Sticks and Stones

In the meantime, let’s be realistic about the world we live in. Mexican leaders apparently have an economic policy based on exporting their own citizens, while complaining about U.S. immigration policies that are far less exclusionary than their own. The French jail perfectly nice people for politically incorrect comments, but scold us for holding terrorists at Guantanamo.

And both have cheerleaders in the American left. The mind boggles at the stupidity of these positions.

 

Then you have the "American Right" cheerleaders that support the American President who treasonously buddies up with the Mexican leaders and allows a foreign invasion of 12 million to 20 million of their people and support the globalist Fred Thompson who also supports immigration harmful to America, and is graded a "C" by Americans for Better Immigration. The mind boggles at the stupidity of these folks who whine about the "left" and participate in the promotion of destroying a nation on the "right".

 

So those who disagree with you about immigration are "stupid"? How do you figure?

 

Those who would complain about the Mexican leaders and their policies and think that the American leader is not equally responsible for allowance of those policies and think that Fred Thompson is the solution to those policies are as equally lax in whatever cerebral qualities that Bro Curtis is suggesting the left are lacking in.

 

Yeah ? Where are these cheerleaders ? Who's a republican that's a fan of Bush's immigration reform plans ? Show me some.

 

Every individual that is a supporter of this use of military force and opposed to Bush's immigration reform is a walking contradiction and there are a number of folks on this board which meet the criteria. You can not say attacking and occupying Iraq is good because it is for national security, when the American leadership obviously cares not for national security. They care about killing Iraqis and Afghanis and controlling their resources, taking the freedoms of American citizens in the name of national security, while allowing millions of non-citizens to enter and reenter America at will. We are importing criminals from these foreign lands who are raping, killing and plundering us. This is a clear and present danger to the security of the United States and yet we are bombing a nation thousands of miles away who has done no harm to us and represents nor represented a threat to the United States of America.

 

Everybody is wrong, 'cept you.


Got it.

 

Not true...you were just right.

 

Quite an observation, Carpro. He is extremely obsessed with Bush, and anyone else who doesn't march in step with him.

Everyone that disagrees with him on anything is a neocon jingoist. Not a very good debate tactic.

 

The ones I'm pretty confident to be neocon jingoists are you two. It's not a debate tactic nor is it even name calling. Do you actually deny that you support neoconservative policies and do you not use "patriotism" to support your war hawk positions? If you stand strong on your beliefs then you shouldn't have a problem admitting them. If these are not your beliefs then I apologize and look forward to you two elaborating on how you are not Bush obsessed, Bush promoting, war hawks.

 

I have never seen a flattering definition of "neocon", have you ?

And I have explained my beliefs, only to have you ignore them, and continue on your rants.

I have never questioned the patriotism of those against the war, yet you say I do.


You have your mind made up about us, so why bother ? The facts don't sway you.

 

Well no, because most of the folks in the nation and the world loathe them. However, if you support Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz/Rove/ and concepts aligned with the Project for the New American Century, then you are a "neocon" or a "neocon" supporter.

The facts do sway me, and are why I repented of being a neocon.

 

For some reason, my brother still being active duty keeps my views on the Iraq war pretty private. I remember being very critical of Bush on lots of issues here, and to say I haven't been is dishonest.

But I really think the troops would be better off without folks like Rufus' "support". That's how I feel.

 

If you supported them you would not desire that they die and be maimed for a misguided cause. The sooner you and more Americans complain and apply pressure, the more American lives will be saved.

 

I feel that your kind of support gets more troops killed, my kind of support gets them home with their families.

 

I like Fred Thompson and I hope he runs for President and wins.

Sticks and stones and, maybe, ham bones!

 

Our enemies - not us - "desire that they die and me maimed" for their "misguided cause".

The "sooner you and more Americans" stop complaining and learn to "apply pressure" on the enemy "the more American lives will be saved" in the long term.