You suggest that I oppose, "people who support strong legislation to prevent pollution (who) are trying to control the Federal budget and undermine our economy", and that, "people who believe in trying to preserve our environment are stupid".
I oppose people who can't find a reasonable balance between preventing pollution and maintaining a sound economic society. "Save the environment at all costs" is a stupid, unrealistic, and misguided sentiment. Having said that, however, I abhor pollution. But I detest the idiot who throws a cigarette butt out the window or the graffiti hoodlum more than the power plant at the edge of town. The former shows a total disregard for the environment and society; the latter is necessary to maintain our way of life. But I do indeed believe that the environmentalist movement is more of a ploy to advance a socialist agenda than it is a movement to "protect the environment", per se. And the disingenuous charges levied by them are disgusting and tiresome. The "global warming" scare is just one such ploy. "Global Warming" is a bogus issue. "Pollution" is another issue all together, but should be approached in a realistic manner, not a radical one.
You suggest that I believe, "all Democrats are evil (and) all Republicans are good".
Nope, not at all. In fact, I don't think I've ever called even one Democrat "evil". I do, however, think the leadership of the Democrat party, i.e. Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Kerry, John Conyers, Hillary Clinton, et al, are disingenuous, race-baiting, class-envy-baiting, blame-game-playing, idiots, along with the likes of Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton, of course; and I think that the Democrat Party pundits, such as Paul Bagalia, Al Franken, Eleanor Clift, Randi Rhodes, et al, are all total morons; and I think that the Democrat ex-presidents, i.e., Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, are breaking tradition in a disgusting attempt to undermine the current administration; and I think people who follow, in lock-step, the Democrat Party as I described are all poor and foolish misguided dupes; and I oppose just about every policy issue in the Democrat Party agenda; but I never called all Democrats "evil".
But I will admit that I believe the Republican Party, in general, maintains a more respectful presence than the Democrats. For example, if I were to ask you to find one mean-spirited thing John Kerry said about George W. Bush, you could actually cite hundreds, maybe thousands of them. But if I were to ask you to find even one mean-spirited thing George W. Bush said about John Kerry, you'd be hard-pressed to find even one. Go ahead, look for them.
And the same thing could apply to the Democrat versus Republican leadership in the Senate and the House. Look at the mean-spirited statements uttered by Nancy Pelosi, and compare them to the way Dennis Hastert presents himself and the way he talks about his political opposition. Compare the Senate leadership style of Republican Bill Frist versus Democrat Tom Daschle. All those comparisons are as different as night and day. I've never seen a more mean-spirited bunch than I see in the current-day Democrat Party. But I'm a Libertarian in principle, and I'm certainly not beholden to the Republican Party.
You suggest that I think, "George Bush can do or has done nothing unethical".
Of course he "could", but no, I don't think he has. You might disagree with some (or all) of his policy issues, but "unethical" is absurd. Like him or not, agree with him or not, personally, I believe he's doing what he believes to be the right thing, and he's doing it within the boundaries of the constitution and the law, both international and domestic.
You suggest that I think the, "recent problems in New Orleans caused (by) the hurricane were exacerbated because the Mayor of New Orleans and the Governor of Louisiana are Democrats."
Nope, not because they're Democrats, but because their both incompetent, blundering, blame-game-playing idiots. I don't care what political party the belong to. They blew it, plain and simple. They just blew it. And they didn't present themselves very well either.
You suggest that I believe, "the most recent war in Iraq has been conducted masterfully by the Republicans".
First of all, I never said any such thing. Second of all, with the benefit of hind-sight, anyone could have made better decisions. Third of all, I don't presume that I'm a better military strategist than the folks in charge of this thing. But if you think you are, perhaps you should run for ten-star general. But actually, I think we should have invaded Syria by now, and I believe that we're not doing enough. I believe that we should face the threat of radical Islamic terrorism with the same might and determination that we had in World War II. I believe we should publicly condemn the United Nation for not only appeasing terrorism for the past forty years, but also for the criminal facilitation of Saddam Hussein over the past dozen. And I believe that we should withdraw all support from that corrupt and inept organization until a total overhaul is implemented. But these things are easy for me to say. I realize that the reality of the thing is that we have to "play politics" in the world arena, so I'll rely on those who know more about than I do, and who will approach it with a little more diplomacy.
So you see, almost all of your assertions are incorrect.
