Originally posted by: Ldir
Translation: "I will vote for Bush because he is Republican and Republicans oppose abortion."
That is the answer for many people Siddhartha. Their issue is abortion. Nothing else matters.
Translation: anyone who disagrees with me must be wrong because I'm a self-righteous liberal. If you were a man of principle and understood this reality as I do, maybe you would understand. Instead you'll just personally attack me as you've done in the past. No skin off my back.
Originally posted by: GrGr
What is more fundamental than the rule of law, the constitution, civil rights, habeas corpus, humanitarian rights, freedom of and from religion etc and so on? Iraq (the illegal invasion, Abu Grahib etc.) clearly proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Bush administration is fascist at heart. What issues can be more fundamental than that? What in your opionion threatens society so much that you look to fascism to "save" it?
Three of the major political problems facing the world today are theocratism (religious fundamentalism), militarism and imperialism. Bush is a theocrat (he believes in divine guidance), he is a militarist and he is imperialistic. Now these are all anti-American policies if you look to the ideals of the founding fathers who broke free from an empire supported by it's military.
If you summed up the Bush Precidency in an equation it could look like this: Bush = Theocratism + Corporatism + Militarism + Imperialism.
I think I'm going to vomit next time someone says we should vote against Bush because of Abu Ghraib. What a joke. As for the legality of the invasion, neither you nor I will ever know what Bush really thought or what the facts really were. This is what I said in my previous post. Without knowing for sure, it's a wash. Your decrying of Bush as a fascist is a move to the very scare tactics that you constantly whine about in other threads. Give me a break.
Oh, and there's a big difference between divine guidance and theocracy. Of course, you're probably one of the atheists in this forum and feel threatened by anyone who feels that he is in touch with a higher being. No skin off my back.
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Are you saying that I can't disagree with the invasion handling of Iraq and still vote for Bush?
Not at all. I am merely explaining why you will vote for him regardless of any fact at all. You are polarized inwardly by self hate of your natural self and have assumed a false and supposedly good alter identity which you will not give up because it would reduce you back to being the think that you hate because you were taught to. The strength of your love of the good arises and is sustained and is inversely proportional to your hate for your true self, that within you that is actually God. This is why humanity is backward and completely upside down. There is no exit from duality via the mind because it's the mind that creates and sustains it. You were perfect the day you were born. There is nothing to seek, nothing to get, nothing to learn. There is only the unlearning that takes place by letting go and being.[/quote]
So you're saying that anyone who votes for Bush does so out of what amounts to ignorance. You qualify this by circular logic - that no amount of thought, fact-finding, or other mechanisms can remove this ignorance, as it is ingrained in my very being. Sorry, but I'm not buying it. It's one thing to weave a logical argument, but it's another to weave a logical trap that anyone who disagrees with you automatically falls into.
Originally posted by: conjur
cmdavid, too bad "trying to obtain wmds" was NOT the justification given for war No one doubts Saddam was a threat. The question is was he an imminent threat. The answer is a resounding no. Therefore, the war was not justified.
Depends what you consider 'imminent'. What would you prefer - that sanctions be lifted and Saddam be allowed to regroup for a few years, build more WMD, then go try to take him out? Fact is, it was going to happen eventually. The time scale you nor I nor Bush will ever know, as it depended on a great many things. The obviousness of this still sticks in my mind with regard to Iraq. The same people that criticize Bush for taking action in Iraq are the ones criticizing him for not acting in Iran. If we had gone into Iran, Iraq would now have WMD and the situation would be reversed. If you're going to argue anything, argue the underlying policy of trying to deny WMD.
imminent: ready to take place; especially : hanging threateningly over one's head <was in imminent danger of being run over>
Facebook
Twitter