, whose endorsement he sought and is "very proud to have"? Kinda like that?

Somehow, no one seems to want McCain to jump thru hoops to prove he doesn't believe Roman Catholics are "satanic" and Pope Benedict is "the anti-Christ". Or that Hitler became anti-semetic as a result of his Catholic education. Or that each and every Muslim has a scriptural mandate to kill Christians and Jews. Or that God sent Katrina specifically in retribution for New Orleans' "sexual sins".

Could the the difference be he's a hateful white Christian bigot, not an angry black one?

quote:

Originally posted by Jack White:
Uh-huh. Like John McCain did with Rev. John Hagee, whose endorsement he sought and is "very proud to have"? Kinda like that?

I don't see the comparison. Wright was Obama's pastor for 20+ years, while Hagee is not even personally close to McCain.

quote:

I don't see the comparison. Wright was Obama's pastor for 20+ years, while Hagee is not even personally close to McCain.

I think the comparison is apt. While you can properly argue that Obama had the option of leaving his church when Rev. Wright's views became apparent, McCain sought out Rev. Hagee and solicited his endorsement, fully knowing his very public views.

My other point was that McCain hasn't been made to visit talk show after talk show to reassure us he doesn't subscribe to Hagee's views, as Obama has. McCain has continued to say he's "proud to have" Hagee's endorsement.

quote:

Originally posted by CrazyPoet:

quote:

Originally posted by Jack White:

quote:

Lincoln is responsible for the greatest blunder in American history. No other President in history has had such disregard for our Constitution.

You have my attention. Please elaborate.

x2 - I'm quite curious as well...

“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so….
…Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes…
… This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it. I can not be ignorant of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of having the National Constitution amended. While I make no recommendation of amendments, I fully recognize the rightful authority of the people over the whole subject, to be exercised in either of the modes prescribed in the instrument itself; and I should, under existing circumstances, favor rather than oppose a fair opportunity being afforded the people to act upon it. I will venture to add that to me the convention mode seems preferable, in that it allows amendments to originate with the people themselves, instead of only permitting them to take or reject propositions originated by others, not especially chosen for the purpose, and which might not be precisely such as they would wish to either accept or refuse. I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen—has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.”

Lincoln’s Inaugural Address, March 1861

If you are trying to bait me into saying that the Constitution provides for some right to Secession or dissolution of the Union by one or more, but not all States then I will not b/c I know that it doesn’t. Much of Lincoln’s handling of the War lies in who you feel the aggressor was I guess and I am sure that the majority of you feel quite differently about that than I do so we will have to stick with the few facts. Luckily for Lincoln, his side won and was able to right a very kind history of him. Otherwise, he would be mentioned in the same sentence as other suppressors like Stalin, Hussein, and Castro. Instead, he is on mountains with men of much greater fiber like Washington, Jefferson, and Roosevelt. His greatest disregard for the Constitution was HIS suspension of Habeas Corpus in Maryland and in other border states in the months leading up to the war in an attempt to quell any opposition that he could a la Stalin and his Gulag. Of course, this suspension of fundamental rights was challenged and overturned in the U.S district court (LED BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, ROGER TANEY). Lincoln then completely ignored the ruling. This complete disregard continued through Reconstruction after a Congress made up entirely of Unionist decided that only Congress could suspend Habeas Corpus. Lincoln then directly pursued military tribunal courts for the Citizens of the Confederate States of America even though civil courts were functioning (also later declared unconst. In Ex Parte Milligan.)

Now, as far as his handling of the minor insurrection that he turned into the greatest debacle in American History, let’s give Lincoln the benefit of the doubt and pretend like he didn’t deny any fundamental rights to Southerners in the months leading up to the firing on Ft. Sumter. Let’s also pretend that he didn’t have warships already in route to Charleston before the firing on Ft. Sumter. Would you bleeding hearts have tried a little diplomacy first or at least tried to get the issue of slavery settled by the Supreme Court before you turned everything you had on the people that you wanted to be a part of your Union? Lincoln’s diplomacy in the months leading up the War of Northern Aggression make George W. Bush look like Gandhi.

quote:

Originally posted by Jack White:

quote:

Obama has cozied up to anyone who could do something for him, hence Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers.

Uh-huh. Like John McCain did with Rev. John Hagee, whose endorsement he sought and is "very proud to have"? Kinda like that?

Somehow, no one seems to want McCain to jump thru hoops to prove he doesn't believe Roman Catholics are "satanic" and Pope Benedict is "the anti-Christ". Or that Hitler became anti-semetic as a result of his Catholic education. Or that each and every Muslim has a scriptural mandate to kill Christians and Jews. Or that God sent Katrina specifically in retribution for New Orleans' "sexual sins".

Could the the difference be he's a hateful white Christian bigot, not an angry black one?

Listen, you'd have to be a complete nut to compare Rev. Wright to John Hagee. First, McCain did not attend Hagee's church for 20+ years, Hagee didn't baptise his kids and marry he and his wife. Obama's pastor has played a much larger role in his life than Hagee ever played in McCains. The fact that you liberals keep trying to drum up this Hagee garbage is a clear sign that you know Obama is indeed wounded. Hagee never said "GD America", he never accused our government of manufacturing the AIDS virus and he sure as hell didn't say that the USA and KKK where one and the same. You and your folks can keep reaching on this Jack, but you mark my words, your party is about to nominate a candidate that cannot win the general election. Liberal elitists and blacks are not the nations biggest voting blocks, those voring blocks who will elect the next president are the "bitter" people who cling to guns and religion.
Lastly, was McCain actually in the pews when Hagee said those things? Because, quite a few people have come forward and said Wrights sermons were quite the same when the Obamas were there in the church.

Lastly, Obama has not had any real interviews, he's been going to places that throw him softballs, please, spare us the nonsense if your going to post. Admit it, Obama has not really been interviewed by anyone who isn't already voting for him.

BTW, at least what Hagee said actually stems from religious views and he isn't prostheletizing political garbage in his church. It is well known to anyone who has read the bible and believes it, that God indeed did bring judgment to cities, includiing Sodom and Gemmorah. Therfore, if one were to believe the bible, and the word of God who says that he is unchanging through time, one could easily say as a Christian that God may still bring judgement to a city or region. Speaking purely from a philosophical standpoint.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Presley,

quote:

Hagee never said "GD America", he never accused our government of manufacturing the AIDS virus and he sure as hell didn't say that the USA and KKK where one and the same.

No, he didn't. But equally offensive, he did say Catholicism is Satanic. He did call the pope the anti-Christ. He did claim Katrina was God's direct retribution for sexual sins. So are you okay with those views? Are you okay, then, with your candidate seeking him out and asking for his endorsement? Why do you refer to it as "this Hagee garbage", as though it's of no concern? Why should John McCain not be asked to answer for it and to denounce the views, even if by friendly questioners?

Forget for the moment the comparison to Obama and his pastor. What about McCain and Hagee, as an issue in and of itself? You can't use Barack Obama to absolve John McCain.