Nov 7th, 2004, 07:00 AM
Burbank, you have an amzing ability to conveniently know when I'm being sarcastic, only when you don't disagree with me. If you honestly believe I think England "a lesser country," than you don't actually read my posts. I have made it a point to overdo my "dislike" of foreigners here, as somewhat of an alter-ego to deliberately irritate very specific members on these threads, because I enjoy their comeback insults. If you haven't been able to read into that, allow me to tell you who they are. AChimp, FS and Dole. I hold absolutely nothing against Canada, Netherlands (FS may not even be from there), and absolutely not England, which I have admired and studied since I was in 8th grade (20 years ago).
As for my arguments, I honestly do not believe I am as right wing as you seem to communicate in your arguments with me. I dislike being made out as Pat Buchanan, or John Lithgow in Footloose, as much as I'm sure you would dislike being compared to Michael Moore. My beliefs are very far left of the examples you use against me. But, thats the nature of argument on these boards... and don't say it's not, because when I first explored beyons General Blabber in December 2002, I tried stating my position clearly, to no avail. I was immediately verbally assaulted with a barrage of Right Wing Hitlereque comparisons, which as you've seen, I could give a shit about. I can take a beating just as well as I can dish it out.
So in an effort to clearly state my position more clearly, one final time:
I am fundamentally much more libertarian than I am Republican. Where I share some views with the Republican Party, my beliefs are much more akin to the Libertarian platform. I also consider myself to be a Conststutional constructionist.
Why, then, would I not have voted for Michael Badnarik?
1. It might sound cliche, but my vote would have been wasted. The U.S. is, as unfortunate as it may seem, a two party country.
2. I approve of the job George Bush has done. I believe, whether anyone here likes it or not, that he has done an excellent job in reclaiming the economy post 9-11. I believe he has done a great job in encouraging small business as well as large. He has a well rounded, and realistic position on economic issues currently facing America. He will, in my opinion, continue to encourage entrepeneurialism and smaller local/regional businesses to form, grow and function. I do not believe the Democratic party is any longer a party that can realistically make this statement. Small business is the foundation for this country, and always has been. Democrats, as far as I can interpret from their very poorly communicated message, will destroy these small businesses by taxing them out of existence, as the fight for the "working man."
3. I believe we were right in attacking Iraq. How can a Libertarian possibly believe that? a.) Because of the same organization many democrats fall back on so easily. The United Nations was placed in charge of controlling Iraq. They failed so miserabley, it can not be posted in one message. Everything that organization did, in regards to Iraq, was in direct contradiction to themselves. They issued Resolution after Resolution after Resolution. They issued ultimatums. They negotiated. They threatened. THEY repeatedly comlained that resolutions were being violated. In situations, such as these, there MUST be consequence for actions and crimes commited by countries that behave like this, or we risk much greater deterioration of regions, and a larger scale threat in the long run. Were there WMDs? I don't know, and neither does anyone on these boards. I personally believe there were and they were moved to Syria. That is one opinion, and happens in my mind, to be the most reasonable. Maybe there werent. Regardless, there was intent to acquire WMDs. Do I believe those weapons would be used on the United States. Nope - I honestly dont. But, they would have been used on Iran and/or Israel. The results of that would have been horrific, and launched this world into a war much larger than this. Do I believe Iraq knowingly harbored terrorists and/or funded their organizations. Yes and yes. Saddam Hussein stood much to benefit by these organiztions harming this country as well as Europe, and turning attention elsewhere. Beyond that, he was a complete megalomaniac, and hated Europe and America.
Had the United Nations acted as a united front, and followed through with consequences of these repeated 16 UN Resolutions, we may have been able to avrt this war all together. But, in my opinion, bribery, corrupt business deals, and animosty of each other caused various countries to balk, and none to actually address the issue at hand. As for the members that did balk - France, Russia and Germany - they were number 1, 2 and 3, respectively, countries that had the largest revenues from deals with Iraq, most of which were in violation of sanctions. The United States was number 48. Do I want to be in Iraq - nope. D I believe we did the right thing - absolutely.
4. I have various issues I cannot support that the Libertarian party believes. For instance I do believe in the legalization of drugs. However, I believe legalization of narcotics is absolutely wrong. I also believe it is necesary to keep certain federal programs and departments in place, and that the Conststution can not be taken literally in the sense of Defense and roads being the only responsibility of federal government.
________________________________
I believe the current state of the Democratic party has a more extremist view to the left of center than the Republican party does to the right.
So you can continue to throw names out as often as you'd like when you want to argue, and I will return with equally, if not greater overblown statements. But, the fact is - there are manymore non-religious, non-"redneck" people like me thatvoted than you care to admit, and it's unfortunate you have as negative a view of Americans as you do.
|