Why the Left Hates America by Daniel J. Flynn

[bizmark]

Originally posted by: Ornery
Thank you, I follow your thinking, but I honestly think Daschle is just being an ass. WTF would have to be accomplished inside of 14 months to make him happy? Again, what better path could we have chosen? All I hear is whining from the farthest left, right up to the center moderates, with no alternative plan.

Heheh, when are politicians of any stripe not just being asses? What was Newt Gingrich all those years? A nice guy who cooperated patriotically and never did anything pointless and destructive that was nevertheless politically advantageous? Whoever it is, it's basically the opposition party's JOB to resist, to criticize, to make asses out of themselves. It's how the game is played.

Secondly, I've got an alternative plan that there's NO EXCUSE for not implementing. Close the damn borders and control the damn ports. link

Congress authorized funding for 200 additional Immigration and Naturalization Service inspectors and 200 new INS investigators. Again, it sounds like a no-brainer; the agency is a mess, it?s true, but that?s mostly because it is overwhelmed. No one who has looked at the INS ever said it didn?t need more inspectors and investigators on the ground. But the president?s proposed ?continuing resolution? doesn?t fund them.

It pisses me off royally that despite all of the hoopla about protecting the US, we still let thousands of illegal immigrants in every day, any one of whom could easily be a terrorist. Is this an impossible problem? No, it's actually pretty easy to solve if only some of our "leaders" would be willing to grow some balls and risk alienating the Hispanic vote and the farmers who rely on illegal labor. In every domestic policy put in place since 9/11, I see NO SUBSTANCE but LOTS OF SHOW. A month or two ago, we had a big thread about the farce that we call Airport Security. I don't want to rehash that argument here. The porousness of our borders is another farce.... how we can still call ourselves The Most Powerful Nation in the World when we can't even protect our borders against thousands of invaders per day is beyond me.

And further it pisses me off that Bush is being so hypocritical on this issue by playing it up in public and then not supporting it in private, to the extent that it should be funded. Yes I know that Jonathan Alter is not the be-all and end-all of exactly what happens in Washington, but I doubt that he's lying about the substance of the matter.

What makes you think I'm painting "all liberals" with a broad brush?

Well, you had no problem lumping me in with Barbara "Fugly" Streisand and Jane "Plastic" Fonda.

I say, lead, follow or get out of the way! The trouble is, folks like Daschle, Gephardt and Senator Byrd have the power to gum up the works to the point where we make NO progress. Then their loyal followers on the left have the audacity to point fingers and say we're not getting anywhere! :disgust:

Yeah I agree that pretty much all American politicians above the level of City Council are slimeballs. The only ones who haven't sold out are the ones that are most condemned by the media and political insiders. The ones in power see what they can get away with (regardless of whether it's good for the country), and the opposition blindly opposes all that it can (regardless of whether it's good for the country). It's a never-ending game....

The first thing we do, is we kill all the politicians....

 

[Tominator]

Originally posted by: dolph

Originally posted by: Tominator

Originally posted by: Dudd

Originally posted by: Tominator
Another absolute dumbass surfaces.....

Be specific or STFU!

Typical Liberal.....nothing but name calling...:|

The contradiction in this post is amazing.

I KNOW what and who a Liberal is! It's not a name, but a label. Some even claim the title. It actually means something. Calling someone a Nazi or Facist without backing it up IS name calling!

i'm a liberal. i don't hate america. am i a contradiction?

Imho, yes. You continue to support those that do hate America.

 

[0roo0roo]

typical. disagree with tominator and your unpatriotic american hater. talk about a pathetic twisted mind

 

[PistachioByAzul]

Everything is typical to someone who is.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Flynn is coming to my university (University of Pittsburgh) this Thursday. The non-partisan conservative group I'm in (Panthers for American Values) is sponsoring him. I'm looking quite forward to it.

ZV

 

[Tominator]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
typical. disagree with tominator and your unpatriotic american hater. talk about a pathetic twisted mind

We see one everytime you post.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Flynn is coming to my university (University of Pittsburgh) this Thursday. The non-partisan conservative group I'm in (Panthers for American Values) is sponsoring him. I'm looking quite forward to it.

ZV

Non Partisan Conservative Group is an oxymoron, especially when those calling themselves Conservatives represent the beliefs of those on the Lunatic Fringe of the Far Right. It wouldn't be so bad if those who usually dwell in that political realm were intelligent enough to realize that those who don't share their personal views aren't inherently dangerous. Of course to even label these groups political views as something that could be considered personal is playing fast and loose with reality as it is apparent to most that views this extreme seem to be more of a symptom of the ever present Group Mentality that usually is prevalent when it comes to organizations founded on close minded rhetoric. In fact the close minded nonsense these groups spew out sounds remarkable similar to the nonsense of their adversaries from the Far Left. Granted the words are different but the tone and fervor in which they spout their nonsense is eerily similar, especially when you realize that none of their opinions seem to be of a personal nature. Of course it's understandable as it is easier to manipulate those who let themselves be taken in by the Group Mentality as the likelihood of the group realizing they are just simplistic buffoons isn't nearly as great as it would be for individuals who actually might take the time to analyze the bill of goods they are being sold.

 

[Nemesis77]

It seems to me that the "patriots" here blindly believe their government and unquestionably accept whatever they decide to do ("The Department of Homeland Security", AKA "The Big Brother" AKA "The Secret Police"). To them I have this to say (I can't take credit for this quote, altrough I have used it here before (the oriqinal quote was about about the "freedom of the press-ranking"):

I thought that patriotism meant love for ones country, not for ones goverment, I thought a patriot of a democracy was supposed to always question anything that might infringe on his freedom or that of others. But it seems that whenever an article like this is seen in the news, the american "patriots" refuse to question their goverment or their nations policy, instead they stand up behind it no matter what and dismiss the criticism as some foreigners and/or liberals having their panties in a bunch.

This is I believe, the opposite of what the founders of the US would have wanted. The US is not the greatest nation on earth simply because patriots say so, even if they yell it from the rooftops or chant it every chance they get. If the US is the greatest nation it is because it allows people freedom, they have freedom to question their goverment and its actions among other things, but it seems that the more patriotic an american is the less they feel a need to question anything. That apathy and contentment is a real danger to democracy, because it means no one is protecting the democratic rights.

 

[Ornery]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77
It seems to me that the "patriots" here blindly believe their government and unquestionably accept whatever they decide to do ("The Department of Homeland Security", AKA "The Big Brother" AKA "The Secret Police"). To them I have this to say (I can't take credit for this quote, altrough I have used it here before (the oriqinal quote was about about the "freedom of the press-ranking"):

I thought that patriotism meant love for ones country, not for ones goverment, I thought a patriot of a democracy was supposed to always question anything that might infringe on his freedom or that of others. But it seems that whenever an article like this is seen in the news, the american "patriots" refuse to question their goverment or their nations policy, instead they stand up behind it no matter what and dismiss the criticism as some foreigners and/or liberals having their panties in a bunch.

This is I believe, the opposite of what the founders of the US would have wanted. The US is not the greatest nation on earth simply because patriots say so, even if they yell it from the rooftops or chant it every chance they get. If the US is the greatest nation it is because it allows people freedom, they have freedom to question their goverment and its actions among other things, but it seems that the more patriotic an american is the less they feel a need to question anything. That apathy and contentment is a real danger to democracy, because it means no one is protecting the democratic rights.

Another tard with a baseless opinion and no better plan to resolve the terrorist issue...

 

[Descartes]

With all the pontifs and pseudopundits on here claiming to know so much and insulting everyone else, I'm surprised you're not in office!

Arguing politics is both futile, and pathetic. I'd say we may as well start a religion thread, but that's been done a thousand times too...

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Flynn is coming to my university (University of Pittsburgh) this Thursday. The non-partisan conservative group I'm in (Panthers for American Values) is sponsoring him. I'm looking quite forward to it.

ZV

Non Partisan Conservative Group is an oxymoron, especially when those calling themselves Conservatives represent the beliefs of those on the Lunatic Fringe of the Far Right. It wouldn't be so bad if those who usually dwell in that political realm were intelligent enough to realize that those who don't share their personal views aren't inherently dangerous. Of course to even label these groups political views as something that could be considered personal is playing fast and loose with reality as it is apparent to most that views this extreme seem to be more of a symptom of the ever present Group Mentality that usually is prevalent when it comes to organizations founded on close minded rhetoric. In fact the close minded nonsense these groups spew out sounds remarkable similar to the nonsense of their adversaries from the Far Left. Granted the words are different but the tone and fervor in which they spout their nonsense is eerily similar, especially when you realize that none of their opinions seem to be of a personal nature. Of course it's understandable as it is easier to manipulate those who let themselves be taken in by the Group Mentality as the likelihood of the group realizing they are just simplistic buffoons isn't nearly as great as it would be for individuals who actually might take the time to analyze the bill of goods they are being sold.

We are non-partisan as we count among our members Libertarians and Republicans, and we have a strong and friendly relationship with our campus' Student Democrats. There are two notable campus organizations who hate us; the College Republicans (they demonize us for "distorting" their agendas) and the "Students In Solidarity" (essentially communists).

Our reasoning behind promoting Flynn is not so much that we agree with everything he says as it is an effort to counterbalance the "objective" speakers like Howard Zinn that the socialists bring to campus. The last speaker we brought to campus was Dinesh D'Sousa (sp?), who I personally respect more than Flynn. Next semester we are working to bring in Brent Schundler to speak.

We are not a group of Pat Buchanan wannabes, heaven forbid that I ever end up like that man. We just want to provide some amount of counterbalance to the demonstrations done by the Students In Solidarity, as well as get our name out. The group is less than a year old and we are not widely known on campus. We felt that by creating a controversy we would get some exposure, and we could establish ourselves as more moderate once we were better known.

Think of Flynn as a publicity tool.

ZV

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Ornery
Another tard with a baseless opinion and no better plan to resolve the terrorist issue...

And your solution is to re-create Stasi? Didn't East-Germany teach you that it doesn't work?

Why do you want to form the "Department of Homeland Security"? To protect your freedom and security? And while doing so you give up that freedom and security you are trying to preserve? Nice logic there

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Flynn is coming to my university (University of Pittsburgh) this Thursday. The non-partisan conservative group I'm in (Panthers for American Values) is sponsoring him. I'm looking quite forward to it.

ZV

Non Partisan Conservative Group is an oxymoron, especially when those calling themselves Conservatives represent the beliefs of those on the Lunatic Fringe of the Far Right. It wouldn't be so bad if those who usually dwell in that political realm were intelligent enough to realize that those who don't share their personal views aren't inherently dangerous. Of course to even label these groups political views as something that could be considered personal is playing fast and loose with reality as it is apparent to most that views this extreme seem to be more of a symptom of the ever present Group Mentality that usually is prevalent when it comes to organizations founded on close minded rhetoric. In fact the close minded nonsense these groups spew out sounds remarkable similar to the nonsense of their adversaries from the Far Left. Granted the words are different but the tone and fervor in which they spout their nonsense is eerily similar, especially when you realize that none of their opinions seem to be of a personal nature. Of course it's understandable as it is easier to manipulate those who let themselves be taken in by the Group Mentality as the likelihood of the group realizing they are just simplistic buffoons isn't nearly as great as it would be for individuals who actually might take the time to analyze the bill of goods they are being sold.

We are non-partisan as we count among our members Libertarians and Republicans, and we have a strong and friendly relationship with our campus' Student Democrats. There are two notable campus organizations who hate us; the College Republicans (they demonize us for "distorting" their agendas) and the "Students In Solidarity" (essentially communists).

Our reasoning behind promoting Flynn is not so much that we agree with everything he says as it is an effort to counterbalance the "objective" speakers like Howard Zinn that the socialists bring to campus. The last speaker we brought to campus was Dinesh D'Sousa (sp?), who I personally respect more than Flynn. Next semester we are working to bring in Brent Schundler to speak.

We are not a group of Pat Buchanan wannabes, heaven forbid that I ever end up like that man. We just want to provide some amount of counterbalance to the demonstrations done by the Students In Solidarity, as well as get our name out. The group is less than a year old and we are not widely known on campus. We felt that by creating a controversy we would get some exposure, and we could establish ourselves as more moderate once we were better known.

Think of Flynn as a publicity tool.

ZV

Outstanding That post was written with tongue in cheek anyway

 

[Ornery]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Ornery
Another tard with a baseless opinion and no better plan to resolve the terrorist issue...

And your solution is to re-create Stasi? Didn't East-Germany teach you that it doesn't work?

Why do you want to form the "Department of Homeland Security"? To protect your freedom and security? And while doing so you give up that freedom and security you are trying to preserve? Nice logic there

I already answered that, if you'd bother to read, numbnuts:

• Originally posted by: ELP
  

  Originally posted by: Ornery
  "...a few hacks writing books..."
  
  Well, we have Babs and company out in Hollywood, but they're all FAR left and not to be counted among the "moderate Democrats", right?
  
  We have Daschle & Gephardt, and Ole' Helen Thomas spewing garbage, same as Babs, but they sure aren't far left, are they?
  
  
  "So let me get this straight. We have to give up our freedom, to defend our freedom?"
  
  I have YET to hear another plan from ANY of these obstructionists. NOTHING! :frown:

  
  So you saying 'YES' to this question?

  
  "So you saying 'YES' to this question?"
  
  Basically, we have to give up some freedom for more security, yes. It ain't rocket science, it's reality. Again, you got a better plan? Does anybody on your side of the isle?

Now it's your turn. What's your big idea? None? Then STFU! :|

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Ornery
Basically, we have to give up some freedom for more security, yes. It ain't rocket science, it's reality. Again, you got a better plan? Does anybody on your side of the isle?[/list]Now it's your turn. What's your big idea? None? Then STFU! :|

"People who are willing to give up freedom for the sake of short term
security, deserve neither freedom nor security." -Benjamin Franklin

A great man. You should listen to him.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Flynn is coming to my university (University of Pittsburgh) this Thursday. The non-partisan conservative group I'm in (Panthers for American Values) is sponsoring him. I'm looking quite forward to it.

ZV

Non Partisan Conservative Group is an oxymoron, especially when those calling themselves Conservatives represent the beliefs of those on the Lunatic Fringe of the Far Right. It wouldn't be so bad if those who usually dwell in that political realm were intelligent enough to realize that those who don't share their personal views aren't inherently dangerous. Of course to even label these groups political views as something that could be considered personal is playing fast and loose with reality as it is apparent to most that views this extreme seem to be more of a symptom of the ever present Group Mentality that usually is prevalent when it comes to organizations founded on close minded rhetoric. In fact the close minded nonsense these groups spew out sounds remarkable similar to the nonsense of their adversaries from the Far Left. Granted the words are different but the tone and fervor in which they spout their nonsense is eerily similar, especially when you realize that none of their opinions seem to be of a personal nature. Of course it's understandable as it is easier to manipulate those who let themselves be taken in by the Group Mentality as the likelihood of the group realizing they are just simplistic buffoons isn't nearly as great as it would be for individuals who actually might take the time to analyze the bill of goods they are being sold.

We are non-partisan as we count among our members Libertarians and Republicans, and we have a strong and friendly relationship with our campus' Student Democrats. There are two notable campus organizations who hate us; the College Republicans (they demonize us for "distorting" their agendas) and the "Students In Solidarity" (essentially communists).

Our reasoning behind promoting Flynn is not so much that we agree with everything he says as it is an effort to counterbalance the "objective" speakers like Howard Zinn that the socialists bring to campus. The last speaker we brought to campus was Dinesh D'Sousa (sp?), who I personally respect more than Flynn. Next semester we are working to bring in Brent Schundler to speak.

We are not a group of Pat Buchanan wannabes, heaven forbid that I ever end up like that man. We just want to provide some amount of counterbalance to the demonstrations done by the Students In Solidarity, as well as get our name out. The group is less than a year old and we are not widely known on campus. We felt that by creating a controversy we would get some exposure, and we could establish ourselves as more moderate once we were better known.

Think of Flynn as a publicity tool.

ZV

Outstanding That post was written with tongue in cheek anyway

I've been around enough to be accustomed to your posts. I just realised that it did sound a bit farther to the right than my sympathies actually lie.

ZV

 

[Ornery]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Ornery
Basically, we have to give up some freedom for more security, yes. It ain't rocket science, it's reality. Again, you got a better plan? Does anybody on your side of the isle?[/list]Now it's your turn. What's your big idea? None? Then STFU! :|

"People who are willing to give up freedom for the sake of short term
security, deserve neither freedom nor security." -Benjamin Franklin

A great man. You should listen to him.

He also said, "Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight."

Guess that means we shouldn't bother about terrorists at all, eh? Until you, our obstructionist's on the left, or Ben Franklin crawls out of the grave with an alternative plan, we'll freakin' stay the course. You do know who the first ones will be to start whining if we fail to avert another attack? Christ, search the forum topics from a year ago and you'll see that Bush is blamed for NOT averting the 9-11 attack!

Just what we need, another ass, from Findland no less, telling us how not to handle this crisis. Thank you SO MUCH, really appreciated!

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Ornery
Guess that means we shouldn't bother about terrorists at all, eh? Until you, our obstructionist's on the left, or Ben Franklin crawls out of the grave with an alternative plan, we'll freakin' stay the course.

Sure you have to worry about terrorists. But you don't need Secret Police for that! You already have the means to deal with them. Remove the cause of terrorism and you remove terrorism.

You do know who the first ones will be to start whining if we fail to avert another attack? Christ, search the forum topics from a year ago and you'll see that Bush is blamed for NOT averting the 9-11 attack!

Just what we need, another ass, from Findland no less, telling us how not to handle this crisis. Thank you SO MUCH, really appreciated!

It's "Finland", not "Findland". And besides, you people comment on other countries all the time, it's time to return the favour . I just think it's pretty funny and sad that some americans look forward of having a Secret Police watching over them, while they claim to be the "Land of the Free". And what I find even funnier is that the people who are demanding for Big Brother, also claim to be the true patriots. It seems to me that those "patriots" are nothing but blind sheep.

You want to completely remove the threat of terrorism? That would mean turning your country in to a police-state. But hey, that's OK! Freedom is a small price to pay for "security". Just don't be surprised if foreigners laugh at your face next time you claim that USA is the "land of the free".

 

[Ornery]

"Remove the cause of terrorism and you remove terrorism..."

What a fuckin' tool! Every act of terrorism could be averted by capitulating to the terms of your oppressors, eh? You couldn't come up with ANY answer at all for my last question. How about this one? What should the Jews have done to appease Hitler? How could they have prevented their fate using your "remove the cause of terrorism" rule? Answer that, the previous question or go the fvck away! :|

 

[Peetoeng]

Originally posted by: Ornery
"Remove the cause of terrorism and you remove terrorism..."

What a fuckin' tool! Every act of terrorism could be averted by capitulating to the terms of your oppressors, eh? You couldn't come up with ANY answer at all for my last question. How about this one? What should the Jews have done to appease Hitler? How could they have prevented their fate using your "remove the cause of terrorism" rule? Answer that, the previous question or go the fvck away! :|

Good question! I'm gonna ask a friend of mine, a South African black: "what could've his ancestors done to prevent white Boors from oppressing them?"

 

[bizmark]

Originally posted by: charrison

Bin laden likely dead(this weeks tape is likely not real).

Proof? The Bush administration itself believes that it's real, last time I heard....

I have heard a couple of reports over the radio, sorry no links.
1. the tape showed evidence of editing.
2. The tape was recorded over the phone.
3. It was not video tape. Surely a well connected organization can afford a $300 video camera and tape

*ahem*

WASHINGTON, Nov. 18 ? U.S. intelligence has concluded that an audiotape of Osama bin Laden broadcast last week is real and was recently recorded, providing the first evidence in almost a year that the al-Qaida leader is alive, a White House spokesman said Monday. The audiotape, first broadcast on an Arab-language TV network, does not appear to have been altered or edited, suggesting it is what it sounds like: bin Laden promising more terrorism.

linky

oh and Ornery do you have a response to my last post regarding Bush's lack of funding for increased border security?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: bizmark

Originally posted by: charrison

Bin laden likely dead(this weeks tape is likely not real).

Proof? The Bush administration itself believes that it's real, last time I heard....

I have heard a couple of reports over the radio, sorry no links.
1. the tape showed evidence of editing.
2. The tape was recorded over the phone.
3. It was not video tape. Surely a well connected organization can afford a $300 video camera and tape

*ahem*

I will stand by item #3.

 

[Ornery]

"Close the damn borders and control the damn ports."

Sorry, I thought you were joking, but that suits me fine!

"The first thing we do, is we kill all the politicians.... "

Um, I'll have to think about that one...

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Ornery
"Remove the cause of terrorism and you remove terrorism..."

What a fuckin' tool!

thanks, I love you too .

Every act of terrorism could be averted by capitulating to the terms of your oppressors

If I remember correctly, there has been 3 terrorist-attacks on US soil. Bomb in WTC, bombing in Oklahoma and sept. 11th. And because of those incidents, you want to sacrifice your freedom? And who said anything about capitulating? You could just look at the reasons why some people attack USA (and don't be so naive and say "They hate our freedom!" (btw. if you give up your freedom, then aren't you "capitulating to your oppressors"?)) and work on towards removing the cause.

But on the other hand: if you want to live in a totalitarian society with Big Brother, who am I to tell you otherwise?

You couldn't come up with ANY answer at all for my last question.

You mean means to preventing terrorism from taking place in US soil? Easy: develope cooperation with foreign law-enforcement agencies, support moderate governments in Islamic world (and no, Saudi-Arabia is not moderate), improve relations with the islamic world, develope better means of screening people who come to USA. None of those things require establishment of a Secret Police. are you prepared for that because of those incidents?

What should the Jews have done to appease Hitler? How could they have prevented their fate using your "remove the cause of terrorism" rule? Answer that, the previous question or go the fvck away! :|

Godwins law. "When someone doesn't have anything sensible to say, he will bring up nazis in to the discussion". Holocaust has exactly zero to do with this issue. Americans are not jews on their way to ovens. You are not being oppressed by your government (yet, The Stasi you are working on is a step in to that direction). It's funny, you shout "What about the jews!", when you are busy building a organisation that reminds me of Gestapo...

 

[etech]

"Remove the cause of terrorism and you remove terrorism..."

One of Osama's goals that I have seen is to have the West convert to Islam.

Ain't gonna happen.


So the only alternative is to remove Osama and his backers. Difficult but possible.