Republicans to Drop Measure Labeling Democrats 'Socialist'

[Marcus Bryant]

I would expect that our national defense protect us from those whom the state manages to piss off enough that they plan suicide attacks against us. Unless, of course, you believe that they do so because we're "us."

[Yonivore]

I would expect that our national defense protect us from those whom the state manages to piss off enough that they plan suicide attacks against us. Unless, of course, you believe that they do so because we're "us."

What did we do to piss them off?

[LnGrrrR]

I would expect that our national defense protect us from those whom the state manages to piss off enough that they plan suicide attacks against us. Unless, of course, you believe that they do so because we're "us."

Honestly, if someone really wanted to perform a suicide attack, then they could. Security will not catch EVERY plot. It's just not going to happen. If you think they will, then you're having an unrealistic view of our security.

Now, I do agree that we spend too much on security, and much of our security is ineffective. But it's unrealistic to think that we'll stop every plot, much as it is unrealistic to think that police will be able to apprehend every crook, or that juries will make sure to acquit every innocent person.

[LnGrrrR]

What did we do to piss them off?

Mostly, placing bases in their countries. Not saying whether it's justified or not, but that tends to piss them off.

Also, our laidback culture where we allow women to show their faces.

[Yonivore]

Mostly, placing bases in their countries. Not saying whether it's justified or not, but that tends to piss them off.

At the request, behest, or agreement of the host nation and for perfectly legitimate national security reasons.

So, we should try to pacify a group over an illegitimate grievance?

Also, our laidback culture where we allow women to show their faces.

A perfectly legitimate grievance.

[LnGrrrR]

At the request, behest, or agreement of the host nation and for perfectly legitimate national security reasons.

So, we should try to pacify a group over an illegitimate grievance?

Like I said, not saying it's legitimate. There are many people within a country that don't agree with what their government does though, however. Wouldn't you agree?

I mean, if the President said that France could build a base in Tennessee, I doubt many people would like that. I don't know if any of them would take up suicide bombing, but I doubt they'd be pleased.

[Yonivore]

Honestly, if someone really wanted to perform a suicide attack, then they could. Security will not catch EVERY plot. It's just not going to happen. If you think they will, then you're having an unrealistic view of our security.

Now, I do agree that we spend too much on security, and much of our security is ineffective. But it's unrealistic to think that we'll stop every plot, much as it is unrealistic to think that police will be able to apprehend every crook, or that juries will make sure to acquit every innocent person.

I disagree. I think the NSA surveilllance programs were designed to identify just such threats.

Terrorists aren't made in a vaccuum. They need materials, support, money, and logistical expertise.

I think so long as Obama continues the anti-terrorism programs put in place by the Bush administration, it'll be effective.

[Yonivore]

Like I said, not saying it's legitimate. There are many people within a country that don't agree with what their government does though, however. Wouldn't you agree?

Sure, but, because it's not legitimate, it's also not reasonable to suggest we could have done anything differently.

I think exporting our culture to the Middle East -- even in the absence of a military presence -- was just as provocative to these fanatics. But, again, we opened our shores to everyone and many middle easterners came here to be educated.

They took back our culture and friendships - that developed into associations.

I mean, if the President said that France could build a base in Tennessee, I doubt many people would like that. I don't know if any of them would take up suicide bombing, but I doubt they'd be pleased.

We already base troops from all over the world in places all over the country. For training, joint exercises, security of their own assets, U.N. involvement, etc...

And, your right, we don't take up suicide bombing over it.

The bottom line is this; these Islamic extremists don't like that civilization has encroached into their 13th century paradise and shown women they are treated as equals in other parts of the world, shown individuals that personal liberty exists outside of what Sharia allows, and demonstrated the government doesn't have to be fascist to be functional....and, goddamnit, they don't like it.

That's why they attack. And, why do they attack America particularly? Well, we're the Great Satan. All the other Western Cultures emulate us and, by the looks of it, Britain, France, Germany (not so much), and the other Europeon countries are proving to be soft targets for Dhimmitude.

If they can get us to capitulate, the rest of the planet will be a cake walk...

[LnGrrrR]

I disagree. I think the NSA surveilllance programs were designed to identify just such threats.

Terrorists aren't made in a vaccuum. They need materials, support, money, and logistical expertise.

I think so long as Obama continues the anti-terrorism programs put in place by the Bush administration, it'll be effective.

Agreed. Sure, the program will catch terrorists. However, do you know how much cost goes into running such a system? First, you have to have deep packet inspection at multiple points. Then, you have to have analysts to determine what's useful and what's throwaway. Then you also have to deal with storage, security and proper handling of data, as well as dealing with the hazards of granting access to read emails of normal citizens.

Do you know how easily computer admins can abuse their power? Especially in something that gets as large as government funded en ies do?

Conservatives are against bigger government, and they're against abuse of power, and they're against invasion of privacy, right?

They should be against this then too. In theory, the system would be great if we didn't have finite resources and manpower. However, this being the real world, we do. I'd rather those resources go to finding better informants and tracking down clues, than spreading a ridiculously wide net and hoping to pick up a needle in a haystack.

Computers are great, but they can't replace humans yet.

[LnGrrrR]

Sure, but, because it's not legitimate, it's also not reasonable to suggest we could have done anything differently.

I think exporting our culture to the Middle East -- even in the absence of a military presence -- was just as provocative to these fanatics. But, again, we opened our shores to everyone and many middle easterners came here to be educated.

They took back our culture and friendships - that developed into associations.

Agreed... it's not our fault our culture rocks.

We already base troops from all over the world in places all over the country. For training, joint exercises, security of their own assets, U.N. involvement, etc...

And, your right, we don't take up suicide bombing over it.

Yes, but my point is that, by far, America places more bases in foreign countries. Just because those governments agree doesn't mean its citizens necessarily will.

The bottom line is this; these Islamic extremists don't like that civilization has encroached into their 13th century paradise and shown women they are treated as equals in other parts of the world, shown individuals that personal liberty exists outside of what Sharia allows, and demonstrated the government doesn't have to be fascist to be functional....and, goddamnit, they don't like it.

Agree 100%. However, we differ on the solution. I'm totally fine with letting them have their back-assward way, and let the Shiites and Sunnis all kill themselves off if they wish. The amount of people we've lost in the war against them has been greater than the initial attack, which was initiated by someone who we haven't even caught yet. Of course you can't capture and put to justice the people who did it, so you go after the terrorist ring. But I'd go after them subtlely, rather than take up a big mallet and whack it down on Iraq.

That's why they attack. And, why do they attack America particularly? Well, we're the Great Satan. All the other Western Cultures emulate us and, by the looks of it, Britain, France, Germany (not so much), and the other Europeon countries are proving to be soft targets for Dhimmitude.

If they can get us to capitulate, the rest of the planet will be a cake walk...

I think the European countries are having issues because A) they're closer than us, so it's easier for Muslims to share their lifestyle and B) they're not "Americans". I don't think we need to take out a huge number of Shias/Sunnis in order to stay "American". But maybe I'm just more optimistic about it.

I'm all for taking down s bags. But I'd rather we do it the silent ops way than the invade and take over forever way.

[Marcus Bryant]

It probably has something to do with supporting asshole tyrants in those countries over the years, as well as the enlarged military presence. And, yes, some of those ers are crazy. So it'd probably not be worth the trouble to stir them up such that they sit around all day in their huts thinking about ways to kill the average Joe and Josephine who'd prefer to do nothing other than enlarge their asses on good ol' fashioned American fast food and watch season four of the latest hit reality TV show about other people who have fattened their asses on good ol' fashioned American fast food.

[DarrinS]

Isn't socialist just simpler and easier to say than government-sponsored and government-controlled?

[Duff McCartney]

If the GOP really wanted to make Americans fearful and make the Democratic party look bad...they could have pushed for the Democrats to rename themselves as something really horrible...they could have picked a name so awful that nobody would even vote for them....

I think I got it...the Democrats should rename themselves...The Republican Party.

[Ignignokt]

It probably has something to do with supporting asshole tyrants in those countries over the years, as well as the enlarged military presence. And, yes, some of those ers are crazy. So it'd probably not be worth the trouble to stir them up such that they sit around all day in their huts thinking about ways to kill the average Joe and Josephine who'd prefer to do nothing other than enlarge their asses on good ol' fashioned American fast food and watch season four of the latest hit reality TV show about other people who have fattened their asses on good ol' fashioned American fast food.

so those upper middle class saudi highjackers were hut dwellers, not only are you bigoted about arabs, but you're ignorant as well about them.

Why does idiocy come easy for you?

[Marcus Bryant]

so those upper middle class saudi highjackers were hut dwellers, not only are you bigoted about arabs, but you're ignorant as well about them.

Why does idiocy come easy for you?

Oh, boo hoo. I'm bigoted about everybody. Any civilization which is perpetually stuck in medieval times doesn't deserve any respect. Of course, the treatment of women and disregard for basic human liberties fits right in well with your ignorant view of conservatism in this country. Fealty to the Bush/Cheney administration is not conservatism.

[Ignignokt]

Oh, boo hoo. I'm bigoted about everybody. Any civilization which is perpetually stuck in medieval times doesn't deserve any respect. Of course, the treatment of women and disregard for basic human liberties fits right in well with your ignorant view of conservatism in this country. Fealty to the Bush/Cheney administration is not conservatism.

How bout this, it's not your slight bigotry, it's more of your ignorance on this whole matter. The saudi hijackers were upper middle class well educated men, that's a fact along with your lack of understanding.

second, i don't see conservatives here wanting to bring back no child left behind, temp work visa programs, or Medicare part d.103004 whatever.. but we are defending tatics that were used to protect this country because we believe them to be effective and within the right of the country to these things.

When Cheney stands for what's right, i don't give a damn about poll numbers or hatred from the opposition i'll support what he says. I don't pick what side of the issue to fall because of the November elections. Public oppinion is too shifty to base your beliefs on those things Marcus, so spare me the generalizations, and quit trying to be liked around here.

[Wild Cobra]

Republicans to Drop Measure Labeling Democrats 'Socialist'

First off, I think the whole idea of the republicans wanting to call the democrats, socialists, is laughable. Not because it's not true, but because so many republicans are too!

I agree the democrats are a party of socialists...

Now I had to jump in on this exchange...

How bout this, it's not your slight bigotry, it's more of your ignorance on this whole matter. The saudi hijackers were upper middle class well educated men, that's a fact along with your lack of understanding.

Was it there own money I wonder, or money to live on while planning and waiting? Even if they earned a comfortable living, it was their belief rather than income that causes terrorism.

second, i don't see conservatives here wanting to bring back no child left behind

Conservatives want to return the schools to local control.

, temp work visa programs

No, nothing wrong with these programs. We are just against illegal work programs!

, or Medicare part d.103004 whatever

I cannot speak for all conservatives here, because it is a form of socialism. However, I believe most have no problem helping the elderly and disabled in such ways.

.. but we are defending tatics that were used to protect this country because we believe them to be effective and within the right of the country to these things.

Yes, your point?

When Cheney stands for what's right, i don't give a damn about poll numbers or hatred from the opposition i'll support what he says. I don't pick what side of the issue to fall because of the November elections. Public oppinion is too shifty to base your beliefs on those things Marcus, so spare me the generalizations, and quit trying to be liked around here.

I haven't seen him stand for wrong ideals. Maybe yours are...

[Marcus Bryant]

How bout this, it's not your slight bigotry, it's more of your ignorance on this whole matter. The saudi hijackers were upper middle class well educated men, that's a fact along with your lack of understanding.

...who subscribe to a Medieval view of human life. Duh.

When Cheney stands for what's right, i don't give a damn about poll numbers or hatred from the opposition i'll support what he says. I don't pick what side of the issue to fall because of the November elections. Public oppinion is too shifty to base your beliefs on those things Marcus, so spare me the generalizations, and quit trying to be liked around here.

Yawn. I don't worry about being liked on the internets, unlike your coconut self.