Pacifism and the Left

[PoliticalChic]

It's fun to watch you backpedal. First it was that soldiers were spit on. Now it's someone "feels" like they were spit on because someone said something mean to them.

So...you are stipulating that (Liberal) folks say "something mean to them."

I'll accept that as you moving ever closer to admitting the truth of the OP, Polkie....

No, I'm saying one person said something mean to someone.

You're tap dancing...."someone"???

You really mean some Liberal, to a member of the armed forces....

Admit it.

 

[Polk]

So...you are stipulating that (Liberal) folks say "something mean to them."

I'll accept that as you moving ever closer to admitting the truth of the OP, Polkie....

No, I'm saying one person said something mean to someone.

You're tap dancing...."someone"???

You really mean some Liberal, to a member of the armed forces....

Admit it.

Yes, one "liberal" (not that we actually know the person is a liberal, but for the sake of argument I'll accept the claim) to one member of the armed forces. Does that really show anything though? I'm sure if I dug around long enough, I could find a conservative saying something equally bad. Does that mean all conservatives would be liable for that comment?

 

[PoliticalChic]

No, I'm saying one person said something mean to someone.

You're tap dancing...."someone"???

You really mean some Liberal, to a member of the armed forces....

Admit it.

Yes, one "liberal" (not that we actually know the person is a liberal, but for the sake of argument I'll accept the claim) to one member of the armed forces. Does that really show anything though? I'm sure if I dug around long enough, I could find a conservative saying something equally bad. Does that mean all conservatives would be liable for that comment?

Bill Press a liberal?

Bill Clinton?


So...I'm up to three?


"Super Committee Deadlock Would Put U.S. Military ‘Out of Business’
The House Armed Services Committee chairman adds to the growing GOP chorus against potential Super Committee cuts or the automatic trigger fallback touching defense when he speaks at AEI this morning.

According to an advance copy of his remarks, Representative Buck McKeon (R-California) will say that the Obama administration has “steadily lowered our guard” while the military faces a more dangerous world.

“President Obama’s policies are reflective of an ideology that treats American power as the principle adversary, not ally, to world peace.”
McKeon at AEI: Super Committee Deadlock Would Put U.S. Military ‘Out of Business’ « The Enterprise Blog


So....can I add all of the Democrats, too?

 

[Polk]

No, because saying some defense spending will be cut does nothing to support your argument.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No, because saying some defense spending will be cut does nothing to support your argument.

Now you are not being honest.

The 'punishment' for the Right in not agreeing to find a solution to the debt ceiling is to penalize the military.

This is in comparison to punishing the Left vis-a-vis entitlements...

But, you are aware of that....aren't you.

 

[initforme]

We need wars. But the military industrial complex needs war.

 

[PoliticalChic]

We need wars. But the military industrial complex needs war.

There certainly is an element of truth in your post...

1. But, did you realize that the most interventionist President in history was Woodrow Wilson, Besides taking his country into WWI, he employed American troops in Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba and Panama.

In fact, the Progressives to which Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama pay obeisance saw war as character-building for the nation.

2. Progressives saw WWI as an opportunity to change America and enforce collectivization. “In 1917, as Woodrow Wilson prepared to take the United States into the European war, the leading collectivist intellectuals of the day, John Dewey and Herbert Croly of The New Republic, beat the drums for American participation. …Dewey wrote that the progressive opponents of war were blind to the “immense impetus to reorganization afforded by this war.” He hoped they would work “to form ... the conditions and objects of our entrance.” In other words, they should exploit the opportunities war bestowed for collectivizing America. Croly was pithier: “The American nation needs the tonic of a serious moral adventure.” War Is the Health of the State

a. “Once the war is on, the conviction spreads that individual thought is helpless, that the only way one can count is as a cog in the great wheel. There is no good holding back. We are told to dry our unnoticed and ineffective tears and plunge into the great work.”
From a Randolph Bourne essay published in June 1917, “The War and the Intellectuals.”

b. Dewey reveled in the thought that the war might force Americans to “give up much of our economic freedom…we shall have to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.”
Taking liberties - latimes.com


'March in step'....pretty much the description of Liberals.

 

[regent]

Should the US engage in military campaigns for reasons other than defense of the American people or American property?

 

[Nosmo King]

Does the Left embrace pacifism, or does the Right embrace brutality?

Brutality?


Got your example of it right here: Those Sesame Street thugs!!


"A new documentary released by Al Jazeera exposes the use of children’s songs and heavy metal music to torture prisoners at Guantanamo Bay — a tactic that came about not long after President George W. Bush created the camp to detain prisoners in the “war on terror” against Al Qaeda."

Read more: ‘Sesame Street’ songs and heavy metal blasted to torture Guantanamo detainees: reportÂ*Â* - NY Daily News

Or...

There never was a civil rights movement the Right liked. Instead, those on the Right attempt to marginalize, discriminate and belittle those American citizen wishing for what everyone else is supposed to have~ equality.

There never was a war the Right disliked. Not the meat grinder that was Vietnam. Not the invasion and occupation of Iraq which had nothing to do with the attacks on September 11. Whatever the cause, from propping up a brutal dictator to 'securing' resources from a foreign people, the Right dutifully falls in line drumming the war beat and criticizing those who would reconsider.

What about the wage disparity? The Right has no problem keeping the poor poor and making the rich richer, in spite of the brutality of such disparities.

Yup! The Right favors brutality over equality, brutality over diplomacy and brutality over the ability to make an honest wage for an honest day's work.

Bring the Sesame Street example again.

 

[Polk]

No, because saying some defense spending will be cut does nothing to support your argument.

Now you are not being honest.

The 'punishment' for the Right in not agreeing to find a solution to the debt ceiling is to penalize the military.

This is in comparison to punishing the Left vis-a-vis entitlements...

But, you are aware of that....aren't you.

It's a "punishment" because each side considers those respective issues as high funding priorities. To say that actually harms the military is laughable. Even with the cuts, we're still spending around the same amount as the rest of the world combined. That's absurd in and of itself, until you then add on that most of the other big spenders are our allies.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The problem with liberals is they view the world from a fantasy perspective.

Where reality is just an inconvenience; and ideology and agenda trump common sense.

Like those fantasy WMD's??

Carby, "the Perfect Foil", enters, stage right.

BAGHDAD — American and Iraqi officials have completed nearly the last chapter in dismantling Saddam Hussein’s nuclear program with the removal of hundreds of tons of natural uranium from the country’s main nuclear site.

American military personnel helped move about 600 tons of uranium in the form called yellowcake. It had been stored at Tuwaitha, an installation 12 miles south of Baghdad, which had been the site of Iraq’s nuclear program.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/07/world/middleeast/07iraq.html

There were no WMD's and all the non sequiturs in the world can't refute that.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If all liberals are pacifists,

then is Hillary Clinton not a liberal?

 

[NYcarbineer]

We need wars. But the military industrial complex needs war.

There certainly is an element of truth in your post...

1. But, did you realize that the most interventionist President in history was Woodrow Wilson, Besides taking his country into WWI, he employed American troops in Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba and Panama.

In fact, the Progressives to which Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama pay obeisance saw war as character-building for the nation.

.

So all Liberals are pacifists, except for the ones that are war mongers?

You are getting more daft by the minute in this thread. You really need to cut your losses and move on.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Does the Left embrace pacifism, or does the Right embrace brutality?

Brutality?


Got your example of it right here: Those Sesame Street thugs!!


"A new documentary released by Al Jazeera exposes the use of children’s songs and heavy metal music to torture prisoners at Guantanamo Bay — a tactic that came about not long after President George W. Bush created the camp to detain prisoners in the “war on terror” against Al Qaeda."

Read more: ‘Sesame Street’ songs and heavy metal blasted to torture Guantanamo detainees: reportÂ*Â* - NY Daily News

Or...

There never was a civil rights movement the Right liked. Instead, those on the Right attempt to marginalize, discriminate and belittle those American citizen wishing for what everyone else is supposed to have~ equality.

There never was a war the Right disliked. Not the meat grinder that was Vietnam. Not the invasion and occupation of Iraq which had nothing to do with the attacks on September 11. Whatever the cause, from propping up a brutal dictator to 'securing' resources from a foreign people, the Right dutifully falls in line drumming the war beat and criticizing those who would reconsider.

What about the wage disparity? The Right has no problem keeping the poor poor and making the rich richer, in spite of the brutality of such disparities.

Yup! The Right favors brutality over equality, brutality over diplomacy and brutality over the ability to make an honest wage for an honest day's work.

Bring the Sesame Street example again.

Based on your post, the Left favors ignorance.

You don't know nuttin.'

My poor, sad friend. You are clearly the product of the 'Liberal echo chamber'...you babble inaccuracies, and none of the other Libs correct you.

I will.

1. "There never was a civil rights movement the Right liked."

"...Civil Rights Act of 1964? That’s where the Democrats showed their mettle and Republicans were proven to be racists. Right? Wrong. 82% of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 versus only 64% of Democrats. Furthermore, a few years later, it was Republican Richard Nixon who first put teeth behind affirmative action."
Racist Democrats vs. Colorblind Republicans - Conservative News, Views & Books

Strike one.


2. "There never was a war the Right disliked. Not the meat grinder that was Vietnam."

a. In late 1962, Kennedy was still fully committed to supporting the Diem regime,
though he had some doubts even then. When Senator Mike Mansfield advised
withdrawal at that early date:

The President was too disturbed by the Senator's unexpected argument to reply to
it. He said to me later when we talked about the discussion, "I got angry with
Mike for disagreeing with our policy so completely, and I got angry with myself
because I found myself agreeing with him (Kenneth O'Donnell and Dave Powers,
Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye, Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1970, p. 15).

b. Lyndon Johnson succeeded John F Kennedy as president. Like many ‘hawks’ in the White House, Johnson was a fervent supporter of the ‘Domino Theory’ and he was keen to support South Vietnam against the NLF:

“If we quit Vietnam tomorrow we’ll be fighting in Hawaii and next week we’ll have to be fighting in San Francisco.”
Lyndon Johnson and Vietnam

c. BTW...right up until his last day in office, the rapist, Clinton, was touting WMD's in Iraq.

Strike two!


3. "What about the wage disparity? The Right has no problem keeping the poor poor and making the rich richer, in spite of the brutality of such disparities."

Any difference in earnings, if that is what you are frothing about, is due to productivity.

Income and wealth inequality…or demographics. In Alan Reynold’s “Income and Wealth,” he studied the data, and found the following. Certainly the top fifth of households has a far greater proportion of same, but it also has six times as many full-time workers as the bottom fifth, heavily composed of two-earner couples with older children or other relatives who work. The bottom fifth is heavily composed of aged or younger couples, the retired or the still in school. Also, some in the bottom fifth because they are part of the underground economy, or in crime, so income is not reported. Or suffer addictions which preclude work.

a. In 2004, 56.4% of households in the bottom fifth featured no work by anyone for the entire year.
http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032005/hhinc/new05_000.htm

b.The total number of full time, year round workers in the bottom fifth for 2004 was less than 3 million…which compares to 16.4 million in the top fifth of households. Ibid.

The difference in income does not reflect inequality, but rather, productivity. The fact that the lowest fifth are neither starving, nor living in the streets reflects the intrinsic generosity of our society, and the transfer of incomes via government programs. 80% of income in the bottom fifth is from such transfers; it is only 2% for the top fifth.

c. Other pertinent factors include age and experience of head of household, educational differences, the rise of working women, which increased the number of two-earner families, increased in college educated workers, percent of immigrants in the workforce, which also give the impression of inequality.

Strike three!!

Aren't you embarrassed at how wrong you are in every case...of course not. Water off a duck's back.

Now, even though my post is true, logical, and documented, I have no expectation that it will influence what passes for thinking in your existence....

...'cause you're a Liberal.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No, because saying some defense spending will be cut does nothing to support your argument.

Now you are not being honest.

The 'punishment' for the Right in not agreeing to find a solution to the debt ceiling is to penalize the military.

This is in comparison to punishing the Left vis-a-vis entitlements...

But, you are aware of that....aren't you.

It's a "punishment" because each side considers those respective issues as high funding priorities. To say that actually harms the military is laughable. Even with the cuts, we're still spending around the same amount as the rest of the world combined. That's absurd in and of itself, until you then add on that most of the other big spenders are our allies.

This post is beyond tap dancing....it's Hip Hop!

1. "...still spending around the same amount as the rest of the world combined."
And that pertains.....how?
A discussion of the importance to world stability of the United States military is for another day.

BTW...Obama?s 2011 Budget Proposal: How It?s Spent - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

$3.69 trillon budget proposal

1. Social Security $738 20%

2.National Defense $738 20%

3. Income Security $567

4. Medicare $498

5.Net Interest $251

6. Health $381

7. Education $122

8. Veteran’s Benefits $122

9. Transportation $91.55

10. International Affairs $67.39
$3,575.94
The same 20% as Social Security.

The fact that the Left threatens the military because the Right "considers those respective issues as high funding priorities" is strong evidence for the OP.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Like those fantasy WMD's??

Carby, "the Perfect Foil", enters, stage right.

BAGHDAD — American and Iraqi officials have completed nearly the last chapter in dismantling Saddam Hussein’s nuclear program with the removal of hundreds of tons of natural uranium from the country’s main nuclear site.

American military personnel helped move about 600 tons of uranium in the form called yellowcake. It had been stored at Tuwaitha, an installation 12 miles south of Baghdad, which had been the site of Iraq’s nuclear program.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/07/world/middleeast/07iraq.html

There were no WMD's and all the non sequiturs in the world can't refute that.

I know you can't think....but can't you read, either?

Is yellow cake uranium not a danger as WMD?

Found in the Iraq nuclear program?


NO?


So, what was the hokus pokus form the Left with their hero Joe Wilson going to Chad to see if Saddam bought yellowcake?

'Joseph Charles Wilson IV (born November 6, 1949) is a former United States diplomat best known for his 2002 trip to Niger to investigate allegations that Saddam Hussein was attempting to purchase yellowcake uranium; his New York Times op-ed piece, "What I Didn't Find in Africa"'
Joseph C. Wilson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Is yellow cake uranium a WMD?

No?

"The Wall Street Journal today reveals that Muammar Gaddafi has not destroyed weapons of mass destruction in Tripoli, Libya – namely Mustard Gas, Uranium Yellowcake and Scud Missiles."
Gaddhafi WMD: Mustard Gas, Yellowcake, Scud Missiles | Maggie's Notebook


You are so easy....
...I roll you up and smoke you like a Cuban cigar.


Weren't you the look-out at Pearl Harbor???

 

[Nosmo King]

Brutality?


Got your example of it right here: Those Sesame Street thugs!!


"A new documentary released by Al Jazeera exposes the use of children’s songs and heavy metal music to torture prisoners at Guantanamo Bay — a tactic that came about not long after President George W. Bush created the camp to detain prisoners in the “war on terror” against Al Qaeda."

Read more: ‘Sesame Street’ songs and heavy metal blasted to torture Guantanamo detainees: reportÂ*Â* - NY Daily News

Or...

There never was a civil rights movement the Right liked. Instead, those on the Right attempt to marginalize, discriminate and belittle those American citizen wishing for what everyone else is supposed to have~ equality.

There never was a war the Right disliked. Not the meat grinder that was Vietnam. Not the invasion and occupation of Iraq which had nothing to do with the attacks on September 11. Whatever the cause, from propping up a brutal dictator to 'securing' resources from a foreign people, the Right dutifully falls in line drumming the war beat and criticizing those who would reconsider.

What about the wage disparity? The Right has no problem keeping the poor poor and making the rich richer, in spite of the brutality of such disparities.

Yup! The Right favors brutality over equality, brutality over diplomacy and brutality over the ability to make an honest wage for an honest day's work.

Bring the Sesame Street example again.

Based on your post, the Left favors ignorance.

You don't know nuttin.'

My poor, sad friend. You are clearly the product of the 'Liberal echo chamber'...you babble inaccuracies, and none of the other Libs correct you.

I will.

1. "There never was a civil rights movement the Right liked."

"...Civil Rights Act of 1964? That’s where the Democrats showed their mettle and Republicans were proven to be racists. Right? Wrong. 82% of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 versus only 64% of Democrats. Furthermore, a few years later, it was Republican Richard Nixon who first put teeth behind affirmative action."
Racist Democrats vs. Colorblind Republicans - Conservative News, Views & Books

Strike one.


2. "There never was a war the Right disliked. Not the meat grinder that was Vietnam."

a. In late 1962, Kennedy was still fully committed to supporting the Diem regime,
though he had some doubts even then. When Senator Mike Mansfield advised
withdrawal at that early date:

The President was too disturbed by the Senator's unexpected argument to reply to
it. He said to me later when we talked about the discussion, "I got angry with
Mike for disagreeing with our policy so completely, and I got angry with myself
because I found myself agreeing with him (Kenneth O'Donnell and Dave Powers,
Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye, Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1970, p. 15).

b. Lyndon Johnson succeeded John F Kennedy as president. Like many ‘hawks’ in the White House, Johnson was a fervent supporter of the ‘Domino Theory’ and he was keen to support South Vietnam against the NLF:

“If we quit Vietnam tomorrow we’ll be fighting in Hawaii and next week we’ll have to be fighting in San Francisco.”
Lyndon Johnson and Vietnam

c. BTW...right up until his last day in office, the rapist, Clinton, was touting WMD's in Iraq.

Strike two!


3. "What about the wage disparity? The Right has no problem keeping the poor poor and making the rich richer, in spite of the brutality of such disparities."

Any difference in earnings, if that is what you are frothing about, is due to productivity.

Income and wealth inequality…or demographics. In Alan Reynold’s “Income and Wealth,” he studied the data, and found the following. Certainly the top fifth of households has a far greater proportion of same, but it also has six times as many full-time workers as the bottom fifth, heavily composed of two-earner couples with older children or other relatives who work. The bottom fifth is heavily composed of aged or younger couples, the retired or the still in school. Also, some in the bottom fifth because they are part of the underground economy, or in crime, so income is not reported. Or suffer addictions which preclude work.

a. In 2004, 56.4% of households in the bottom fifth featured no work by anyone for the entire year.
http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032005/hhinc/new05_000.htm

b.The total number of full time, year round workers in the bottom fifth for 2004 was less than 3 million…which compares to 16.4 million in the top fifth of households. Ibid.

The difference in income does not reflect inequality, but rather, productivity. The fact that the lowest fifth are neither starving, nor living in the streets reflects the intrinsic generosity of our society, and the transfer of incomes via government programs. 80% of income in the bottom fifth is from such transfers; it is only 2% for the top fifth.

c. Other pertinent factors include age and experience of head of household, educational differences, the rise of working women, which increased the number of two-earner families, increased in college educated workers, percent of immigrants in the workforce, which also give the impression of inequality.

Strike three!!

Aren't you embarrassed at how wrong you are in every case...of course not. Water off a duck's back.

Now, even though my post is true, logical, and documented, I have no expectation that it will influence what passes for thinking in your existence....

...'cause you're a Liberal.

You hide behind the skirts of political party and not ideology. If the consistent linking of Democrat to Liberal and Conservative to Republican was true, George Wallace and Lester Maddox would be steeped in patchouli oil while singing "We shall overcome" and "If I had a hammer, I'd hammer out justice" simply because they were members of the Democrat party. And the Republicans would be refuting Teddy Roosevelt as a big government over regulator instead of "Trust Buster".

If I had to defend a political ideology, Conservatism is the one I'd use such ham handed ruses for, because it is indefensible otherwise. Always on the wrong side of the curve of history, running a party smoke screen to cover the tracks of Conservatism is the only, if least intellectually noble course of all.

You're out.

 

[francoHFW]

"Actually, it's called intelligence. You wouldn't understand..."

 

[Unkotare]

"Actually, it's called intelligence. You wouldn't understand..."

LOL!!!!! @ that coming from YOU!!! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[editec]

Keep telling yourselves that there is a leftist movement who are communists and pacifists if it makes you feel better about yourselves.

Meanwhile your nation is going to shit thanks to a cabal of corporate theives.


It's absolutely incrdible the delusions you people buy into when the FACTS are right there for your consideration.

GO READ A BOOK.