Thank you for the morning chuckle. :o)

Well… don’t be offended. My view is merely different that your view. We live on a planet where some of us don’t judge, to their detriment. “It’s their @#$@#$ country” sounds really cool, but it’s just not the way the world functions today. The Earth is a big sandbox and we all like to play our way. But there are rules.

I don’t make excuses for animals. I don’t even want to try. We should do our best with all the means at our disposal to get these people to rise up against their rotten 10%, with the same indignation they show those (ahem) who are trying to HELP them.

I’m an optimist. Maybe over time this will actually be done. Then we’ll have new friends, literally in a sandbox, that we can live and trade with.

PS… I love Europe. I’m glad we have such a great ally and trading partner. Ditto for Japan. Between the 3 of us, there’s much proof that ‘blowback’ isn’t reason enough to fester in hatred. The world is too small.

80-90% of all peoples in all society’s can be reasoned with, and are concerned just about the well being of their families and friends.

It’s that last 10-20% that we need to be concerned about. That is, you have these islamists, neocons, and the more extreme liberals/ socialists that live in their own echo chambers and believe that only their point of view can be correct.

We are in danger of having our national agenda, that has been hijacked by neocons for the last several years, soon to be hijacked by the socialist-types (trade unions, liberals, entitlement advocates).

[Are you equating the NeoCon agenda of state sponsored torture and the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent people in Iraq and the destruction of 3,000 American troops (and tens of thousands of seriously wounded US soldiers) in an illegitimate war on the same level as the threat that "trade unions" might raise employee's standard of living? You are disgusting.

And when you bluster about entitlements, are you aware that you are speaking about Social Security and Medicare? Or are you just parroting off words that sound good when they're repeated by right wing bullshitters?]

I always said that the US system was by far the best because it has created centuries of stability.

At this moment I am jealous of the Parliamentary system where strong moderate sentiment of a majority of the populace isn’t subverted by a system that pushes all candidates, even those who are known moderate such as McCain, to one extreme or other in order to be acceptable to our primary election voters.

All of these attacks that try to associate McCain with the neocon-appeasing Bush, just kill me. McCain has been a champion of campaign-finance reform, a rational immigration policy, and even co-sponsored legislation to limit Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ability to get into trouble, by reducing their diversification into the very risky mortgage products that have led us to this financial catastrophe.

[In the areas that matter, McCain has not been a maverick, as Biden noted in detail. You can keep bringing up a few times when McCain voted back and forth on some issues, but 90% of his voting record has been with Bush's failed policies.]

Why do people blame deregulation of Wall Street, when it was FM & FM that created the liquidity for these toxic risky mortgage products with their implied backing by the United States government. The “regulated” European banks are getting into financial messes, as are US banks.

It was Democrats who defended the known-to-be-fraudulent FM & FM institutions against appropriate regulation, and who received many $100’s of thousands of dollars in political contributions; with Obama, Clinton, and Senator Dodd (chairman of banking committee) the highest beneficiaries of this dirty FM & FM special interest money.

[Not true, but the democratic congress isn't running for president. Obama is. And Obama is not working to deregulate FM/FM in the way McCain has worked his whole career lock step with Phil Gramm as "fundamentally a deregulator." Trying to copy paste McCain into an agent of regulatory reform is a lie and you know it. ]

McCain’s primary cause, which is to try to separate special interests and their money from the legislators who write and vote on our laws seems prescient, and exactly what we need.

[Except that McCain has made a 180 on all of his principles of 2000, and has turned into a Bush clone in order to get the Republican nomination. He is currently losing, and thank God for that. I only hope his Bush Machine doesn't tamper with votes enough to steal the election, as that would be extremely divisive to the country at a time when it needs strong leadership, not a 73 year old angry man riddled with cancer and propped up by a cheery but ignorant, fundamentalist wingnut. ]

And to the islamic idiots, you are forgetting one small detail. It’s their fucking country. You know, like “sovereign” stuff? What do you feel when some smug european laughs at your american ways? Now imagine when some neanderthal people get bombed just by being the way they are.

But it gets worse. The US is now “defending”, policing Iraq. Which means that US is defending people that have exactly medieval morals! Where’s your outrage at that? It’s been widely known how iraqi treat the woman and children.

Comanche,

I not only respect your line of thought, it also resonates with me. Still, I’d like to answer this:

Some on the left equate “fundamentalist” Muslims with “fundamentalist” Christians as though they were equally dangerous. I think this is superficial at best, and very probably dishonest. Do you think that the religion is really the *cause* of their behavior?

There are some people that do think so, but they are, in my opinion, letting their atheism go too far. I rather see religion as a fuel. But fires don’t need only fuel. They need oxygen and a match. Geopolitical tensions, weapons market, a lot of cash involved and collateral damage provide such. Religion is what drives people to define the “other” as “not human”, it allows that some extremists convince the population that they won’t be fighting people, but “animals”, and hence should not feel guilty towards simply kill them, but on the contrary, should be proud of it.

Interestingly enough, you can see this rationale in nelsoart’s comments. That’s what offends me about his thinking. He thinks he’s above these things because he belongs to the “civilization”, yet he has no problems in calling these people “animals” because they had the bad luck of being born in countries that are still in medieval times.

How about “criminal,” “thug,” or “villain”?

“Sith Lords”? :p

I feel the need to express that I’m grateful for Realtosh’s rants (tho’ frankly Realtosh, people were right when they said they went on a little too long…) I’m grateful because he echoes my sentiments pretty closely.

I’m quite accustomed to not responding on blogs like this when they turn political because I don’t see the need to be publicly flogged for merely possessing a conservative viewpoint. I was appreciative that there was less name calling of conservatives on your comments than I’ve experience elsewhere. Thanks!

If you start from the assumption that if someone doesn’t agree with you they are idiots (in my experience, the usual stance when discussions like this turn political) then you are, plainly and simply, a bigot. I’ve observed bigots on both ends of the spectrum, but I’d have to say, the left seems to have more of them.

BTW, Daniel, thanks for letting this “get out of hand.” (I contacted Daniel separately a few months ago because I differed from something political he had written, and he was a complete gentleman about it! As I recall, he even proposed a line a research. I wish I’d had the time to pursue it!) Anyway, thanks.

I’m a registered Republican, for pragmatic reasons: you can’t vote in our primary without declaring. But like a huge majority of Americans (including, apparently, Realtosh) I consider myself an independent, somewhat conservative, leaning a bit toward libertarianism. I, too, like McCain for his courage to do what he thinks is right. I don’t always agree with what that is, but I can get behind a man or woman who does what they think their conscience is telling them.

Question: I hear the word “fundamentalist” use pejoratively more and more. Some on the left equate “fundamentalist” Muslims with “fundamentalist” Christians as though they were equally dangerous. I think this is superficial at best, and very probably dishonest. Do you think that the religion is really the *cause* of their behavior? One’s religion, I suppose, may give rationale for behavior, but something tells me these people are acting out of some other place. If they didn’t feel justified to politicize their immoral actions, I think it is probable, they would be immoral in some other way. In other words, let’s stop glorifying them with the title “terrorist.” How about “criminal,” “thug,” or “villain”?

Comanche

I don’t make the rules, I just live here and call it as I see it.

As far as how they react… I’m not so concerned about that. I’m glad we have justice, no matter how it makes someone feel.

No one likes war. I don’t like nation building. We can’t afford it. Our response to terrorism has to be rethought. But that doesn’t mean bending over and picking up soap.

I fully agree. I still think that the former is a lot more wasteful than the latter, but it’s equally money-in-the-garbage can. I also agree with you when you say we must judge them accordingly to their morals and actions. That doesn’t mean however we can BOMB them, bokay?

These animals have no desire for political discourse… so they blow stuff up, including their own women and children.

This is completely ridiculous, it could only come from a person that has no idea whatsoever what he’s talking about. These people that kill, these animals, usually don’t know anything about civilization, about politics, about anything at all. They were taught medieval morals and how america is the “great satan”. And then planes come in and bomb their family, “proving” their thesis. Guess how these people react?

We don’t need to understand these people. They leave few options available as they don’t reason. Unfortunately, blowback occurs because they think nothing of operating from homes and churches and schools.

No one likes war. I don’t like nation building. We can’t afford it. Our response to terrorism has to be rethought. But that doesn’t mean bending over and picking up soap.

Some religions are better. We can and must judge. These fairy tales are used to recruit and justify terrorism.

Luckily, most muslims (and xtians) practice religion-lite. If their economy improves, they’d have skin in the game. They wouldn’t want to lose the good life. It’s not a pure solution, but it sure would help. Playboys and Britney Spears CDs would go a long ways to occupying young men.

Extreme liberals have nothing but excuses for these animals and most of them also blame America. Speaking about blowback, where was the indignation when Saddam killed and tortured so many?

I see a small group of fanatics that want to be relevant. They want attention. They have no idea what, but something. As Tony Robbins said in a recent lecture, everyone wants to be important. These animals have no desire for political discourse… so they blow stuff up, including their own women and children.

I’ve heard a few moderate muslims outright denounce these animals. I’ve yet to hear some liberals do the same.

I withdraw my comments then, the Heavenly Millennium is already here, and no-one told airmanchairman about it.

Rejoice!!