Liberal free for all coming to an end

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

I'm trying to figure out what exactly you're saying. Yes, our bombs are better, in that they are much more targeted. Yes it therefore costs more money, but are you saying that's a bad thing? Isn't it worth it not to blow up just whatever happens to be nearby and to target your attacks?

I am being sarcastic. The Republicans hate taking care of people who need help and love bombing people who don't cooperate with us.
The military/ industrial complex is alive and well and fully supported by Republicans and Democrats alike.
When are we going to get serious about our future energy supply? Is building more and more sophisticated weaponry that is mind boggling expensive going to solve anything?

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

When are we going to get serious about our future energy supply? Is building more and more sophisticated weaponry that is mind boggling expensive going to solve anything?

We'll get serious about future energy once we have a viable alternative. Mr Fusion would be nice. I also hear the engineers are having problems with hydrogen powered cars, but then I think I heard Norway is already running them? Either way, our energy supplier goes from the MidEast to Russia since they seem to have most of the hydrogen resources.

And of course sophisticated weaponry will solve things. Haven't you seen Iron Man? Seriously though, it's worked ever since our ancestors threw rocks.

[randolph]

Tracy

And of course sophisticated weaponry will solve things. Haven't you seen Iron Man? Seriously though, it's worked ever since our ancestors threw rocks.

Well, We lobbed $500,000,000 dollars worth of missals into Libya. We wiped out Quaddafi's airforce (which probably wasn't worth shit) which was supposed to force him to capitulate, but he fights on. Now NATO is bombing the rebels tanks, what a fuck up!

Oh! for the glory days of Teddy Roosevelt and his great white fleet sailing around the world letting every one know how great we are.

[Enoch Root]

Good old Tracy, I can always depend on you for a loaf of halfbaked bullshit and imperialist entitlement. I find it amazing how you vacillate from pro-business bullshit to trying to sound like a reasonable person about GE's business and their tax debacle but it does implicate Obama so I guess it's easier for you to do that. And I love how you portray the victimizers (ie, the rich) as the poor victims of government policies, never mind that it is the rich who make laws to suit their own selfish ends, never mind that there is no real delineation between government and the private sector, never mind that it is deregulation that is to blame for so many problems, never mind that the economic system you love so much is a slave system.

Criminals should pay for their crimes. But I guess I'm just a parasite so what do I know?

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Tracy

Well, We lobbed $500,000,000 dollars worth of missals into Libya. We wiped out Quaddafi's airforce (which probably wasn't worth shit) which was supposed to force him to capitulate, but he fights on. Now NATO is bombing the rebels tanks, what a fuck up!

Oh! for the glory days of Teddy Roosevelt and his great white fleet sailing around the world letting every one know how great we are.

I do agree with BO on one thing. Militarily, we are spread thin. So yes, we should have had command at the beginning like we did. NATO should have the capability of carrying on from there. What I don't like is that it hardly seemed planned. No one could agree on what exactly the goal was. Also, BO was barely committed to seeing it through. And they took their time getting it going. You don't commit our troops to battle if you don't really give a shit one way or another what happens.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

never mind that it is the rich who make laws to suit their own selfish ends, never mind that there is no real delineation between government and the private sector, never mind that it is deregulation that is to blame for so many problems, never mind that the economic system you love so much is a slave system.

mmmm hmmm. If you say so.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I'm just a parasite so what do I know?

Who said you're a parasite?

[TracyCoxx]

Boner fucked up last night. He seemed to have forgotten two of his pledges: Defund Obamacare, and cut spending $100 billion. I'm tired of republicans who put pleasing democrats over pleasing their own constituents.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Boner fucked up last night. He seemed to have forgotten two of his pledges: Defund Obamacare, and cut spending $100 billion. I'm tired of republicans who put pleasing democrats over pleasing their own constituents.

Are you aware that the Republicans voted overwhelmingly to continue a 147 million dollar annual subsidy to Brazilian cotton growers in order to protect Monsanto's sale of cotton seed in Brazil?
Meanwhile they want to defund family planning in the US.
If the Reagan and Bush taxcuts were eliminated, we would have a budget surplus and we could begin to pay off the debt.

Is that going to happen?
Not while the rest of us allow to be

[transjen]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Boner fucked up last night. He seemed to have forgotten two of his pledges: Defund Obamacare, and cut spending $100 billion. I'm tired of republicans who put pleasing democrats over pleasing their own constituents.

i have to laugh at all of the GOP who are now pissing and moaning about the budget and are demanding cuts and are so worried about the sea of red ink when for eight years they said not a word when W was run up the credit card with his massive tax cuts for the rich and two unfunded wars
So now that a DEM is in the white house all of a sudden you are worried about it and yet you still want all of W's tax cuts left alone and in fact you want them made bigger
So if you were serious Bush's tax cuts would be the first to go then end both wars and not start a third like John Macain wants and the GOP are banging the war drum for and end corpate wellfare
But no the GOP wants just the poor to suffer from the cuts and pay for sea of red ink while the rich party on and get even more tax cuts
Don't cut planned parent hood do away with Bush's tax cuts and it's time the rich started paying there share
GEORGE W BUSH created this mess with his trickle down BS and two wars put on credit so F rich and make them start paying there share
Trickle down does not create jobs and the world will not end if the taxes for the rich went back to pre 2001 amounts
The GOP wants to end entitlements then the first to go should be the rich should pass less then everyone else
Jerseygirl Jen

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by transjen

i have to laugh at all of the GOP who are now pissing and moaning about the budget and are demanding cuts

wait wait... I have really not read the rest yet, but I sense some good ol fashioned George Bush bashing coming on....

Originally Posted by transjen

and are so worried about the sea of red ink when for eight years they said not a word when W

hahaaaaa there it is. Jen, who is it that's pressuring Boner to make real cuts in spending?

Originally Posted by transjen

So if you were serious Bush's tax cuts would be the first to go then end both wars

Hey, tell it to your Obama

But even he knows that ending Bush's tax cuts would tank the economy. So you really don't think it's possible that we might be over spending somewhere? There was one congressman I saw on the news yesterday who came up with several hundred million to cut for a particular item in defense. It passed without any no votes at all. Are you sure you wouldn't concede that it's possible we're spending too much?

[ila]

Originally Posted by randolph

Tracy

Well, We lobbed $500,000,000 dollars worth of missals into Libya. We wiped out Quaddafi's airforce (which probably wasn't worth shit) which was supposed to force him to capitulate, but he fights on. Now NATO is bombing the rebels tanks, what a fuck up!

Actually the current cost, to the US is 500,000,000. That would include the cost of the missiles as well as the all other operational costs such as fuel for the aircraft, parts replacements, all munitions, and the cost of operating the ships involved.

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

I do agree with BO on one thing. Militarily, we are spread thin. So yes, we should have had command at the beginning like we did. NATO should have the capability of carrying on from there. What I don't like is that it hardly seemed planned. No one could agree on what exactly the goal was. Also, BO was barely committed to seeing it through. And they took their time getting it going. You don't commit our troops to battle if you don't really give a shit one way or another what happens.

The US is a signatory to NATO so why do the two of you try to make it look like NATO and the US are separate entities when it comes to military alliances and actions.

I disagree that the US should have retained command. Other countries are more than capable of taking command of military operations.

I do agree that no politician thought about what goal is to be achieved. It seems that the only thought was to destroy Libya's military capability and maybe hope that Qadhafi would leave of his own accord or maybe be overthrown. Beyond that the politicians don't have a clue as to what to do because no plan was ever made.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

mmmm hmmm. If you say so.

When you've nothing to say I guess you can always resort to onomatopoeia and condescension.

The briefest glance at the world shows it to be shackled by the American empire: sweatshops to make Nike shoes and garden-variety exploited workers in South America making your Cocacola--who are sometimes murdered by their government, a government that is in cahoots with the US to provide them cheap slave labor. Chinese workers are exploited every day to make all manner of crap that is summarily bought by Americans in thrall by your greedy, materialistic consumerist culture. The list goes on and on. And let us not forget this is because these American companies believe it natural to exploit people, just like the aristocracy of old. Let us not forget either that the use of slave labor is the real reason why jobs have been "offshored." You have to put the hoi polloi in their place after all. You have to put them to work, make them useful, show them who's boss. This is what I mean by slaves.

The point about parasites should be well known to you. Libertarians love that word don't they? "Burden us not with your chaff" and other such authoritarian garbage. These exploited workers are the "parasites" and so am I since I'm Puertorican. I'm just a moocher, a freeloader and so are the Indonesians in sweatshops and so are Mexican immigrants and so are the average US workers. It's what authoritarians always do: they exploit people and then they scapegoat them. That should sound familiar: teachers and unions are blamed for the financial troubles even though they were caused by tax cuts for the rich and two wars which have yet to end.

This issue of "parasite" or some other similar labeling of victims is at the heart of your absurd sociopolitical beliefs--you look down on the smallfolk, but pander to the rich and powerful.

[randolph]

Ila

I disagree that the US should have retained command. Other countries are more than capable of taking command of military operations.

Are they really? NATO planes bombed insurgent tanks because they didn't "know" that they had tanks.

[ila]

Originally Posted by randolph

Ila

Are they really? NATO planes bombed insurgent tanks because they didn't "know" that they had tanks.

Would you like me to produce a list of times and places that US planes bombed and strafed their allies? I could start with recent events in Iraq and Afghanistan and then start working back in time.

And BTW the only planes that NATO owns are AWACS. All other countries participating in the Libyan conflict are owned by their respective countries and that includes countries that don't belong to NATO.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

When you've nothing to say I guess you can always resort to onomatopoeia and condescension.

No, you've just made a bunch of unsubstantiated claims. I could get all worked up over it, or just recognize that that's your thing and let it go.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Chinese workers are exploited every day to make all manner of crap that is summarily blah blah blah

China is doing very well off our nickle. I would like very much for that to end, and for that work to come back over to the US. If the Chinese are exploited they have their government to thank. There's no reason for them to be living in the conditions they are. China is a very wealthy nation.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

This issue of "parasite" or some other similar labeling of victims is at the heart of your absurd sociopolitical beliefs--you look down on the smallfolk, but pander to the rich and powerful.

Parasite is your word not mine. I'm not going to say it does or does not apply to you. I don't know you and you don't know me. You don't know who I look down on or who I pander to. And I've never heard the phrase "Burden us not with your chaff". I even googled it... nothing. It's catchy though. You should make a t-shirt with that written on it and sell it.

[ila]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

We'll get serious about future energy once we have a viable alternative. Mr Fusion would be nice. I also hear the engineers are having problems with hydrogen powered cars, but then I think I heard Norway is already running them? Either way, our energy supplier goes from the MidEast to Russia since they seem to have most of the hydrogen resources.

You should get your facts straight. The majority of oil imported by the US comes from Canada. The second most imports by the US are from Mexico.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by ila

You should get your facts straight. The majority of oil imported by the US comes from Canada. The second most imports by the US are from Mexico.

My apologies to Canada. But are you sure the US gets more oil from Mexico than the Mid East?

[ila]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

My apologies to Canada. But are you sure the US gets more oil from Mexico than the Mid East?

I'm not sure about the total quantities coming from Mexico and the Middle East. I do know that Mexico is ranked second as the country that supplies the US with oil, however all the countries of the Middle East combined may supply more oil than Mexico.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by ila

I'm not sure about the total quantities coming from Mexico and the Middle East. I do know that Mexico is ranked second as the country that supplies the US with oil, however all the countries of the Middle East combined may supply more oil than Mexico.

The oil output of Mexico is declining. The sale of oil is what sustains the Mexican government. In the near future Mexico will no longer have oil to sell and will likely descend into chaos. The people of US border states better get prepared.
Egypt and Libya are contained by desert. We have a wadeable river!