TravellingGuy said:
Beside the fact that Saddam's WMD were a threat to the immediate vicinity, not to the USA on the other side of the world. Although Saddam was a bad man, a bad ruler, and killed lots of people, he has never been convicted of being a Terrorist against the united states. Its interesting how Bush and his lackies (yourself included) try to pray on the fear and anger that people have towards the Terrorists of the world to turn us also against other people (who are not terrorists).
yknow until pearl harbour that is exactly what everyone in the usa was saying about a guy named adolf hitler "ahh he is on the other side of the atlantic it doesnt concern us here in the usa" what do you think would have happened if the usa did not declare war in 1941? england was in the middle of being bombed to shit and the allies were losing on every front. the entry into the war by the usa was pivotal to the allies winning the war and had the usa not been bombed and continued their non-interference the german atomic program at peenemunde might have given the germans the bomb and effectively have won the war in europe and given the germans the ultimate trump card -- in 1944-45 there were plans for a nazi nuclear attack on new york (
http://www.luft46.com/armament/abomb.html) . lucky for us the japanese decided to bomb pearl harbour and as Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto said "I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible
resolve" - December 7th, 1941
hmm seems to me that it was a good thing that the usa was filled with so much resolve to take care of imperialistic japan and their lunatic ally hitler who was only a "local problem" in europe.
energizerbunny wrote
"But then Dubya only cares about the employers not the employees. The employers can make more money that way, or at least until the masses can no longer consume the products because they don't have jobs to buy them. Bush knows that he can win the masses with fear and the big corporations with money"
George W. Bush has:
- increased federal spending on education by 60.8 percent;
- increased federal spending on labor by 56 percent;
- increased federal spending on the interior by 23.4 percent;
- increased federal spending on defense by 27.6 percent.
ya he definitely doesnt care about the labour which is why he increased federal spending on it by 56%
lets also not forget that he signed the farm bill, which was a non-kosher piñata filled with enough pork to bend space and time;
and pushed through a Medicare plan which starts with a price tag of $400 billion but will — according to every expert who studies the issue — go up a gazillion-bajillion dollars over the next decade
oh he also has:
- got more people working for the federal government since the end of the Cold War; (he created a massive dept of homeland security lets not forget that)
- not vetoed a single spending — or any other bill, and he has no intention of eliminating a single department
And that's all before Bush went into reelection mode. Read Tuesday's lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal, and you'll find that this is one of the spendiest (yes, that's right, "spendiest") president in American history, second only to LBJ."
(lots of this was taken from various sources around the net)
robert frost said it best when he said "a liberal is a man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel"
