“Everyone loves seeing us tied down here. One need only observe how Vladimir Putin is throwing his weight around Europe, how China is growing more influential by the day, how Iran has been emboldened and how all the Arab dictators are relieved that America is mired in Iraq so we can’t push any democracy on them to understand that there’s a huge ‘opportunity cost’ for our staying here without either success or an exit strategy.”
— New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, in a Sept. 5 dispatch from Baghdad
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
104 Comments
Bush knew or should have known that his decision to bog the US down in that quagmire would cost us globally. Unfortunately, ‘the decider’ decided that his personal vendetta was more important than the National interest.
Unfortunately, most Republics continue to back his ill-fated obstinancy.
Friedman seems to not be very bright. He says we have no exit strategy, when we do: “Leave.”
{ the sky won’t fall, but the neocons and Zionist-Jews and PNACers will all harp that it will, so when have they ever been right }?
Leaving will, however, screw-up Israel’s plan to “rule the world” { and that’s what this thing is really all about }.
“that quagmire would cost us globally”
Well, bingo, there it is.
World Conquest….
I told you so…
Next November, vote to change our country, and change the world for the better.
I heard a story on CNN this morning that, if Mitt Romney is elected president, he will work to repeal taxes on captial gains and interest. What about eliminating or reducing payroll taxes? Oh, I had a momentary lapse. Wealthy people don’t work for wages.
And how would you “change our country, and change the world for the better?”
Ron Paul wants to do away with income taxes. Hows that for a reduction in payroll taxes?
I presume my payroll taxes are being spent, one way or another, on replenishing military industrial complex weaponry. But what the heck. I’m only in my late thirties and they’ve already started trying to brainwash us that we won’t get the dough until we’re seventy. Bleaker forecasts call for not receiving payments at all. Those are usually delivered in a matter-of-fact tone, as if we’re not supposed to mind. Well, I do mind. If they’re not planning to pay us in retirement, they are most certainly welcome to quit gouging us for it.
Friedman, on the other hand, should preface every single one of his columns with, “Yeah, I know, I thought the invasion was a good idea.”
Friedman is one of “them” and all he does is follow the “talking points” of the neocons, Zionists and PNACers { and any new travelers who hops on that treasonous train }.
{ Job requirement of the NYT }
The only-est solution to the Middle East problem is to spend, say, $3 Billion a week not on killing Iraqis, but on developing alternatives to fossil fuels.
Imagine the progress we could make! There would still be a market for oil for petrochemicals and plastics, but we would stop burning one of the planet’s most important resources. The environment would benefit from reduced fossil fuel emmissions. But Middle East oil would no longer have a nut-grip on the world economy. And they’d be free to worship whomever and however they see fit.
The Fart-car would solve the problem. You could make the car go and blow the horn at the same time.
I’m glad Friedman’s noticed the huge drain on resources and ability caused by the Iraq debacle.
But “pushing democracy” on the Arab world? Ha! When has that EVER happened?
Some people just dont get it… Not every “People” WANT democracy!!
Some “People” do quite well in a more “controlled” society, or tribal or feudal style of living..
Everybody has their place, and nobody knows any different…
Why must we try to push OUR way on the entire world like a bunch of red/white/blue missionaries??
Next November, vote to change our country, and change the world for the better.
Yes, vote third party since the two parties are only interested in screwing the country over.
Ron Paul wants to do away with income taxes. Hows that for a reduction in payroll taxes?
Works for me. Income tax should not be allowed. VAT or something similar works better. That way the more you buy, the more tax you pay. The bad thing is the VAT in the EU is so high that poor people are hurt by it.
Dont charge it on food and that would solve most of that problem.
For the younger crowd, dont expect Social Security to be there when you retire. The Republicans and Democrats have been stealing from it since the days it had a surplus. Better start IRAs or 401Ks while you have the chance.
Example: There wasnt much of a difference between Tsarist Russia, and Communist Russia(except for religion) — The STATE still had all the control… When the Soviet Union fell, Russia was in pretty dire straits, until Putin could get things going again…
But even then, Putin has seen a need for tighter run government control… and the West(some of us) want to condemn his actions…
Chas,
A true democrat, a true statesman, would have used his leadership position to encourage dissent and to encourage freedom of the press. He should have expended his energy persuading the country to strengthen the foundations of democracy. God knows our Founding Fathers were not saints, but they sought to teach us, in their speeches and written work, to aspire to something greater. Putin had that opportunity and he squandered it.
My point about payroll taxes is that – unlike capital gains or interest earings taxation (which is typical, hoary, fossilized Republican policy) – payroll tax cuts would actually benefit the working families in this country who REALLY need tax relief.
You make a good point, but how are you going to make up the revenue lost by cutting payroll taxes? The main federal payroll taxes, other than income, are Social Security and Medicare. Both of those programs are soon to be in dire straits because of the Republican and Democratic policies of stealing from them to make the deficit look smaller than it really is.
I am all for killing the income tax, providing that they make it a Constitutional amendment to bring it back. Otherwise, they will just pull a switch where we pay both income taxes and a federal sales tax.
They need to cut about 2/3 of the federal programs completely and scale back the rest, but that is not going to happen in our lifetimes. The old saying is once a federal program starts, it rarely ends.
The average Fraud, Waste, and Abuse at the federal level for the last 50+ years is between 33 and 50 percent.
Most people think that the feds should be able to utilize economies of scale, and they should. In reality, feds pay more for the same thing than the lower levels of govt. It has been that way since about the Civil War or a little bit later.
On capital gains, the short term ones need to be fairly high to discourage speculative trading that can lead to big market problems. The long term ones could be somewhat lower.
Saving interest should be tax exempt, up to the median amount. This would encourage people to save while limiting the benefit to the richer people.
I understood your point, Kelly. I agree with you.
My point stands, though, that charging us at the same rate, or threatening to increase the rate, all the while saying that we won’t collect until we’re practically in the ground, is unacceptable.
I am not an expert on balancing the federal budget, but if we would stop spending 3 billion a week in Iraq, close the off-shore corporate tax loopholes, and do a little bit more tinkering with corporate welfare, I think we could afford income or payroll tax cuts for the middle/lower class. I had it up to my ears hearing about more death tax, capital gain tax or no income taxes for the wealthy.
There are two facts that no-name overlooks. 1. We have to have rules and laws to live by- without it we have Anarchy and 2.you have to pay to have those laws enforced.
Ron Paul advocates pure anarchy- no rules, nobody to enforce them. Is Ron Paul going to be president for free? Who will pay his salary?
Libertarianism will make this nation a third world country in a very brief period of time. If you want to live like Mexico, please, go move there.
I wonder when that photo of Friedman was taken. If recent, it appears Friedman has been hitting the Grecian formula for hair bottle with great frequency.
Friedman is a mixed bag. He often checks his politics at the door, but always brings his ideological eraser along just in case he wants to change his view.
Friedman thinks like he writes. He’ll make a statement, let it get some opinion feedback and if it is somewhat unpopular he can hit the backspace key to re-align his position.
Well, Friedman is an opinion editor and that is what he gets paid for doing. I just wish he would stop doing the “political changling” morph moves every five minutes of his life.
Kelly,
I think you should run for office on that platform. Hell, I’d even volunteer to write your speeches. (All I want in return are a few boxes of my favorite cigars…and a nice, new humidor.)
I do not want to live in Mexico. I merely pointed out that corporations are moving jobs to Mexico, thanks to NAFTA. At some point, those jobs are going to pay better than here.
Unlike the haters on this blog, I love America. I may not agree with everything America has done, but as a friend said: We may not be better than anyone else, but we are no worse.
Guess I am hitting too close to home for some people.
No-Name:
Are you suggesting that the posters on this blog hate America simply because they happen to disagree with you on a couple of points? In America, as I understand it, people have the right to speak up.
No I am not. But some of the posters on this blog have shown their hate for America; others have shown their hate for the other side. Neither form of hate is good.
I agree we have free speech, but on this blog the neolibs and neocons seem to think that free speech only applies to them. They use trolling and personal attacks against anyone that disagrees with their point of view.
I am speaking up, as it my right. Agree or disagree, as is your right.
I never said people could not disagree with me. I expect both neolibs and neocons to attack my points, but I should not have to expect that, should I?
I have posted respectfully, and I deserve to be treated the same, but I know certain posters will not give me that courtesy. However, I will continue to post respectfully even when they spew their hate and ignorance.
Most of the neolibs and neocons think they are better than everyone else. I do not think I am better than anyone else. I think we are all equal like our Founding Fathers said in their documents.
I did attack your points and not you.
Putin had that opportunity and he squandered it.
Posted by: TRTaliaferro | September 08, 2007 at 10:17 AM
================================
It is most difficult to encourage dissent in a nation where dissent has been met with death or imprisonment for so many centuries…
I know what our Founding Fathers have done… A Nation built on Dissent… What scares me now, is that Dissent is looked on by SOME, even on this Blog, as Anti American, or UNAmerican…
I guess it cuts both ways, TRT…
We could all hope and wish that Russia could turn the tide of their Millenium+ of history… But, one never knows….
No-Name: To some extent, you’re painting yourself as a victim.
That said, the sun is shining, and I am off.
Blank — We LOVE to quote the Founding Fathers on their “equality’ ideals… But many of the very men who wrote such things were themselves Slave Owners… and thus did not really believe ALL MEN are created equal, or we would never have had the battle over slavery that we had… (and maybe still have to a smaller extent)
Many of those who wrote such magnificent words about Freedom, and Equality, and Justice, did not even believe the SLAVES were HUMAN BEINGS!!
And yet, we applaud their great wisdom and words of equality and justice… We can call their words Ideals… but hardly can we call their words justice…
As for the government truly acting in the way you have suggested, Of the People, By the People, and For the People… That would seem to be one of many of the often quoted “pipedreams” of Abe Lincoln… Nice thought, Abe, but even Abe knew what his words were… a vision, a dream…
All right, one last comment for Chas: I agree that it’s difficult to put a true Democratic government in place. Later…
Three score and 2 years ago, our nation became the first and ONLY nation in the knkown history of the world, to use Nuclear Weapons on a sovereign nation of human beings… It scared the Spit out of us SO BAD, that now we send our troops anywhere there might be a threat of another nation doing the same, and we threaten to do it again, if they dont comply with our wishes and demands…(witness the attitude of our nation towards Iran at present)….
WOW — we really lerned a lot, didnt we???
Chas,
I am not a big supporter of moral relativism, but in this case you are completely ignoring the historical context of slavery and it’s acceptance.
I don’t think the mere fact that some of the founding fathers had slaves makes them or their ideals any less substantial.
Slavery in many forms was simply part of the culture of the entire world, not just America.
Wow, Nathan, you’re off to a good start… Defending Slavery… SHAME on you!!
The Slavery of the Old Roman Empire was NOTHING comparable to the Slavery in this country… In Ancient Rome, Slaves were a LEGAL class of citizen, and had laws both protecting them, and giving them “certain rights” as Citizens of the Empire… It was almost like a designated working class… And, if freed by their owners, were equal in all respects to all other citizens…
Chas. while it may not seem humane to use nuclear weapons, the alternative was a bloody invasion of Japan that would have left the country in ruins and millions dead. I know history revisionists have tried to change the expected number of American dead, but their numbers don’t match the bloody island hopping numbers. It is likely that 5 – 10 million Japanese would have died in a land invasion. Their leaders were encouraging children to fight. Some have argued the Japanese Peace Party was ready to make a deal. It was, but it was not in power, and at the time, they were being hunted down by the War Party so they were either in hiding or dead. When the Emperor decided to call for surrender, he did so from hiding.
Japanese officials at the time said it took the bombs to cause them to surrender. In Japan, surrender was considered dishonorable, better death than surrender.
I know some of our Founding Fathers were slave owners. They were not perfect, and neither are we. Do you also condemn the African tribes that were capturing the slaves to sell to America? What about the countries that still practice slavery today? It is estimated that there are more slaves now than back then.
I doubt we will nuke Iran. If we did, Russia and possibly China would probably nuke us back. I do not think the President or his advisors are that unwise. I will apologize if I am wrong and we will live to talk about it. Our forces are strained enough that invading is not an option, unless we institute a draft. Other than the lone Democrat pushing for a draft, I do not foresee that many Congress people supporting a draft in the current climate.
Nathan, the advocate of slavery. I wonder if he’d sell his daughter off to slavery as the “good book” allows.
Chas, Nathan wasn’t defending slavery,he mentioned historical reference.
Calling people racists and pro-slavery without justification is really getting old Chas.
You’re bucket of gasoline in a forest fire.
Nathan was not defending slavery he was stating the fact. cultural norms often dictate right and wrong at any given time. Look at SUVs, at this time there are still acceptable to drive but the tide is turning and the day will come that they owners will be required to stop having them. Does that now mean their owners are bad people?
Are we bad people because the Hindus see a cow as a sacred animal and we see them as a source of meat?It was at the time not a bad thing in the majorities opinion to have slaves, majority set the norms and as a culture changes so do the norms.
“Calling people racists and pro-slavery without justification is really getting old Chas.”
In the Old South, the slaves were hired for life. In the North, the slaves were hired by the hour.
No name, with the majority of the Neo-cons still running the White House I am not as sure of no nuke as I would have been several years ago. I still wonder how we let a group of Trotskyists to gain such power in this country. Many still will not even admit that Iraq had went badly.
Ummmm Slaves in this country were not HIRED… They were OWNED… While it is true they seem to have been better treated in the North, they were still PROPERTY…. They were not considered citizens… They were, as I mentioned, not even considered Human Beings in some places… There were also a LOT of people opposed to Slavery from the beginnings of this new nation…
It seems that every society has had those who have chosen to consider others as NON PERSONS… That doesnt make it RIGHT, even if it should happen to be a majority….
And the reference to owning an SUV is just plain spurious!! Doesnt even fit the parameters…
Chas and his side-stepping ways, refuses to apologize to Nathan.
I wont apologize to anybody making racially motivated statements…
And there is no side-stepping to it Kansas… Slavery in this nation was overwhelmingly racist… no arguments there either!!
Right you are, Chas.
When we create a system in America in which people are literally OWNED by another, that’s slavery and that’s bad.
But when we create the system that we have now, in which some people are forced to work for slave wages because there simply aren’t 100 million good jobs out there, that’s fine and normal.
It’s “inevitable” in fact.
As I’ve said before, SLAVES had jobs, and so do WAGE SLAVES today.
The wealth of fat cats is entirely dependent on a politically powerless underclass to serve them.
Its odd the all the Republicans come out of the woodwork to justify slavery. Remind me how many Black republican serve in Congress?
I agree with you on wage slaves, CapN… That was the intent of my parenthetical comment upthread… stating that we still have slavery to a certain extent…
Thanks!!
Tom Paine, there used to be one in the House, a football player from Oklahoma…
The poor dumbies that vote and talk Republican are RINO’s they share everything except the social/economic class of their rich true republican party. Remind me of modern day ‘Uncle Toms’.I bet everyone of them has a well worn copy of ‘The Secret’ stashed somewhere!
The slaves counterparts in the North were the poor imigrants working 12 to 18 hrs a day in unsafe and cruel working conditions. That even included their children.
Welfare is just as much slavery as the things mentioned above. I know numerous families that have been on it for five, yes I said five, generations. The system keeps you down. This system is just as bad as the slave workers. Welfare reform helped a little, but not a lot. The system keeps you hooked on it by punishing you if you try to get off it. Some people take the risk and do get off it, others are not willing to take that risk. Who is the biggest supporter of that system? The Democrats.
People should be helped to get off the system, whether it is welfare, the slave workers, or anyone else. Education packages that dont interfere with your benefits. Job training options that are focused on the needs of employers for specific types of jobs as well as the potential skills of the future employees. Affordable housing options that give you a chance to move out of that rat infested apartment and dont penalize you for making extra money initially. I had a friend and they would pay her child care for volunteer work or if she just wanted to stay home. If she got a paying job, they would not pay.
Are these pie in the sky? Possibly, but the amount of money being poured into the current system isnt working, adding more has not helped and has worsened it in some instances.
Before you shoot them down, what options do you think will work? Maybe between the group of us we can come up with a more workable solution and present it to our elected officials.
When I am operating on a playing field of logic and reason, with people who refuse to do so, it tends to make a discussion about slavery in our History a difficult one.
In a historical context, now this is the key here, HISTORICAL CONTEXT, are you reading that?
Ok.
One more time. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Slavery was not looked upon in the negative light we see it today.
This doesn’t make me a racist. This doesn’t mean I am saying slavery is/was ok.
I am saying that if you wish to seriously look at slavery, you need to do so, with HISTORICAL CONTEXT.
“I am saying that if you wish to seriously look at slavery, you need to do so, with HISTORICAL CONTEXT.”
Don’t waste your breath with the idiots who can’t look at history properly. People who project our modern day sensibilities to the past show their ignorance and should be pitied. Not argued with.
I think we all agree slavery was bad. It happened. People of the day allowed it. Lobotomies and Electroshock Therapy were okay in our not too distant past.
Can we change the past? No, but we can learn from it if we choose to do so. Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat its mistakes.
Too many people on this blog dont think we can make a difference. If you think you cant, then you cant. I believe I can make a difference. Maybe I will, maybe I wont, but I dont try, I wont.
Arguing about it hear is not going to change the way it is out there. The extremists drinking their red or blue kool aid are not going to change their opinions. That just leaves the rest of us and there are more of us than there are of them.
Who is willing to take up my challenge to get involved? I know some of you already do, and kudos to you for doing so. There is one constant in life: change. It’s a coming sooner than some would like and later than others want.
How many people thought slavery would end before the Civil War? How many thought America could win the Revolutionary War when we had a ragtag ill-equipped Army and the British had their superior Army. Without French help, we would have still won, it would just have taken a bit longer. How many of those people thought we would later develop a strong relationship with England?
Read the history of Lincoln and you would think he would given up as many times as he failed. Same thing with Edison and the light bulb. We only fail when we give up trying, whether it is in life, politics, or something else. If we dont try, then we have automatically doomed ourselves to failure.
Muck the Foustache.
After Friedman’s feckless willingness to throw the dice and gamble that the U.S. would just muddle through in Iraq, it’s a mystery to me why anybody bothers to listent to him.
Tom: lots of people knew Bush was lying about the need to go to war, and lots of us stood up and said so. You, by contrast, thought it was time for the Islamic world to “suck on this,” and for us to out-crazy them.
Well, Tom, mission accomplished. Osama wanted us bogged down in Iraq, and that’s what he got with the “help” of opinion-makers like you.
Muck the Foustache.
We were like the wind..strong, going where we wished, when we wished…strong and fearless…then Bush took us into Iraq, and now we are the small breeze in the rest of the world. Soon every contry will be pushing us around, even the French. Rats!
The word “context” sounds like a dirty word coming out of Nathan’s mouth, he who conveniently employs the narrowest definitions and insists on the most literal understanding of things when doing so serves his purposes.
To see Nathan insist that American chattel slavery must be understood in “context,” he seems to be trying to suggest that slavery was just some uncontroversial part of the landscape. Except it wasn’t. It was the hottest of hot-button issues from the time of its inception.
Frankly, Nathan, it does the Founding Fathers a disservice to suggest that they weren’t aware of the contradiction between the claims of the Declaration of Independence/Constitution and the economic system of plantation agriculture and chattel slavery.
And Nathan: if the historical “context” of late colonial America was so amenable to slavery, why did Washington stipulate in his will that all his slaves be freed?
http://www.pbs.org/georgewashington/milestones/free_slaves_about.html
As usual, Nathan, your attempts at sneakiness leave you out of your depth. WAY out.
“…now we are the small breeze in the rest of the world”
No, we are not. You people hate this country. Your statement proves it.
Of course, slavery was the most stupid thing this country has ever done. Period
Yeah, “hiring” all those people was a really bad idea.
CF2K,
I don’t disagree with your statements. I was merely trying to set a foundation for having a discussion.
A couple of posters here seemed hell bent on simply saying Slavery is bad and so are all those who supported it.
It has been awhile since I have studied this, but I think I remember the reasoning for why slaves were only considered 3/5 of a person.
If I am not mistaken, there were many people who were trying to get slaves recognized, but alas, they did what they could during the times.
It also took awhile for women to be treated as equal as well. It was not just slavery.
My only argument so far was that you need to look at these things in their historical context to truely understand them.
It was a terrible idea. Hindsight is 20 20
“the reasoning for why slaves were only considered 3/5 of a person.”
It was a compromise. For representation in Congress and electoral votes. The North wanted to give the slave zero count, the South wanted to count them as one person. They tried to split the difference.
“Who is the biggest supporter of that system? The Democrats.”
Umm No-Name… Clinton made a HUGE change in the welfare system… He set time limits… He established what they called Workfare… I think it is still going that way… But if it isnt, it must have been changed by this Administration…
Dont try to say the Democrats are supporting the welfare system that could allow 5 generations to live on it…
Ummmm Fleet…. the South was the ones where there was POLL TAX, among other demeaning things, to discourage blacks from voting… The NORTH was all for considering them as VOTING CITIZENS… Check your history on this one… I think you lose…
BTW fleet… it isnt a bit nice to call female posters “whore” Really NOT acceptable…
“Dont try to say the Democrats are supporting the welfare system that could allow 5 generations to live on it…”
Clinton vetoed it 2 or 3 times.Trying to say the dems don’t support it to a fault is silly.
She started it not me.
“Check your history on this one… I think you lose…”
Somehow, you have jumped forward in history. Slaves couldn’t vote until after the war. Duh.
Chas they are. Yes, Clinton made some reforms, but there are enough loopholes that it did not make that much difference. Since Democrats support Welfare and have controlled for most of the time since it started, it is hard for them to be blameless.
Based on the current admin, I dont seem him or his party making it any better. Do you really think a Republican Congress and President are going to increase welfare in a major way? For those who have been on it for several generations, it would have to started under Democratic control. I supported Clinton’s approach for welfare reform, but the final version was far short of what was needed. Good inroads have been made at reducing the numbers, but too many roadblocks and exceptions exist. Training and educational opportunities that would allow people to live better working than on welfare are needed. Many of the people off welfare find themselves in worse shape than when they were on it. Many of these people fit into the slave worker force mentioned above. It is a disgrace that both parties have allowed this to happen and continue to allow it. We as a nation can and should be things that help these individuals and families get off the system and stay off it.
The system is geared to keeping people on. Ask people on Workfare and you will see what I mean. In theory, most people were supposed to get off it within several years, but the exceptions have allowed many to stay on it past that time.
I am an equal opportunity anti/pro person. If I see the Republicans doing something bad, I speak out, same with Democrats. If I see the Democrats doing some good, I will speak out, same with Republicans. Very few people on this blog can make that same claim.
I dont disagree with you… But, the republicans had the Congress and the Whitehouse for nearly the entire run of BushCo… And I havent seen many, if any, cuts in the “system” They have had Congress since ‘94… And Clinton still managed to get some reforms that he wanted, but he was blocked from others… That was pure Clinton blocking on the part of a Republican Congress, that many of his other reforms were rejected…
Johnson was probably the worst for welfare excesses…. but given his Great Society, I guess that would be expected…
Political Mom, Libertarianism is not anything like anarchism. The goal of Libertarians, is to reduce the size of government to a conservative level. Do away with social programs that make people lazy and cost the working taxpayers, do away with the outrageous powers the government has that tie it to corporate transactions, do away with unnecessary laws that unnecessarily protect people like a nanny state, and unnecessarily put people in jail that cost the taxpayers even more money to house hundreds of thousands of people with petty drug charges, while white collar criminals pay their way out of jail and don’t face the same justice system the rest of the citizens face. The Libertarian platform believes inalienable rights granted to every citizen that have been taken away from us. We want those rights back. We have been alienated from those rights, and it is treason by by the leaders we elected into office, more so with this administration than past ones.
And, Fleet, if you are arguing it was to count numbers for congressional seats… Ummm… THAT didnt happen till after the war either!! And since the south didnt want them to vote anyway, I hardly think it was the south that wanted blacks even counted…
The South didnt want to give up its FREE LABOR sources… errr… read that FORCED labor forces…
It was just a stupid, idiotic, racist issue… It should never have happened… and it was NOT favored by nearly as many people as you and Nathan have implied…
There were MANY STRONG cries for abolition…
And, just for anyhow, There is a WORLD of difference between Blacks being EMPLOYED by northerners as Servants, than the Blacks in the South who were OWNED by their tyrant masters…
Inalienable Rights… Ummm hey, elephant, I think those rights are refrenced in the Declaration of Independence, which is NOT LAW… The constitution has the Bill of Rights… I wish people would get that figured out after all these years…
You made my point, Republicans have only had Congress since 94. The Democrats had control for a lot longer than that. Attempts to reform it in the 70s actually made it worse. There is blame for the Republicans, but the blame needs to be based on who controlled Congress and for how long since LBJ. And, yes the Republicans deserve blame for blocking Clinton on things, but the Democrats share blame for blocking Bush on some things as well, even when the Republicans had a majority in Congress.
I expect to see less Congressional Republican opposition on things as the Congressional elections loom. They cant afford to lose more seats. If that ploy will work, we dont know until Election Day. A few good scandals by either party could cause problems for that party. Good successes in key areas would also help that party.
The filibuster needs to be abolished since both parties have abused it for too long. Anymore just the threat of a filibuster can kill legislation.
Also, bills need to be allowed on the House and Senate floors instead of having to be approved by committee since the Committee Chairs can kill a good bill. I know people will oppose both of the above, but both have done as much harm, if not more, than good.
The Democrats cant block the Republicans on the number of votes they had up until November 2006… And remember, too, the 70’s only had 4 years of a Dem. Presidency… The rest of the 70’s was Republican…
You had Republicans in office from 1968 – 76…. And from 80 – 92… and from 2000 – Present… That is 26 years…
In that same time frame you have had 12 yers of Dem. Presidents… basically without control of the Congress….
Some of this welfare problem HAS to rest in the hands of the Republicans…
You still think the Democrats have had control of the Welfare system for the past 40 years???
chas- Here-
“The 3/5’s Compromise is said to have started the North verses South conflict. The simple though complex question that was brought up was should slaves be counted in census’ to determine the number of congressional delegates a state was to receive? This divided the nation because the North had little slaves, but the South had more slaves than they did salve owners. The North didn’t want slaves to be counted because counting slaves would give the South an unfair advantage.”
The link:
http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/99434.html
Yea, the South wanted them for Congressional seats… but not give them any vote… or citizenship… The North opposed THAT idea more than counting them… The Slaves should have either not been counted at all, since the South would not give them equality of citizenship, or equal voting rights… OR they should have been given voting rights, and full citizenship…
The compromise was a BAD thing… if you insist on trying to blame it on the North…
chas, you are over your head.
Fleet… There was NOTHING good about slavery… NOTHING… Dont you get that??? I wont EVER go along with anything that says Slavery was a GOOD THING!!!
The only good thing about slavery was when it was brought to an END!!
Chas, I said the Democrats need to share the blame, not that only the Democrats need to be blamed. Control of the Presidency is not as important as control of Congress. Congress is where the real power is when it comes to govt. money. I blame both parties.
So, ummm, who had control of the Congress during those 26 years of Republican Presidents???
And remember, neither party in the minority can block the will of the other party, unless there is a very low percentage difference between the majority and minority… like we have now in the Senate… For years, the Democrats had NO way of blocking Republican legislation, because they didnt have the votes…
“Fleet… There was NOTHING good about slavery… NOTHING… Dont you get that???”
You not only are in over your head, you are out of your mind. Who is saying slavery is a good thing?I have said slavery is the worst thing that could have happened to this country.
So, why are you trying to DEFEND it, instead of condeming it outright??? IF you are against it that strongly, then the 3/5 compromise post you made was totally useless, and possibly disingenious…
Unfortunately Randy didn’t quote the preceding paragraph of Friedman’s piece.
“Scene 2: On my way into Iraq, I had a private chat with an Arab Gulf leader. He said something that still rings in my ear: “Thomas, everyone is keeping you busy in Iraq. The Russians are keeping you busy. The Chinese are keeping you busy. The Iranians are keeping you busy. The Saudis are keeping you busy. Egypt is keeping you busy. The Syrians are keeping you busy…””
Yeah, that’s our foreign policy these days. It’s called “let those who are in need of the most powerful incentive to not f*ck up the world do as they like while we spend a decade or ten in Iraq.”
Thanks a million, Augustus Stupidus.
“So, why are you trying to DEFEND it,…”
I think you are now officially over the edge. Pleased to show me where I have defended slavery.I have said slavery is the worst thing that could have happened to this country.
You drunk?
Beating Charges Split La. Town Along Racial Linesby Wade Goodwyn
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12353776Bill Haber, APCarwin Jones talks to his father, John Jenkins, outside the LaSalle Parish Courthouse in Jena, La. Jones is one of five black students still facing attempted second-degree murder charges for beating Justin Barker, who is white, last December. A sixth black student has already been convicted on lesser charges.
Interesting reading see the link
All Things Considered, July 30, 2007 · As at hundreds of other high schools across America, black and white students at Jena High School in Jena, La., rarely sit together. The white students gather under a big shade tree in the courtyard, while black students congregate near the auditorium.
Our worst enemy among Iraq’s neighbors in NOT Syria or Iraq. It is SAUDI ARABIA! Remember 9/11? alQuada? Theses were products of the Saudi Wahabi sect.
Saddam was an enemy to Wahabi and alQuada? Is that why Bush attacked him? Trying to si ingratiate us with alQuada that they will leave us alone?
Tim McVeigh was a product of New York Ben.
Are New Yorkers all dangerous? Was McVeigh an enemy of the Wahabi and that’s why they attacked a target in N.Y. McVeigh was in the Army too, so the Wahabist attack the Pentagon as well.
Gee, this is fun Ben, I can make up all sorts of conspiracies theories. :)
(pokes Ben in the eye)
So what did Iraq and Saddam Hussein have to do with 9/11?
Or terrorism, for that matter?
Ben Laden must love George Bush..he’s done more to help Bin Laden’s cause than all the Islamic extremists put together.
The difference is, Kansas, mine is real and yours is fantasy. Just like the WMDs.
In the Old South, the slaves were hired for life. In the North, the slaves were hired by the hour.
Posted by: fleettwood | September 08, 2007 at 12:34 PM========================
Fleet, this is where I see you defending Slavery as a part of Life… I dont think it is necessary to do that… I dont think we have to say it was an acceptable part of Life, then… Because, in fact it wasnt… Unless you MADE it acceptable…
Thus, I saw your comment as a defense of something that need not be defended…
You can call it moral relativism, or whatever… So, maybe that answers why I said you were defending Slavery…
If you werent, then fine… But you later came back with the post about the 3/5 Compromise as well… Also, seemingly, a defense of Slavery…
In fact, the Compromise is when the Congress should have demanded that slaves be freed, and given equal status as citizens, and an equal right to vote…
But “pushing democracy” on the Arab world? Ha! When has that EVER happened?
Posted by: Rage
i think it was first tried in 1935 or so.
But last year, a few days into the first semester, a new student, a freshman African American, asked the principal at an assembly, if he, too, could sit under the tree. He was told he could sit anywhere he liked.
Three white boys on the rodeo team apparently disagreed.
The next morning, there were three nooses hanging from the shade tree in the courtyard.
The white boy ran back to his truck and pulled out a pistol grip shotgun. Bailey ran after him and wrestled him for the gun.
After some scuffling, Bailey and his friends took the gun away and brought it home. Bailey was eventually charged with theft of a firearm, second-degree robbery and disturbing the peace. The white student who pulled the weapon was not charged at all.
etc
Most interesting, Story… fascinating…
Good Night! Good Luck! And God Bless, whatever you conceive God to be!!
Nite All!! Have a Great Sunday!!