Is Ron Paul locked out?

With the Hilary Rodham-Clinton surge yesterday, it keeps her and Obama focused on each other instead of moving "the party" forward.

It also keeps the attacks vicious and inward focused.

It wouldn't matter how many Mexicans came across the border... in fact, we'd probably be BEGGING them to!

Unfortunately, both Democrats want to tax the $hit out of businesses... like taking money away from them is going to create more jobs ?:|

Actually signed by Bush (but pushed by Clinton).

NAFTA was initially pursued by corporate interest in the United States and Canada supportive of free trade, led by Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, U.S. President George H. W. Bush, and the Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari. The three countries signed NAFTA in December 1992, subject to ratification by the legislatures of the three countries. There was considerable opposition in all three countries. In the United States, NAFTA was able to secure passage after Bill Clinton made its passage a major legislative priority in 1993. Since the agreement had been signed by Bush under his fast-track prerogative, Clinton did not alter the original agreement, but complemented it with the aforementioned NAAEC and NAALC. After intense political debate and the negotiation of these side agreements, the U.S. House of Representatives passed NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by 234-200 vote (132 Republicans and 102 Democrats voting in favor; 43 Republicans, 156 Democrats, and 1 independent against),[6] and the U.S. Senate passed it on the last day of its 1993 session, November 20, 1993, by 61-38 vote (34 Republicans and 27 Democrats voting in favor; 10 Republicans and 28 Democrats against, with 1 Democrat opponent not voting -- Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND), an ardent foe of NAFTA, missed the vote because of an illness in his family).[7]

McCain most likely will pick Huckabee as a running partner. If he kicks the bit bucket, then a 'theocrat' will be in power. SOmeone too stupid to believe in evolution.

I have no problem with people whose religious views co-exist with science, but this country is great because we separate church and state. Once you have a religion (you like) in power, it is just a short step to a religion you DON'T like in power.

And Huckabee lied on network TV. He was asked about him speaking about religion in campaign talks on TV and said "I don't bring it up, only answer questions about it" and Daily Show came up with a dozen clips where he was ranting about religion (not asked about it).

As you said, the Democrats want to form a 'Mother Govt Libero-Fascist' economy. - A guy actually wrote a book on this topic, was on Daily SHow. Hillary actually said she'd like propaganda such as on how to raise kids right plastered all over public places such as bus stops, DMV lines, etc.

Combine this with the Feds destroying the economy by printing hundreds of billions in fake money and giving it to banks, and therefore devaluing everyone else's money, and by spending trillions we don't have on programs we can't afford, I think we're at the stage in the Roman empire when they started inflating their currency to support a permanent 'welfare class' in Rome.

Farmers finally stopped sending grain to Rome as they could only get worthless inflated currency that they didn't stop printing for it. I love the US but I'm seriously considering looking for a country that is more stable and less self-destructive. "Death-to-America?" we don't need no stinkin' terrorists, we are destroying ourselves.

Yup, that's right ? your doomed ? doomed as doomed can be! :p

It was not that long ago that McCain was one of the most liberal (i.e. Hated by the GOP) republicans out there and now he is actually the Rep. presidential nominee?!?!?!?! Freaking amazing and too funny! Who's to blame? Your own party! If you guys could control the overzealous right wing religious nut jobs, corporate greed, fear mongering, WAR mongering, etc., etc., etc., the good 'ol USA would not be in the piss poor shape it is in right now (at home and abroad) because of the "blind Faith" of that particular party! I mean really, what did you think was going to happen when y'all voted for GWB ? twice even!?!?!? See what happens when you goosestep to the Kool-Aid line because that's what a "good Republican" does ? follow the party line ? no matter what! Worked out really well for you guys didn't it? Running elections and trying to control the masses with FEAR. Running elections through EVERY po-dunk church around the country on an ANTI-gay and ANTI-abortion platform (truly some of Karl Roves best work)! Tell me this, aren't y'all supposed to be about keeping the government OUT of peoples lives? Yet you are FOR controlling what a woman can and cannot do with her body!? What homosexuals can and cannot HAVE and or do, as far as the same liberties as heterosexuals have in the U.S.A. where ... "all men are created equal"!? Again, REALLY, what did you expect?!?!?

Truth is, I like Ron Paul, said as much in a few posts here. He's a good man with some great ideas (and some bad as well, he IS a politician!) and the ONLY person running as a Rep. that I have EVER considered worthy of my vote. However, he does not tow the party line so he is not even considered!? It's just f'n stupid! The Republican party just might have had a chance with Ron Paul ? if there were more open minds and closed Bibles. IMHO ?

Edit: Because I am an A$$

Mwuahahahahaaaaaaaa!

Not a single post to discuss the idea of this discussion. :(

And it all came from the unions as well. We did lose some manufacturing jobs in Canada, some to southern US right to work states, some to the far east. Very few to Mexico.

NAFTA by the way, started out as a US/Canada deal, was delayed by the US to bring Mexico in. Our perception is that the Reagan white house forced us into NAFTA, Brian Mulrony when running for leader said he was against it. When running for a second term, he of course supported it.

And NAFTA has nothing to do with border security or immigration.

James

Probably and unfortunately, yes.

I blame the media (who locked him out of at least one debate), and the American voter who puts himself and his checkbook before the long life and health of this nation as a whole.

Just my opinion.

I KNEW I should have kept paying my union dues! DAMN, aint that always the case.

as for NAFTA and the Canadian border: '...because it isn't the one that is causing us to flush our economy and security down the drain"

no, but to us it is no different than Mexico to you. Our companies get flushed out by US companies coming here, setting up shop in our woodlands and waters and then helping themselves to whatever they choose and sending it to the US without paying the tarriffs. Our lumber companies that once relied on that export business go out of business, Canadians lose jobs and the USA doesn't even have the ball sack to pay the fees for it? In central and eastern Canada, same thing different product.

When Wyerhauser takes over a large portion of Canada's forests, they don't hire the Canadians in the area who once worked for teh commpany they forced into bankruptcy, they instead hire American citizens and get them here on visas to work.

NAFTA? What a farce, and yet all you see is how the Mexicans are taking over YOUR country? A little blind eyed to that one I think. If it doesn't hurt you, it is okay?

Nope. I am active in his campaign. He is going all the way to the convention regardless what the MSM says. Should be interesting.

Finally stood up to the left wing polices of decades? Because they were sick of it?

The liberals drove the bible thumpers to the polls. They deserve everything they got.

Dan

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf

Good enough source for you?

Dan

So, The "Moral Majority" had to put us in our place, no matter the cost ... Human or otherwise?!?!?

Dude, That's f*cked up!

BTW: browsed over your pdf. saw nothing of deaths caused by Carter invading a sovereign nation to line the pockets of his family and business partners.

Bush and Company (Karl f'n Rove) for starters, as well as people who think like you do. Yeah, you don't claim to "Be far Right" (hell, who would right now). But you sure as hell think you are "Right".

I am a liberal and it's my fault, I deserve all of the blame due to the GOP having f'ed up our Nation (and world) in more ways than ever thought possible!

What colour is the sky in your world there, buddy?

I just checked your link. (good link, thanks) But I don't see any reference to Deaths during the Carter Admin. (other than the Diaster in the Desert, from the botched Iran Rescue atempt.*) ??? -d

* I don't blamed Carter for all of that the DOD was not prepared to do that sort of mission. The blam / shame is on them as well for that. And we still have Polititions in Uniform and Careerists in the "Puzzel Palace". X-( -d

And then place them into perspective of when carter was in office... You will notice they started dropping off AFTER carter was out of office? Because it took that long to fix what carter caused.

Why, because we didn't have a liberal bible thumper in office that wasn't bleading the military dry for his liberal policies.

[edited to add] They break down the statistics by accidents dawgit, thats where the majority occured in carters years. Equipment failures

Dan

Then this would have never have happened. I still blame the far left... I could care less what you think of my view, as far as I'm concerned your fked up for not seeing it.

Me, I'll vote for clinton... Because I think she is a bitch and won't take crap from other antions. She tried to fix the health care, and I think she can do it this time.

Long as it isnt some far left liberal to put us back where carter left us.

Dan

If it wasn't for them and their b.s. policies.. The nation would have never been fked up to begin with...

Remember
it was a liberal that put us in vitnam
remember
it was a liberal that gave us the cuban boat lift
remember
it was a liberal that gave us gas shortages
remember
remember
it was a liberal that gave us the hostage crisis.
it was a liberal that gave us one of the worse recessions we ever had.
remember it was a liberal gave away the panama canal
remember it was a liberal that gave us whitewater
remember
enron started under a liberal.
rember it was a liberal that gave us high social welfare costs that hasn't done anything to help this nation, other then to drive us further into debt
remember it was a liberal that desimated our military to the point that they were dieing without even going into battle.
I could go on.

You think that did not drive the far right to the votiing polls... Your just stupid to think otherwise.

Yea right, you are so great at helping this nation. And you wonder why the far right came about? Yea, do you selectivly read the constitution to? Or remember the rest of the history of this nation? Only what you want to could it be?

Dan

They are a bunch of scientists that want more information released... Definatly not pro bush. Good reading..

That report I posted goes to congress, which congress wont release to the public. No matter what party is in control.

If you want a link to sign up for it, let me know... There is some truely intestering reading in those reports... No matter what your political beleifs.

Dan

I've never understood the disdain for McCain; the man more reflects middle-class values than any of the other candidates. From what I hear on the radio while driving, I get the impression the right-wing talk-show blowhards would rather see a Democrat in office than McCain. How short-sighted can you be?

I don't see Ron Paul as a viable candidate for three reasons:

1. I wouldn't buy a used car from the man.
2. Fair tax isn't. As I understand it, the "Fair Tax" would replace the current income tax system with a "sales" tax instituted on [b]every expenditure[/b], including services and items which are not currently taxed, such as medical bills, legal fees, accounting fees, and prescription medication. You think you're paying too much for medication now? Additionally, it would [u]not[/u] displace state-level income and sales taxes.
3. The remainder of his stated platform and beliefs from his speeches ((http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html) consist primarily of "Gut the Federal government." OK, that's a good idea; it would greatly reduce the tax load.
- But now we have spot food shortages because the Interstate highway system is falling apart; seems the states were getting 90% of their highway money from Washington and haven't got the political 'nads to raise taxes to fix the roads. Take a look at Virginia today!
- The Federal Reserve has been abolished and we are back on the gold standard, but Americans can't afford products from overseas because the rest of the world doesn't accept the United States' valuation of its dollar against an ounce of gold. No more DVD players, computers, or video games, darn it!
- 2- and 4-year post-secondary schools are closing daily because we didn't know exactly how much they relied on federal money, but it doesn't matter because there are no technical jobs left to train anybody for and all the doctors, lawyers, and accountants are unemployed too. Manufacturing moved out when it became clear the dollar was no longer a viable currency, but they didn't take any people.

All speculation on my part, of course, but Ron Paul is as blinkered by his beliefs as GWB is by his.

edit; spulchok

No hope here, JD. It doesn't matter what he does. I'm not a personal fan of Ron Paul. His ideas are too far-fetched for me and I don't think he can pull them off.

He says in the article you posted "The most permanent tax reform we can undertake, though, is to end the income tax and abolish the IRS. We could remove the entire personal income tax-funded portion of the budget and the federal government would still receive roughly the same revenues that it did during the Clinton years. And we could do this without even touching Social Security and Medicare."

Nice idea, but I just don't believe that could ever happen. I'm not satisfied with McCain either, I should say I'm under-enthused about him.

Definitely no hope here, JD. Not for Republicans. Its McCain or Hillary/Barack.

AV

Who do you blame for Vietnam?

The liberal president who started it but had doubts in the end? (Kennedy) The liberal president who escalated it from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands (LBJ). The right wing hawks who insisted it could be won right up until the end? The republican president who supported the corrupt South Vienamese regime in the first place (Eisenhower) or the president who promised to pull out but took so long to do so (Nixon).

You want to blame liberals for the welfare state. Sure, FDR and LBJ should take some heat. But do you ignore Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan Bush and Bush for not changing it?

You going to blame presidents for recessions? Did you blame Bush senior? Reagan had one on his watch too. So did Nixon. Recessions are cyclical, they happen as do booms and presidential policies may have an influence do not think presidents can stop a recession any more than they can create a boom.

First and the biggest gas crisis was under Nixon/Ford.

You wanna blame Carter for everything - why not blame Nixon for creating the conditions under which any democratic nominee would beat any republican.

You want to blame Kennedy for the Bay of pigs? Why not blame the previous president who supported the corrupt fascist Batista who ruled with an iron fist(supported by the American mob) and created the conditions for revolution. Castro didn't always hate the US, until it was clear whose side they were on. Sure Castro was no Santa Claus but life for the average Cuban improved under Castro, because it was pretty wretched before.

Same thing can be said for the Shah of Iran. Do you blame Carter, or do you blame the republican regime who put the Shah in power in the first place, and helped him organize his secret police.

It is all to easy to play the blame game. And politicians of all stripes play it too. But in the end blame and finger pointing do not help you solve problems. In fact they build barriers to solving problems.

Blame is easy. Solutions are hard. I see this in business and in politics. No one "side" has a monopoly on good ideas and common sense. But keep on playing the blame game and you will miss some solid ideas from the other side.

You wanna have a few beers and vent about some liberals, go ahead and fill your boots, but don't think you are changing anything.

James

Show me the numbers that back up your assertions. The link you provided [b]does not[/b] include data from the Carter administration except Desert One: 8 people.

I'm not seeing where 8 is greater than 2,193 (from your document). Accidental deaths may have fallen after the Carter years, but also during the Carter years, the following policies were put in place in the DoD:
- mandatory seat belt wear in all military [b]and civilian[/b] vehicles for active-duty personnel; and
- mandatory helmet wear for all motorcyclists, on or off military installations.

There's more at work here than you would like to admit. When there's no war, the vast majority of military deaths are accidental, and most of those are usually in [u]personal[/u] vehicle wrecks. Reagan bought a lot of equipment, but didn't do much for military paychecks; the same applies for Bush the First. In fact, the two largest pay raises (by percentage) I remember in my active duty years were included in Carter budgets (FYs 79 and 81, I believe).

I got that Dan. I also 'peek' at the FAS web site from time to time. It's book-marked. I just didn't see much data from the Carter years in that particular document. I did look at the years, it started with 1980. (what I saw) That means it only covers 1 year of the Carter Administration, maybe. (the last year being Jan. '80 to Jan. '81) I do know we (the US) lost a lot of good people durning the Reagan Administration through many wild adventures in Global Control. -d

Why do I blame carter for the hostage crisis? Easy, he didn't have a backbone and the riotors knew they could get away with it.

Damn, I need 2 windows. I was thinking lbj for the great social programs he started, not kennedy.

And I freely admit the many mistakes of the republicans. God, nixon gave us china. impeachment proceedings.

And like it or not, the things I did mentioned did have an effect of how people vote. I do think the far right came out in more strength because of the things I mentioned.

Hell, I voted for hillary. I'm voting liberal. Chuckle, but at least I know the history of the party I am voting for unlike the origional poster. And actually, that is exactly why I am voting for hillary. Because she tried to do something about the health crisis. Which is more then any othe rpresident I know other then nixon(price caps). I think this time she will get it done.

Dan

to that conclusion about carter from that report. I just don't have the time.

If you don't mind, I will reply then.

Dan

Even if you elect someone who wants to implement Canadian style Healthcare in the US, it isn't that simple. Canada started down that road in the 50s, and by early sixties had a system in place.

We didn't have the same issues then as the US does today with HMOs etc. Transitioning would be very very challenging. The health care proposals I saw from Hillary under Bill's watch looked terribly complicated and difficult to implement.

James

does not equal "his fault". It means he was part of the problem, even if it wasn't originally a problem of his making.

He could have stopped it, but instead passed it though.

You can twist in the wind all you want, but it won't take his fingerprints off of NAFTA passing under him.

And in case you didn't notice, any mentions of Clinton were not flames, nor did I direct any at you, so your copy/paste to get people worked up isn't working. I so don't care about Republican/Democrat right now. I do know that Obama will be horrible for us if people are dumb enough to vote for someone simply because he is black.

Republicans are just as much to blame as the Democrats on this one though.

you see an open hostility from evolutionists towards creationists on a regular basis.

If evolutionists are so confident in their religion of science, why do they feel the need to viciously attack people on a personal basis that disagree with them?

People are looking for answers, and anti-religious people don't have a lot of options to cling on to, do they?

Whatever lets you sleep at night, monkeyboy. :D

He allowed it to proceed, but never signed it because Bush had already signed it.
Also look at the vote. Clinton added two new conditions to lessen corporations ability to screw us as badly. Politically it was a smart move to lessen the friction on other Bills.

Non-union costs less and works harder/faster.

A super highway right through the center of the US would make it easier to get goods in from Mexico than to drive from our coasts.

My street had tons of Ron Paul signs in front of the houses. Now it's down to three signs in front of one house. He didn't get the memo. :)

My policy on the election is "I'll vote for president when I can vote for president." I was willing to make an exception for Ron Paul.

I believe Ron Paul has collected a lot more cash than he has spent... makes me wonder how this will end.

Dude, it's your M.O. Imply the worst in every discussion when speaking of dems., libs, the"poor, poor", the "Evil Teaher's Union", etc., etc. ... despite the facts. Your original implication here was Bill Clinton=NAFTA, NAFTA=BAD, Bill Clinton=Dem., Dem=Evil, etc., etc. I am curious to see your response below to bwilmot ?

Yeah, I can be an A$$hole. I frequently prove that to others as well as myself. Not ashamed to admit it, it's who I am. I was kind of pocking the chests of all you rabid anti-libs for no other reason than the years of venom you guys spewed (and still do). It does not make it right or me any better. I edited my a$$hole taunting remarks out of both posts not to try and hide my "a$$holyness" (word?) but because it just ain't right, on either side. However, in all due fairness, if anyone feels they need to see my A$$hole remarks I will oblige in anyway asked.

Again, for what it's worth, I somewhat agree with that last statement. But I will add ... I think he will make an excellent President ? with about eight more years of experience.

Edit: name correction and spelling, a 2fer!

http://www.grassfire.org/242/petition.asp?pid=15808927

more double talk a bs.

The law passed, now build the fence.

James, I don't have the answer to the Health care issue. I just think it is the most important domestic issue there is. If it can be resolved it will make other domestic issues easier to deal with. Much.

I understand your statement about Hillary's plan, but. Again, she did more then others have. She addressed it... She has a history of at least trying like hell to fix it.. Obmama? Hell, I still can't find the side of the street he is on let alone his positions on anything. He is all talk.

That said and done... Is she perfect, hell no... Her Clinton year baggage scares me. Just not as much as the other 2.

Dan

I couldn't imagine what he'd have done to our country. mind you, hopefully we would have the common sense to never elect the tool to begin with. Mind you, we have elected our share of morons over the years, it's just that they cant' cause as much damage from within our borders as they can by commanding your military.

Bush's tight connection with Texas has been his oil pals 9don't know why they even give him the time of day after he has failed them so miserably as well) and then when he bailed out before dropping the company in it, he took his escape money to the Rangers.

Didn't see him trying to sink Petro Canada or buy the Blue Jays though (even though the Jay's are mostly American too).

here's one thing you need to recognize though; if you, as an American, travel the world, you will INSTANTLY be tagged as a Yankee, Bush lover no matter where you go, where you are from or what you support.

It's unfortunate that you can't be seen for who you really are ,but that isn't my fault. You'd need to elect someone else and actually look good for a few years before others will accept you. Even then, Americans aren't welcomed with open arms in most places as it is. BIAS? yes, incorrect judgement? Yes. But the same has been shown by Americans towards Easter Indians, Mexicans, Brits, canadians etc. I guess its just par for the course. You will always be lumped into one group, that's just the way it works, like it or not.

What goes around comes around oz, now doesn't it. With all your hatefull american bashing, I thought you desereved some of the same.

Dan

I know I seen those statistics, and from that website also... In a report to congress. But, it sure was not in the document I posted.

Your point has been made, and I apologize.

Truth of the matter, I'm embarrassed as hell... I truly thought I read that statistic in the document awhile back when I received it in the newsletter. I should have reread it prior to posting that.

Again, I apologize. This apology goes to the original poster as well. I would have not made that statement if I had not read it from a reliable source, and I can not provide that source anymore.

[edited to add:] Where the left feels that President Bush is the wrose president ever. I feel that President Carter was. I let my feelings drive my post. I feel that man did more harm to this nation then any other president ever.

Dan

Boy you really stuck it to me. I am not sure I'll get over that one.

Sheet happens. I guess only history will be the judge of the best and worst. And it's not ready to be written yet. The US is in deep trouble Now, and it seems the US populace haven't quite grasped it all. The person at the top is usually the one who catches the blame. It just works that way. -d

.

So, instead of proving him wrong, you confirm his often negative outlook on Americans? I don't see that helping anything, and actually takes things in the wrong direction.

Did it at least make you feel better?

[i]What I don't like about Ron Paul is that he would do alot of dismantling, but I don't see much of a plan for the transition or aftermath.[/i]

has a transition and an "aftermath". That doesn't make it bad (I'll bet most people never envisioned the "aftermath" of the of the 16th amendment!). Nobody is claiming that it's going to be painless.... pulling out a rotten tooth hurts.... Whittling down a rotten government probably will too.

Ok, we have people not following the laws, not paying taxes, and still getting all the benefits from our government, why on earth would they "pay a fine" and then start paying taxes? Who would collect the fee? What happens to the people that can't PAY the fee, do we then subsidize the program? That was a big loser from the word go.

Pork, it is the American VOTER that will only vote for politicians that DO bring home the bacon that have fed this machine. If a single politician were to stop doing the pork, the people back home would see all of OUR tax dollars being WASTED on OTHER states pork. If your going to waste it, at least waste it locally? The ONLY solution is to cut it off for all, which is NOT going to happen.

I don't think McCain will retreat/withdraw from Iraq until they have their own stable government and strong enough police force and military to protect it's self, which is not going to be within one year.

As for Hussein, you clearly weren't paying attention during the Clinton administration, because ALL of the top politicians were saying that Saddam was a threat to the world and should be removed. Your dislike of Bush is clearly blinding you on this issue, or maybe just making you express it in a way that reality doesn't support.

That being said, we should have had Osamas head on a pike before thinking about anything else.

That is kind of the point, Government SHOULD be doing less, not more.

We already have too many laws. We do not need Congress constantly writing new laws, just so they can thump their chests to show they did their job as "lawmakers".

are not what I would call a 'good idea'. Some of the things that he wants to do, in my opinion, are not the best for our current situation.

I will also agree that in a 4 yr. term, there is no way he can obtain his goals completely.
However, he can help to reduce the trend and lay groundwork to accomplish many of the goals. I think that he will encounter a lot of opposition to said plans, and a lot of work will be needed to bring them forth.
If you look at it as, if he were elected right now, everything he wants to do will be done completely, without opposition or speedbumps, yes, it is scary as hell. But he would not have the power to do all of it on his own. Moving in that direction would be a good thing for the country and our future.

That said, I doubt massively that he will be elected, but if he does gain a lot of votes in the election, then it may just send a message to the stupidf*** other politicians, that things need to change and the people are starting to get tired of the same old crap!

He would not be able to completely do what he wants. But he can lay the groundwork to move in the right direction.
If we (the people) do not send the message that this IS what we want, the current system will not change, and the party lines will remain, and we (the people) will keep getting screwed at every turn!

"I don't feel the need to make personal attacks against someone based on them not thinking the same way I do."

And yet in the same breathe ...

"I think you are not going to like the evolutionary path because with the welfare mentality, humans, unlike other species (and even humans in the distant past) are no longer a part of "survival of the fittest" which IMPROVES a species."

So, your implying ALL Humans have a "welfare mentality" or just Dems/Libs.?

Sorry ? couldn't help it, me being the a$$ that I am. :p

NN,
"I think McCain will have us out of there within a year after taking office. I also think he'll tell the Iranians, Saudis, Jordanians, and Turks "You live here. If you want a stable Iraq, it's time for you to step up.""

Wishful thinking but as long as those oil reserves in that region keep pumping, there is NO WAY someone on the side of big oil is going to hold any of those nations to task, if that statement ever were to be made. "We've", as much as told the Iraqis that and have yet to back it up. As well, McCain has already stated he's ready keep us there for 100 years. Pretty freaking scary ?

JD,

"As for Hussein, you clearly weren't paying attention during the Clinton administration, because ALL of the top politicians were saying that Saddam was a threat to the world and should be removed"

IF, "ALL" of the top politicians were saying this because they believed it to be true, then why did we (the world) not do the whole 'invasion of a sovereign nation' thing on "his" watch? No, the things that were being said to and about Saddam was part of the pissing contest between SH and the UN (world, really) regarding his not following the resolutions that were put in place after Desert Storm. Was he an evil man? Yes. Did this make him the MOST dangerous man in the region if not the world? No. Is that what he wanted everyone to think? Yes. Did this make him worthy of an invasion that was supported by so few nations in the world? No. In any case, why do we (the US) HAVE to be the worlds Police? We don't, that's why President Clinton along with the UN (other nations) were using words and sanctions NOT bombs and human lives. But, is EVERYTHING wrong in the world STILL Bill Clintons fault? You seem to think so.

I don't dislike US citizens, I don't think your soldiers are wrong.

I despise your president and the idiotic fools who elected him, not once but twice, despite his BS during his first term. It proves that a great deal of US citizens have been brainwashed into believing that the USA is correct and despite what the rest of the world thinks or says, they will be ignored because the USa is always correct. That entire concept is flawed and ridiculous.

I also think that anyone that STILL sees Bush as the answer to teh USA's problems is a complete and utter moron. If you haven't been able to learn from his constant missteps over the last 8 years then you are seriously in need of medical attention.

The USA as a country? I have lived there (short term), worked there, operated business there and finally decided to leave it all and not make the permanent move or obtain citizenship there due to the government and the people that support it.

I am still in the USA twice if not three times a month (it's less than a half hour frmo my house to the border)despite my reluctance, I have travelled through most of the USA I have met US citizens in nearly all the states, save a half dozen or so.

I don't hate America's military, I salute the people that still go to war for you, despite their knowing the futility of what they are doing.

I simply do not like the US government and what it stands for with the backward mindset it instills in many of its people. I can't believe people would actually follow and stand up for such a circus act, even seeing how detrimental all their moves have been for USA. It is simply blind patriotism without contest.

But US citizens as a whole? Have quite a few friends here that were once US citizens, great people. Have many business associates friends in the US which are great people.
Have worked with some great US artists and helped them escape the corporate machine, have worked with many fair and decent companies in America.

So get your story right, learn to comprehend what you read and instead of trolling like a pi$$ed off three year old who didn't get two slices of apple before nap time. Try understandg someone else for a change, instead of rushing to defend your once mighty country.

So before you think that the world is being hard on the USA and that is is none of thier business, take a deep breath and realize that YOU have made it thier business.

By acting on a world stage, by invading other countries, by ignoring the wishes of allies, you have in turn put yourself in the limelight and are standing on stage all by yourselves, while waving your flag and giving the rest of your oallies the middle finger.

So when those countries start to point out and focus on your inabilities, lies, deceit, flawed government and unethical, poorly executed approach to saving the world (as if ANYONE believe you're not just in it for yoru own benefit), you have no position to take other than to stand on that stage and take it standing up like an American.

If you hang out with idiots and a$$holes, eventually you will also be seen as one.

That's life, if you dont' understand it, learn to deal with it and get on with it.

but that is besides the point. :p

I am not implying anything other than that the WORLD is caught up in this same downward spiral.

It used to be if you were not strong or smart enough to earn a living, you didn't live.

Now we PAY the stupid and weak to breed like bunnies, while the successful hard working people of the world that actually contribute something to the world are having smaller and smaller families. Is it any wonder why the US is falling behind in the tech fields?

Go to a state park and you see signs "Don't feed the animals". That is because if you constantly give them handouts, they forget how to survive in the wild. We need to stop feeding the animals.

is what you are doing is making excuses for poor behavior based on other poor behavior.

Let each persons records stand on their own, and let them be responsible for their own actions.

Nothing Bill did or didn't do, justifies or takes anything away from GWB.

For you obvious dislike of the whole Ken Star deal, were you as equally outraged when Libby went to prison for allegedly lying about something that wasn't a crime, by a prosecutor that already KNEW who had leaked the information BEFORE talking to Libby in the first place, but continued the "investigation" anyways?

The difference is, Bill DID commit a crime and lost his law license over it and was disbarred.

Again, what does that have to do with NN and I talking about McCain? Focus my friend, focus. :D

Yep, consistently inconsistent! Implying the "WORLD" and somehow attaching that reasoning to the "US" falling behind in tech jobs.

I'm just saying?

BTW: It should be "an" a$$ not "and" a$$.