what terror logistics general attorney?, housing bubble?, travels to Cuba?, active anti-terrorists selected by "law"?, what about savedadeschools.com?, children&family (megascandals with dead children) protecting castrocoyote religious groups like coyote (20 years) Lourdes Suarez, Martinez, single name (police related car tags even bringing kids to her illegal daycare for her "people"), with Alicia Dimitriu (Jaspe, single) with lawyer Abraham Kaplan, judge Jadire Pedraza systematicly torture, beattings, sex violations, starving, homeless my sister. Capt. Noel, Diominic even found my sister tight to a tree and... jailed her "with the gang", legaly they base "she wants and deserve that", gangero alex Willis as "legal boyfriend-torturer", could be impossed "legal new parent" to me, like coyote Lourdes Suarez to my family, "by local, yes USA soil, "authorities"...
A terrorist FARC gerrilla stealing my ID from a winndixie, paralegal pursues anywhere I go, publix paralegalfelonies ("selective paralegal" sanctuaries), jobs, seems like miamidade still obeying Fidel Castro"s 2004 declaration of my political party as "terrorist" and "law" commitment, (today my party is an authority on war on terror), and "current stabli$hment, megacity scandal$.
At 2600SW 97AV gob job agency they even laughed at me about "my ID thief case", ga burns even took away my self-money payed unemployment, judge christina perez called me by coyotelulu's son Pedro galvez's private phone to go "to an spacial office opened just for me at INS" when the terrorist FARC gerilla staeling my ID was "caught", to fix "my" "little problem" of "legal documantations"...
what terror logistics?, what about "the job of ana belen montes at the Pentagon's study about "Cuba posses no danger to the USA?"
what about arrested 30 years castro-agent psicologist at miami police?, what about "their jobs?", do you think "WE THE PEOPLE WILL IGNORE IT"?, just like you?, are WE like you?
take hillary's candidate for "education secretary", repeled from NY out of your children, donate at savedadeschools.com...
what terror logistics?, and you are payed by the goverments, to help terror logistics, and be "tough" with "the rest of the population" not selected, or selected as "non important individual, who can be abused, while your systems laugh of us?

In times of war?, an unilateral in the face of America no-preconditions desarmament of America?, with Iran publicly currently swearing to use 'the bomb to any, once they built THEM?, even with UN resolutions starting to file?"
and... on an election year?
skerry, isn't it?

There will be virtually no difference between McCain and Obama. Obama has made a myriad of comments that go both ways as far as foreign policy is concerned. He is a first-class politician. These two candidates, and the parties they represent, have no interest in answering to you, nor do they have any interest in "serving" you. The facts continue to be thrown right into the face of the American public. It's funny, we should all be working together to stop the true enemy of the average world citizen, but instead we argue about TWO candidates and TWO parties that will end up implementing the same policies that they have always implemented, policies that kill poor people here and abroad while serving the interests of the few. The facts are right there.

When was the last time Iran attacked another country? Why do we still buy what this government is selling us? Here is a good 30-minute video on a sampling of the people of Iran:

http://www.freespeech.org/videodb/index.php?action=detail&video_id=10942&browse=0

Urban,

If you truly hate war and the devastation it brings to men, women, and children, I suggest that you stop supporting the Iraq war. The war was never intended to provide peace to anybody. It has absolutely nothing to do with creating peace. If you disagree with me, please tell me how that statement is false.

WE are not against the people of Iran we are for them to get out of the terrible Mullocracy that has taken ove the country. If you fo not see the difference, I really do not know what will persuade you to anything other than a total defiance against what.

And if you think that Obama and McCain are similar in their politics, I would love to have some of what you are smoking.

Sorry about the name mess up.

What a terrible time to be a liberal! Worse yet, this a fantastic time for Obama supporters to crawl back into the dark places from which they came.
Unless you support a strong America, you support terror. Plain and simple. Do not insult American intellect by suggesting that we should pick and choose the nations that support terrorists...you did that before (remember Clinton?).
Liberals in Congress have created the mess we are in, and they continue to dump water in the boat boasting that they are trying to bail us out. We Americans know better...we Americans will not be duped by nor lured into the socialistic rantings of so many that want us to feel as if our world is imminently doomed.
I absolutely love the McCain response to Hussein's rhetoric about "Bush's third term"...BHO is Carter's third. Those of us that can remember, recognize the truth as spoken by the bi-racial dude with the mouthy wife...you kids better wake up!

"... he talks about protecting the American people; yet he wants to cut missile defense systems."

I'm assuming that your "I don’t get it." response was a rhetorical device.

Obama's remarkable statement makes sense, if you remember the assumptions common to many in the academic and liberal enclaves of America. In their world, building a defensive missile system is an act of aggression, threatening the psychological well-being of foreign leaders.

There may be a bit of truth in the idea, but I don't agree.

I'm (rather selfishly) glad that I live in Central Minnesota: upstream of the prevailing winds from the eastern seaboard, and with a couple thousand miles and a few mountain ranges between my family an the west coast.

Not that I think there'll be a nuclear attack, of course. But who'd want to take a crazy chance?

Well, I live next to probably one of the most strategic places in the US, Scott AFB. It is where the central internet is for all military branches and also the logostics center for all military branches. Remember War Games, the movie, Scott AFB was the second place hit in the model war game.

Why is that bit about nuclear weapons bad exactly? How many do we have now? Enough to blow up the world 176 billion times over? Yeah, we need more, though.

I'm so damn sick of that petty excuse of an argument about "negotiating with terrorists." First of all, negotiations aren't bad. Appeasement is bad. Not every negotiation is a Hitleresque appeasement, you fuckin idiots. So why the hell is it so damn wrong to sit down and talk with these guys? No man, fuck that, let's just blow the shit out of them! That'll teach them! And if someone else complains (cus those guys can't complain, cus they'll be dead already cus we blew em up!), then we'll just blow THEM up! Yeaaah! USA! USA!

It's people like you that perpetuate the myth that diplomacy can't work. We have to resort to violence immediately, like good ol' GWB. Why don't we just use our nukes to blow the world up. Then there'd be no UNINFORMED libs, and all the INFORMED conservatives would go to heaven, where there'd be no libs or muslims or gays. Stupid libs. DEMOCRACY CAN'T-- oh, shit, sorry, I meant DIPLOMACY--CAN'T WORK! Wake up!

†

By the way, he's cutting spending on defense systems that aren't working. Alert the presses, someone's using his brain.

As for weaponizing space? Who knows what we'll find on Mars. Could already be a gigantic Martian fleet in wait. We HAVE to weaponize space. So on that point, I completely disagree with Hussein, the fool. Bring back Star Wars!

†

Rick,

You're comments would make a small impact on my views if you stayed away from calling Barack "Hussein." Also, making judgments on who supports terror or not, its really not okay for you to do. But instead of taking you seriously, I take you for a judgmental person, who can't argue a point without dropping to the lowest form of argument ever.

Grow up sir, please.

H

G dub dropped a memorable quote (for a change)

He said it was important to support democracy "at the heart of the Middle East": "It's a democracy that's not going to look like America, it's not going to look like Great Britain, but it's a democracy that will give government responsive to the people."

He said it had "absolutely" been worth it and democracy in Iraq would make it easier to deal with "the Iranian issue" and would send a message to reformers and dissidents.

He dismissed the idea that "perhaps freedom is not universal - maybe it's only western people who can self govern" as "the ultimate form of political elitism".

So, the crackpot lefties who are calling for immediate withdrawal from a war we already won and finally have under control, it's good to know you're just racists...

speaking of liberal self loathing individuals... can we please get this guy on the VP ticket??
http://www.allenwestforcongress.com/about_allen.php

Screw Congress.. this guy needs to be president.

very nice Andrew,

your logic never fails you. Because Liberals want to pull out, they automatically dismiss democracy as possible in the middle east. What more? they are racists. I cannot imagine a smarter individual than yourself.

Dumbshit

before anyone here posts another comment concerning our invasion into iraq, you should watch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gf1CDmn8q0M

now go rent the entire movie .

"Liberals in Congress have created the mess we are in, and they continue to dump water in the boat boasting that they are trying to bail us out. We Americans know better...we Americans will not be duped by nor lured into the socialistic rantings of so many that want us to feel as if our world is imminently doomed."
I don't have a problem with you expressing your views, but please keep in mind that liberals count as Americans. More accurately, it would be "we conservatives will not be duped by nor lured into the socialistic rantings of so many that want us to feel as if our world is imminently doomed."
My rebuttal:
Conservatives will not be duped by socialistic rantings, but apparently conservative rantings about nuclear weapons that make us feel imminently doomed are absolutely fine. "Unless you support a strong America, you support terror." Is that so? I assume that the only people who support a strong America are "Americans"(Conservatives) and that the rest of the country supports terrorism. Barack Obama's foreign policy is stronger than McCain's because rather than thinking that bombing civilians is a "necessary evil," he thinks that we should target Al Qaeda and its leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan where they are most powerful.

Furthermore, OhHolyNight, please refrain from making embarrasing comments like the one you posted here. Those comments give liberals a bad name.

Furthermore, OhHolyKnight, please refrain from making embarrasing comments like the one you posted here. Those comments give liberals a bad name.

Some people don't like diplomacy because it legitimizes regimes that should not be viewed as legitimate. Besides, what is there to negotiate? Don't make nukes and we'll give you stuff? Worked real well with North Korea. Please don't attack our western neighbors in your neck of the woods? There's nothing to negotiate; all that needs to be said is that those actions are unacceptable. Does anybody really think that we should have to PAY countries to be socially responsible?

On military spending and programs, that is one of the government's very few completely legitimate responsibilities: to defend its citizens. To reduce and slow development is not an acceptable platform to me. Sure, you can cut a program if it doesn't work, but our military's strength lies in its technology. Virtually everyone's got numbers on us, and given how easy it is to blow up large swaths of land, we have to figure out how to reliably neutralize such threats by staying on the vanguard of military technology or we'll very likely be in some trouble.

Eddie, what exactly is so embarrassing about my post: the facts, the belief, or when i talk in all caps as a form of mockery to the people like hoboboh and UC himself who deride the liberals in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS? yeah, i know, i'm stooping to their level. frankly, i don't care. i've learned something in going to this site for the past year now. if someone doesn't want to listen, they won't. from petunia to jarrod to UC to plenty of others, many of the conservatives on this site, right or wrong, will not even hear the liberals out, and instead resort to name calling and petty slander. so what do i care, eddie? i made my point; the fact that you felt an obligation to call out one minor point, and not the actual arguments, in my post makes you just as low and "embarrassing" to the liberals. if i hadn't made any points, then yell at me all you want. maybe next time, big guy.

or is it my cross you don't like?

my points remain valid and, as of yet, uncontested. obama says he'll cut the defense programs that don't work, and he doesn't want to weaponize space. i fail to see how exactly this can be so grossly misconstrued. this is right up there with the "one of the worst decisions in american history," that is, giving Gitmo "residents" the right to a fair trial. yeah. john mccain is making MUCH better comments than "hussein obama."

†

[…] self-propagating malware in the first place. Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | live it! Published Wednesday, February 28, 2023 7:11 PM byharry […]

Can anyone who agrees with the main post explain/quantify the need for the systems Obama is calling into question?

I hear, on the one side, claims that we need these defense systems to protect ourselves from nuclear attack by rogue terrorist groups. Implicit in that is an assumption that a) existing systems are insufficient and b) that XYZ product from Lockheed Martin will protect us, if only we shell out the bucks for it.

On the other side, I hear that these systems are of questionable strategic value and are more in the vein of pork politics that fuel the military-industrial complex, etc etc.

Can anyone on either side help me understand by quantifying his position in this regard?

We are truly screwed if this man becomes our next President. I just cant see how people of normally good common sense are so in love with the hype. Why can't others see through the fog? What is happening here?

http://iwantmycountryback.wordpress.com

Sometimes I get really disillusioned with some of the hatred and anger that is espoused by some so called Christian Conservatives who claim to be crusaders for morality in America. However, I suppose that we have to be patient with those in our union who are still racist and intolerant since they also have the right to vote.

Coincidentally, I consider myself a "Christian Evangelical" but I guess I am rebellious since I don't believe that I should vote along party lines namely Repub. I let my conscience guide me. I also examine the candidate's willingness to be open, sincere and forthright and also admit when they made an error. That an indicator to me that the spirit of truth has influence on their decisions. And also, it's important that they are able to work with people who don't believe what they believe and RESPECT and represent them as well.

We have a mandate as Christians to go into the world and preach the gospel -- bring the good news to those who are hopeless. Not condemn them. Not judge them but through the love of Christ, minister as he did to everyone in need. Sometimes I think that the "Christian Right" lives in a bubble that is created with fear, racism and intolerance. It's sad and ineffective ministry and we will be judged at the end of it all by how well we serve one another in love.

If Jesus were here today most of us religious folk would have condemned him for his associations and his seeming liberal views. We have become so religious and stiff necked and have become wise in our own eyes. It’s shameful and pointed as the world identifies us as hypocrites.

I know that some will argue that lawlessness should not be supported by us but that is not what I am advocating. Moreover even Paul said that he doesn’t understand the mystery of sin. And there is no one who is without sin and no one who is in a position to judge or marginalize anyone. Apostle Paul also says – the heart of man is desperately wicked and deceitful above all things, who can know it? – and in Romans 17 - he said to mark those among you that cause division.

Through the love of Christ we can influence those who are lost and without hope.

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Love never fails....And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

I believe that love is the more excellent way.

I am the new face of the young Christian movement in this country and there are many like me!!!

Huh, hatred and anger???? we are just pointing out that Obama would be disastrous for our country. How is that hateful and angry????

And what does this have to do with the subject athand????

Seconded. Myself and my ilk are guilty of nothing more than observing, bemused, the hatred being spewed forth from the left.

Walk softly, carry a twig...
...and take one between the eyes.

Does the country really not see what happened in an appeasing, "can't we all just get along" administration?  The terrorist war got going early in Clinton's administration and he did nothing.  1st attack on WTC early in his administration, US embassies bombed and c'mon a US warship gets attacked, US service men killed and nothing.  Cutting back US defense is a mistake and believing that he (Obama) will eliminate nuclear proliferation around the world just because he says so is ludicrous.  Won't happen, ever, period.

The Russians have become a new threat under Putin and now flush with cash because of oil revenues (thanks USA for helping us understand how to make money), the Chinese are in an arms race, the North Koreans will always do what they do, we have nuke enabled countries like Pakistan and India that are not that stable, the Iranians will go nuclear and no sanctions will ever stop that.  The international stage is far more complex and dangerous and the "Obama European/Mid-East Tour 2008" isn't going to make people feel warm and fuzzy and just want to give up their aspirations just because, "heck that Obama is just such a wonderful guy."

Who do you want staring down the Russians, Chinese, North Koreans, Iranians, Syrians, etc... (the list is growing btw)?  A junior senator or a guy who's been under extreme pressure?  The former concerns me greatly.

Hi again,

I want to reiterate my question of a few weeks ago. Does anyone who has posted have a stance on the Obama/nuclear/missile defense issue that stands on something more than feelings about his experience or disposition toward dialoging with foreign leaders?

Most of the "discussion" so far seems to be a lot of pontificating and name calling, but where are the facts? I ask not to be snide but because I WANT to know what other people think, and why they think differently than I do. I do not generally agree with things said on this blog, but I read it because I know there are intelligent arguments for things I don’t instinctually agree with.

It makes sense to me that Senator Obama is taking a stance against "unproven missile defense systems,�? “misguided defense policies,�?  and “special interests�? (read: Lockheed Martin), and the idea of an “independent defense priorities board�? seems like a good thing to ensure that our defense priorities are motivated by legitimate security concerns, not keeping Lockheed Martin in business.
To the extent that this blog’s readership is conservative, there should be plenty of voices supporting these stances. What did you hear in that clip? I heard promises of good government and responsible spending, which are conservative/Republican values. And I did not hear promises to eliminate our standing army, or slash our nuclear weapons armaments, or remove American military presence from the rest of the world, or any of the liberal/sissy/weak/playing-footsie-with-Kim-Jong-Il-type of things some posters seem to be accusing the Senator of advocating.

So…does anyone have something substantive to say about the need for certain defense systems, or their performance, or the way defense policy is set, or anything of relevance to what would otherwise be an interesting and important topic for discussion?

Hey guys,

This is my first time on this blog, and I have to say I kind of find it upsetting.  I am a liberal, so I'll admit that I don't agree with your opinions, though at the same time I don't think that's a big deal, especially not in a democracy. 

What upsets me is that I don't think I believe in your values.  I don't think we're looking at the world with the same assumptions even.  All this talk of missle defense and nuclear weapons; all this talk of not talking to our enemies; all this talk of war is necessary for peace.  My disagreement is so profound that I don't even know where to begin to express it. 

Nuclear weapons are unnecessary once you already have enough to destroy the world seven times over; no one is threatening us with missles, so we don't need any defense; talking to your enemies is ten times more important than talking to your friends; and above all else, war is not necessary for peace, the very idea is absurd.

I know you probably disagree with all that, but my real question is:  How can a country hold together when it is so divided?  When the opposite sides of the public debate don't even share the same assumptions and values about the world?  What hope is there for our country if we disagree on the very precepts on which policy should be founded?

-Dave 

Sen. Obama has chosen Sen. Biden as his running mate, arguably as a support on foreign policy.  Do you really think that if a 3am phone call comes in, that Obama will say, “Hold everything…we have to wait until Joe gets here to make a decision”?  And Biden’s track record of decisions and opinions on foreign policy has not always been quite correct.  And how can any of us forget the snide smile on his face whenever speaking to those with whom he disagrees.  I certainly don’t want him negotiating for us.  Obama?  When explaining poker to me, my father said, “When you get to the table, look for the mark.  If you can’t find him, you’re it.”  I don’t think Obama can negotiate with Iran, and I really don’t want him negotiating with Putin,

At what point will we have enough nukes?
This war on terror is fought with People, not nukes.....wake up folks!
Lets fund our VA hospitals (who's gone to the VA Hospital in Fayetteville, N.C. lately)
and lets add more Special Ops troops........this is what we need right now.  You'd think we had no nukes, from the sound of these posts!

It is not nukes that scares me.  it is the Military Porgrams that he will cut.   Do you know how long it takes to make Special Ops soldiers, they do not just appear over night.  

And I really want to know how is Obama going to keepran from making Nukes.   Is he going to go ti the UN????  Is he going to have tea with Iamanutjob??  

And how is he going to get Russia to give up their nukes???  Israel???? Pakistan?????   France????
Nukes are a big deterant.   Why do you think that the US nad Russia never had a hot war????

Stix......
uh, i spent 3 years getting ready for Ranger School.  Fun stuff.
But you're so worried about Irans nukes, but not a word about North Korea's nukes(not to mention a substantial conventional military force)
Quit your whining!

I saw this a while ago too and wondered why the hell nobody was bringing it up.  If Obama gets elected you can bank on Russia, Venezuela, and Iran doing whatever they want with no consequence.

I have a post on my blog talking about this next point.  Do you think if Obama was a regular citizen, say an engineer, and was going to be hired to work on top secret stuff like our nukes, would he pass all the security clearances and background checks the FBI/CIA would do?  I don't think so, not with his track record and shady connections.

john,
the Russians already do whatever they want(in Georgia).......with no consequences! 
Top Secret clearance?  They ain't that hard to obtain, i got one and i had an arrest record!

And why do you think Russia all of a sudden had the balls to march into Georgia.  Think of the timing, we are in the middle of a Presidential election where the existing wars are already a hot topic with democrats not supporting the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.  They also know a change in power will be coming and there is a good chance Obama will be controlling the military so the threat of retalliation is diluted.  The Russians know that Bush can't do anything about it at this point because any military action or engagement in another war will kill McCain and the Republican congressional candidate's chances of victory in November.  And if we did take that action, Obama would be elected and Russia could invade more former terratories.

If you have top secret clearance I am scared.  Plus an arrest record isn't the problem, its the anti-American associations.  Plus I highly doubt you have access to this nation's top national secrets that Obama will be in control of.

John,
..........do you really think the United States would risk nuclear war with Russia over the Republic of Georgia?  And the weakness the Russians slyly acted upon was not an "Obama" or Democrat weakness.....it IS a "Neo-Con" weakness......one of their making. 
Bush's credibility is zero, especially among our NATO allies.  McCain's would be no better, since they believe he is every bit the idiot Georgie Jr. is.
Wake up out of that neo-con induced haze you are in John......there is a REAL world out there.

Since when did I say the United States was ready for nuclear war over Georgia? My point is Obama won't even blame Russia.  His first stance after the invasion was to blame Georgia and offer the analysis of dual culpability.  And you don't necessarily have to attack anyone, the threat of an attack is enough at times.  But in Obama's case he could at least come out and denounce the Russian actions without having to be prodded to do so.

You say it is a neo-con weakness yet you don't back up as to why.  What a good fresh argument: "Bush is an idiot and so is McCain".  Funny you talk about the "real world" when liberals refuse to acknowledge the presence of evil in the world.  There is always an excuse as to why these evil leaders and their countries act as they do.  There is always a diplomatic solution and a good conversation that can magically make the Ahmadinejads of the world start loving Jews. Liberals are never ready to take a strong stand against evil or even recognize it until something like a holocaust takes place.

John,
Our military has NO ability to respond in ANY way to any thing that Russia may do.  Bush and McCain are idiots because they have diminished our military's ability to respond to real threats .  How exactly can we respond effectively to any real threat out there with what we have?  The reality of our present situation is that this war in Iraq has ruined our great military....a military I'm proud to have once been a part of.  You see John, this liberal understands the threat, and it ain't in Iraq.  Let me tell you one thing, diplomacy works well only when a nation is operating from a position of strength....and strength is something that has been squandered by this administration with the approval of lame McCain.
John, come with me sometime, and lets visit the VA hospital here in Fayetteville N.C.  You'd be appalled by what passes for care for our veterans.   Evil?  Evil is sending our sons & daughters to war and treating them like this!

You talk about treating our military properly yet your liberal leaders treat them like crap.  Al Gore tries to disqualify our soldiers' votes in 2000.  John Murtha calls our soldiers cold blooded killers for the Haditha incident before any investigation has been done then never apologizes after all murder charges have been dropped.  Jay Rockefeller rips McCains military experience saying "you have to care about the lives of people. McCain never gets into those issues."  John Kerry recently said that our soldiers in Iraq are "terrorizing women and children."  Dick Durbin compared our military police to Nazis. Ted Kennedy says "Shamefully, we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management: U.S. management."  Barack Obama says all we are doing is just air-raiding villages and killing civilians in Afghanistan.  "We've got to get the job done [in Afghanistan] and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there."

Yeah your party is the one I want in control of the military.  You will probably have the entire Marine Core thrown in jail for war crimes.

@ David Walters--

David, you may have noticed my comments above (22 and 28). It seems that you, like me, enjoy reading conservative blogs to try to and test your own liberal/progressive/etc ideas.

I think what we are doing is admirable, and I wish more people all along the ideological continuum tested their own assumptions so vigilantly, but I think we are wasting our time on this site.

Look at the quality of the comments being made--most posters are inarticulate, can't spell, and have no points beyond knee-jerk liberal hating. Equally obnoxious, repugnant, and vacuous would be a site called "Rural Radical" whose cornerstones were gems of wisdom like, "McCain is a crook and hez gunna die in office anyway," "Republicans believe in God so their dumb!" and "rich peopl should pay for everything, don't complane about paying taxes cuz you have sooo much money so shut up."

If you are interested in really engaging with conservative ideology and testing your assumptions, I would recommend this site which I've stumbled upon in the last few days: http://www.amnation.com/vfr/

(in particular, see this post: http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/011467.html)

When I read Urban Conservative, I can easily identify the overarching ideology: liberals are idiots because Bill Clinton got a blowjob, and conservatives are brilliant because whites did well under Ronald Reagan. It's not new, and it's not challenging. It's like Bill O'Reilly but not nearly as eloquent or well-reasoned. (Or entertaining, for that matter.)

When I read View From the Right, I find myself grappling with real, intellectual conservativism. I don't agree with everything being said, but for once I can finally ascribe that to legitimate, contemplated lines of thought that differ from mine, instead of chalking it up to mere ignorance, stubbornness, and unrecognized privilege. To be honest, I don't know that I could "beat" these guys in a debate. It is exciting, and challenging, like debating your really smart uncle whose library lines four walls of his den.

So, David, I invite you to spend some time reading VFR and quit wasting your time trying to convert these folks. Engage with really thoughtful people who are questioning the dominant order (even though, in their minds, that includes things as fundamental as diversity and tolerance). Or keep trying to match wits with people who say things like this:

"Yeah your party is the one I want in control of the military.  You will probably have the entire Marine Core thrown in jail for war crimes."
--John Kaduk, post #40

John K.-
"Yeah your party is the one I want in control of the military.  You will probably have the entire Marine Core thrown in jail for war crimes."

-No, Dick Cheney&just a few others will do(Convict of war crimes)
to ensure this doesn't happen again.  The marines and soldiers on the ground always do a good job carrying out their mission.  Yet they are treated like shit by this administration when they have served their purpose.  That's gotta end John.

Kyle-
Thanx for the link.......but i can't leave "my friends" here at Urban Conservative!  I'm sure i'd be missed.

In his 1976 Farewell Address, George Washington provided several pieces of indispensable guidance for generations that would follow. Warning against "permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world," he declared that overgrown military establishments" were antithetical to republic liberties. Almost two centuries later, on Jan 17, 1961, another general-turned-president would echo Washington in his own farewell address. "We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions," declared Dwight Eisenhower, warning famously that America must "guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence...by the military-industrial complex." Eisenhower felt compelled to warn the nation that in the wake of WWII and amid its effort to fight the Cold War, military, industrial, and political interests were forming an "unholy alliance" that was distorting America's national priorities. The Framers of our Constitution agreed that the republic they had established must not become an empire. They were determined not to repeat the tragedy of Rome, a republic that had, through military expansion, become an empire and destroyed itself from within. As Roman soldiers found themselves increasingly stationed as distant battlefields, they grew to support their general's political ambitions more than the government itself, until ultimately Augustus Caesar declared himself emperor (sound familiar?). Through carefully calibrated checks and balances on the power of the presidency, particularly on the power to authorize military force, the framers sought to prevent the kind of domestic tyranny that can result from foreign wars.