The Price of Freedom

[PacNW CE]

The United States of America is a country where the people have the power to affect change. This may sound cliché and unforgivingly patriotic, but it simply is the absolute truth, not an obscure and impossible ideal. We as a generation have arguably been through as much turmoil in the past year as the generation that witnessed December 7, 1941. We stand today at yet another potential crossroads in world history. The Executive branch of our government appears hell bent on invading Iraq. Simply put, this action will have lasting effects on our Country. A decision of this magnitude should rest with the people of the country, and fortunately in a democracy it does. Below is a hyperlink to each state's respective Senators and Congressional representatives. Click on your state and district link, and call them and leave a message with your thoughts on the subject. We put these people into political office to represent our beliefs and values. It is our responsibility as Americans to let them know what we think. Email is too easy to delete, simply make the 3 phone calls. I don't care if you are for the War or against the War, all I care about is the actions of my country reflecting the beliefs of it's citizens. Although utilitarian in essence, I personally would rather make this a decision of majority rule. I unrepentantly refuse to sit back and watch the future of our country decided by old men who will never see combat. I hope you would agree with that.

Senate
http://www.senate.gov/senators/senator_by_state.cfm
House
http://clerk.house.gov/members/index.php

I apologize for sending one more piece of mail to your inbox, but I feel the message justifies the imposition.
Forward this to whom you wish, or simply delete. I encourage the use of blind copy so as to protect the privacy of others.

[PacNW CE]

arguably, as in it is difficult to compare how impactful 9-11-01 is juxtoposed against 12-7-41. Different time, different world climate, different political ideals, etc...

[saturnotaku]

There are still a lot of WWII vets alive today. I'd be curious to ask them if they see any parallels/differences between then and now.

[LORD-eX-Bu]

Originally posted by saturnotaku
There are still a lot of WWII vets alive today. I'd be curious to ask them if they see any parallels/differences between then and now.

Yes, they probably would point out how ineffective this Administration has been, all talk, no action, they talk the talk, but don't walk the walk. They are full of hot air, hmm... reminds me of Gore, haha. Anyways, I kinda wish that Mcain would have won now, Bush doesn't do anything and takes too many month long "working" vacations. I don't like Gore either, so I guess I am screwwed. I am a conservative, a republican if you will, yes thats right, and I'm a pretty freakin' strong minded republican. It is too bad that Ronald Reagan is in the state that he is, I wish he were a little younger so that he could lead our country, way better than any of the Bush's. Reagan got things done, he was a great president. Hooah!

[DaveW]

The majority of people (including Americans) are against an attack on Iraq. So Bush isn't going to go in without giving the people a reason. Having Iraq launch a chemical or biological attack on a neighbouring country would be an ideal reason, but Saddam isn't that stupid. I heard on the radio today that the CIA has new information about Iraq's nuclear capability and that the government may disclose to the public what that is, that may or may not get enough public support.

I think Americans are just anxious to find someone to blame for 9/11. They lost Bin Laden so now they want to take out their frustrations on someone else - Saddam - who had very little to do with it. Iraq is still recovering from the last time we bombed the crap out of them, and despite of all Saddams posturing, it will be decades before he has long range ICBMs, by which time he will be long dead (Saddam is an old man now). The real people to blame for 9/11 are those who went down on the planes, you can't punish them (since they are already dead). Invading countries is the wrong way to deal with terrorism. The USA would be the first to complain if the UK had invaded Ireland over the IRA.

Saddam needs killing, he always has, but 9/11 and terrorism has nothing to do with it.


btw:

If he attacks Iraq, the oil price will explode..

Yeah, which will only help Bush's stocks in big oil companies!

[PsychoSy]

Originally posted by |TX|-LORD-EX-BU
Yes, they probably would point out how ineffective this Administration has been, all talk, no action, they talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.

Politics as usual, man. :)

Anyways, I kinda wish that Mcain would have won now, Bush doesn't do anything and takes too many month long "working" vacations. I don't like Gore either, so I guess I am screwwed.

Amen about McCain.
And you're not the only one screwed! :p

It is too bad that Ronald Reagan is in the state that he is, I wish he were a little younger so that he could lead our country, way better than any of the Bush's. Reagan got things done, he was a great president! [/B]

Oh, Reagan got things done, allright. His "Supply Side Economics" theory (which he originally scribled it out on Pizza Hut napkins while Gov of CA) was the equivilent of jumping off a 2-story building. The only difference is instead of getting a busted ass, we got a busted treasury! ;)

He was so good at his job that people seem to have forgotten that over 225 members of his Administration either quit, got fired, indicted, investigated, etc., especially Edwin Meese alone!! He was probed so many times that it made Jenna Jameson blush! :p And most of the Reagan supporters where either members of the Teamsters Union or the "Moral Majority" - the Religious Right, and that scares me. Why? Because I've learned early in line that any time when organized Religion and organized crime walks hand and hand, you had better hold on to your wallet and your civil liberties because they will flush them down the hopper if you don't as they are only interested in their rights, not yours.

I gotta quote you twice...

It is too bad that Ronald Reagan is in the state that he is...

Actually, if it wasn't for his Alzheimers, the only thing he'd be leading would be a homosexual, erotic dance with his buddy Oliver North as they shared bunks in Leavenworth with Edwin Meese recording it with an 8mm camera! :p :D

The "Reagan Era" Republicans liked one sound and one sound only - the faint clink! of coins rubbing together and their greedy little eyes saw many, many, many coins clinking together in our Treasury Dept. and went to town and robbing this country, and the taxpayers, of MILLIONS and MILLIONS of dollars and, fortunately for them, Reagan got sick. If he hadn't gotten sick, the American people would have given ALL of those crooks a different clink! to remember - a clink! made by the tumblers and the locklatch of a prison cell door. That's the kind of clink! that makes "Reagan Era" Republicans like Novak and Limbaugh piss their BVDs.

Speaking of Rush Limbaugh, here's something he said many moons ago during one of his Reagan-worshipping tirades on his show and I guarantee many Americans will remember this for the rest of their lives...

"Ronald Reagan is a man that we Americans owe a debt to in which we will never be able to repay."

*looks at the national debt*

Amen, Rush! Amen! We'll never pay that sucker!! :p :D

[The Baron]

Psycho, amen about Reagan... :p I'd rather have Clinton again... :rolleyes:

And on a side note, all of the Bush administration is for an invasion of Iraq except Colin Powell.

You know, the only guy with ANY MILITARY EXPERIENCE. :p

[LORD-eX-Bu]

Actually, if it wasn't for his Alzheimers, the only thing he'd be leading would be a homosexual, erotic dance with his buddy Oliver North as they shared bunks in Leavenworth with Edwin Meese recording it with an 8mm camera!

Well, I don't really agree with that Psycho. My father worked in the Reagan white house and also worked with Colonel Oliver North so we kinda know Ollie. You do have a point with the organized crime and religious stuff, but I think that overall Reagan did a good job. The man got things done, with all the corruption set aside, even tho I am the son of one of those people that was probed for Iran Contra, but anyways...I respect the man and his family.

=SSC=The Baron

George Bush Sr. was in the military, he fought in WWII, I think he was a hellcat pilot in the pacific theatre, even got shot down and rescued by a submarine. So Clinton isn't the only one who was in the military. Clinton greatly reduced the military and in my own opinion, sold America out. He let Hussein get away with so many things and when Sudan I think it was, offered Bin Laden to the US Government Bill Clinton said that he wasn't interested and let him get away. Bill Clinton sold the Army Rangers out in Somolia, sent them there for a good reason, to help out humanitarianly and take out the corrupt leaders there. Once he saw that if something wasn't done soon, that he would have 100 dead Special Operatoins in Mogadishu, so he sent the Navy and Marines in and they had a show of force. But that was it, with all the American Forces already there we could have gone in and cleared the area from the dictators, who caused 400,000 deaths due to starvation which they could have stopped. But Clinton instead sent everyone home, he sold them out. Now Somolia is worse off and is in total Anarchy. When Usama Bin Laden was en route from Sudan to Afghanistan, multiple times, the CIA knew exactly where UBL was and was tracking his transport, they were poised to take it out, but Bill Clinton let him slip away many times. All this after the 93' WTC Bombings. The only time Bill Clinton really did something was in the Balkans, but that didn't really help much, that killed more innocent than anything. And also, when his scandal broke and those two US Embasies were bombed. Then he decided to do something, but I still beleive that the only reason that he decided to launch those cruise missile attacks was to divert attention from himself. Bill Clinton let Yassir Arafat get away with so much, I am not saying that Isreal is innocent at all, but Bill Clinton signed away alot of the mideast to Arafat and other terrorists. Now they have grown stronger and it is impossible to stop them. Thanks to Bill Clinton, we have a real mess on our hands, and our economy is, for the most part, bad because of him. The recession did not start with Bush, towards the end of Bill Clinton's second term in office the economy was already going down. That was Clinton's fault. Bill Clinton pardoned alot of criminals and that one guy that he pardoned so his brother in law or something got money for it, but then now, George W. Bush is protecting those documents and blocking the probe into those things. I don't like Bush anymore. Oh yeah =SSC=The Baron, you forgot that Al Gore was in the military also. But I am in no way endorsing Gore. I don't agree with him, I thought I agreed with Bush but he is full of hot air. Politicians, they are all the same. Bah! I'll run for office some day, lol, jk.
:p

[outriding9800]

Reagan got things done, he was a great president. Hooah!

That really bothers me..

During the 2nd term ( and maybe part of the first ) the oval office was ran by Nancy Reagan who frequently consulted with astrologers. Now ANYBODY who consults with Miss Cleo i would think they have a problem with balancing their check book much less running the country.

Also am i the only one who remembers Reaganville ???

Bill Clinton pardoned alot of criminals

Well he wasn't the only Prez who pardoned alot of people.
Nixon's pardon was something like " Nixon will be pardoned for things he may have or may not have done ". WTF does that mean ??? Also Hoover pardoned alot more people than clinton.
I mean you dont pardon innocent people.

[The Baron]

Not talking about Clinton, not talking about Bush Sr., saying that the only guy with any actual military experience in Dubya's cabinet says no to Iraq.

We just need McCain. We need a good old fashioned constantly angry guy in the White House... none of this political wartime garbage, but an actual military man who doesn't rely on ex-CEOs for defense information.

[outriding9800]

i liked Mccain..

i think he was the best canidate the republicans had and still have.

even if this whole bin laden / sadam thing would never have happened i still think he would have been an excellent prez.

my only concern i had about him is if he would have any hostilities towards the goverment that held him captive. ( i wouldn't blame i dont think i would be able to ).

but now with all this stuff happening he would be my only pick of all the canidates. with gore being 2nd now. before i get flamed .. atleast he has seen a war up close even though he didn't fight in one atleast he might be able to get a feeling one enough is enough. i mean we don't want a pre wwII germany on our hands with todays weapons

[LORD-eX-Bu]

Even though I wasn't born yet when Nixon was president, from what I have read about him and learned, I don't like the guy one bit. I wonder how he ever got elected, total crook, I mean, c'mon, I really dislike this guy. It'd be cool if Mcain ran again for president on day, you know, before he gets too old or the cancer gets him. I doubt Mcain would hold hostility against the government that held him, my father worked with him also and I have several pictures of my dad at the white house with him and george bush sr. and ronal reagan also. Mcain is a great man, honest and he seems really sincere and down to earth.:)

[sbp]

Originally posted by PsychoSy
Oh, Reagan got things done, allright. His "Supply Side Economics" theory (which he originally scribled it out on Pizza Hut napkins while Gov of CA) was the equivilent of jumping off a 2-story building. The only difference is instead of getting a busted ass, we got a busted treasury! ;)Fact is the US had deficit spending well before Reagan ever became President. There was deficits well after he left office. Yet when the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994 the budget was soon balanced. Clinton on the other hand thought it couldn't be done. http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/pics/bleh.gif

It was Reagan who cut taxes for the American people that led to an economic boom. The previous President Carter left behind an economy in shambles-a nasty recession with massive inflation and high unemployment.

Reagan proposed cutting governmental spending but unfortunately the liberals in Congress refused to go along and in fact increased state spending significantly which led to massive deficits! They were like crack 'ho's unable to control themselves. :eek: So if someone wants to be fair, just as much blame has to be given to the Democrats running up the deficit. In fact more of the blame can be put on them. Reagan had to rebuilt America's demoralized and shaky military. Years of neglect due to the naive Jimmy Carter left the military in sad shape. The Reagan defense buildup showed the Soviet Union that the United States was willing to stand up for freedom. And it was due to that Reagan led the free world to a great triumph over the forces of bloodthirtsy communism which allowed a massive peace dividend to be reaped and sowed which has obviously paid off BIG time.

He was so good at his job that people seem to have forgotten that over 225 members of his Administration either quit, got fired, indicted, investigated, etc., especially Edwin Meese alone!! He was probed so many times that it made Jenna Jameson blush! :p And most of the Reagan supporters where either members of the Teamsters Union or the "Moral Majority" - the Religious Right, and that scares me. Why? Because I've learned early in line that any time when organized Religion and organized crime walks hand and hand, you had better hold on to your wallet and your civil liberties because they will flush them down the hopper if you don't as they are only interested in their rights, not yours.Everyone is still disgusted and in shock from the slimy Clinton administration. http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/smilies/disgusted.gif

"The Most Ethical Administration in History" -Clinton rotflmao! http://sbp777.homestead.com/files/embarassedlaugh.gif

The "Reagan Era" Republicans liked one sound and one sound only - the faint clink! of coins rubbing together and their greedy little eyes saw many, many, many coins clinking together in our Treasury Dept. and went to town and robbing this country, and the taxpayers, of MILLIONS and MILLIONS of dollars and, fortunately for them, Reagan got sick. If he hadn't gotten sick, the American people would have given ALL of those crooks a different clink! to remember - a clink! made by the tumblers and the locklatch of a prison cell door. That's the kind of clink! that makes "Reagan Era" Republicans like Novak and Limbaugh piss their BVDs.That applies to the Clinton 90's. The internet dot bomb went off, CEO's screwing people over BIG time started then and Clintonian crooks going to jail.

Some people will never understand the essence of Reagan. These are the same folks that scratched their heads in wonder because it made so little sense to them, when Reagan gave the "evil empire" speech and said "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" (referring to the Berlin Wall). They also got their panties in a bunch when Reagan called the Soviet Union what it was-an Evil Empire.

No presidency is perfect but some are better than others. Reagans presidency was one of the most successful and the most successful of the over 50 years. The free world was led to a stunning victory over the hegemonistic Soviet Union, there was an economic boom and Reagan ideas still influence. And who made Americans proud to be Americans? That it was okay to stand up for your convictions and be patriotic? Oh yeah . . . all that was Reagan. :D

[Quinn1981]

Clinton is the biggest joke for a prez ever. hes a total crook and screwed the economy over long before he left office. he also screwed the armed forces over by taking their money to give away free stuff. (doesnt everyone know democrats give away free stuff for votes?) ok, rant off...

nobody should have a reason to be worried about sadam. we kicked his ass royally before and can do it again. all he has is the power to make suprise attacks. if the world is smart, everyone will unite to get rid of these crazies hiding behind religious crusades and such so future generation wont have to deal with a united islamic crazy military.

if they let this go, we will suffer for it. these people must be distroyed at all costs.

also, we control the government. it all starts in local government. if people would get more involved at the local level, we would have a better system and have real reps for the people.

just my opinions mind you. :p

[sbp]

The first post is about the War Power Act. This is an argument that has been going on years through various Presidencies. Clinton ignored it, as did Reagan. That said it would be wise to get the support of Congress before proceeding.

About Iraq: I've been pondering this may be a ploy to get Hussein to behave and allow the inspectors back in. I'm not the only one who is thinking this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27698-2002Sep2.html

As for McCain, he has sadly taken a turn for the left. :/

[outriding9800]

That applies to the Clinton 90's. The internet dot bomb went off, CEO's screwing people over BIG time started then and Clintonian crooks going to jail.

You are wrong on that one.. the head of the sec during the clinton era was trying to get safe gaurds in place to prevent things like the enron / worldcom disaster.



Reagan proposed cutting governmental spending

I saw an interview on PBS with Reagans head financal advisor
he told reagan that we could not afford the Star Wars project and reagan looked at him and said yes we can.


It was Reagan who cut taxes for the American people that led to an economic boom

Can you say trickle down economic ??? anybody that is not in the top 1% does not benifit from this.



Fact is the US had deficit spending well before Reagan ever became President. There was deficits well after he left office. Yet when the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994 the budget was soon balanced. Clinton on the other hand thought it couldn't be done

Actually if you looked at Clintons plan you would have seen that in 10-15 years time the defict would have been eliminated.



Everyone is still disgusted and in shock from the slimy Clinton administration.

You for got to mention Reagans affair with his first wife...
The prez is not elected to be our moral leader that is what religion is for. Clinton did nothing different than Reagan did so why are you holding him to a different standard ??

[Quinn1981]

most americans agree we should go to war, so it shouldnt be a problem. but if americans as a whole didnt agree, in this case, it must be overriden. the US spends billions to baby sit those freaks over there, we need to stop wasting money and put it to good use.

[sbp]

How did Nixon become president? In 1972 he was running against George McGovern. What a choice-a crook or a shmuck. :o

Originally posted by |TX|-LORD-EX-BU
Yes, they probably would point out how ineffective this Administration has been, all talk, no action, they talk the talk, but don't walk the walk. They are full of hot air, hmm... reminds me of Gore, haha. Anyways, I kinda wish that Mcain would have won now, Bush doesn't do anything and takes too many month long "working" vacations. I don't like Gore either, so I guess I am screwwed. I am a conservative, a republican if you will, yes thats right, and I'm a pretty freakin' strong minded republican. It is too bad that Ronald Reagan is in the state that he is, I wish he were a little younger so that he could lead our country, way better than any of the Bush's. Reagan got things done, he was a great president. Hooah! Afghanistan was no action? :confused:

Its unreasonable to always expect things to be immediately done amigo. If there was all action, all the time, there would be those who would worry and say why rush into things.

Al Gore was in the military. He was a newspaper reporter keep far behind the lines and had guards. Its cause his daddy was a US Senator who voted against civil rights. click here (http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/pics/dead_Gore.jpg)

[sbp]

Originally posted by outriding9800
You are wrong on that one.. the head of the sec during the clinton era was trying to get safe gaurds in place to prevent things like the enron / worldcom disaster.When companies basically bribed ranking members of certain oversight committees to prevent FASB recommendations from being implemented, two of the ranking members were Lieberman and Dodd.

Can you say trickle down economic ??? anybody that is not in the top 1% does not benifit from this.This old tiresome argument was regurgitated for Bush's tax cut. Here's a new flash: the top 1% or so pay a BIG percentage of the income taxes. So if there's an income tax cut across the boards like Bush's, then people will get the cut according to percentage paid.

And its funny cause my parents and other working class folks benefited from the lowered tax rates.

[outriding9800]

And its funny cause my parents and other working class folks benefited from the lowered tax rates.

Well than you were one of the lucky ones..

all i remember is my dad being laid off for 18 months and living off of p&b sandwiches



This old tiresome argument was regurgitated for Bush's tax cut. Here's a new flash: the top 1% or so pay a BIG percentage of the income taxes. So if there's an income tax cut across the boards like Bush's, then people will get the cut according to percentage paid.

Well you can look at it this way. Do you think the top 1% could have made all that money in the Soviet Union ??? uhh no. Those people where in an environment where it was possible to make that kind of money and you feel sorry for them for having to pay extra for that environment ??

[DaveW]

I think the percentage tax you pay should increase in a linear manner, so that it is impossible for anyone to earn over 1 million a year (e.g. those earning 10 million a year, pay 90% tax). The only people that would make mad is the thieving CEOs of large companies, and it would generate so much extra revenue as to fix the countries budget problems, or maybe they would stop giving themselves pay increases and start paying their employees more, which would have the same effect.

[PacNW CE]

Originally posted by sbp


And its funny cause my parents and other working class folks benefited from the lowered tax rates.

Thats great. My wife got laid off, and we are borrowing from our Schwab account that is worth roughly half of what it was worth prior to GWB. The Pacific NW economy is the worst in the nation, and it is getting worse by the day. I don't know about y'all, but I'd rather give back the 350 bones so my wife could have her job back again.

I remember back when Bush won the election, my mantra was"how much damage can one man do in 4 years?" Unfortunately, the answer to that question is a hell of a lot.

[DaveW]

Read some good comments by former head of MI5 (British secret service):

http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/09/04/m15.terrorism/index.html

[sbp]

Its never pleasant hearing about the hard times that befalls folks.

Originally posted by outriding9800
Well you can look at it this way. Do you think the top 1% could have made all that money in the Soviet Union ??? uhh no. Those people where in an environment where it was possible to make that kind of money and you feel sorry for them for having to pay extra for that environment ?? The leaders of the Soviet Union lived it up like pigs while everyone else was poor and had no freedom. Wonderful. And there was no middle class there.

Originally posted by PacNW CE
Thats great. My wife got laid off, and we are borrowing from our Schwab account that is worth roughly half of what it was worth prior to GWB. The Pacific NW economy is the worst in the nation, and it is getting worse by the day. I don't know about y'all, but I'd rather give back the 350 bones so my wife could have her job back again.

I remember back when Bush won the election, my mantra was"how much damage can one man do in 4 years?" Unfortunately, the answer to that question is a hell of a lot. The economy started going south during the 2nd half of 2000. GWB wasn't president then. No matter who became president there would have been a recession starting in March 2001. The tax cut didn't cause the recession. The tax cut allowed people to keep more of what they worked hard for. It is after all the people's money and they earned it not government. You gentlemen are not against that are you? :eek:

[sbp]

{drinks a beer while awaiting PsychoSy's reply}
Taking an awfully long time there buddy. http://sbp777.homestead.com/files/wink2.gif

Guess he took off.-->http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/smilies/ZZZsleep.gif

Maybe tomorrow http://home.earthlink.net/~sbp777/smilies/shrug.gif