"Aid and comfort to the enemy"

I really am not trying to incite anyone, Fint, but that kind of thinking seems just a little jingoistic.

First, one has to define just who "the enemy" is, and then, what constituted "aid and comfort".

I know, you have been fairly specific just who the enemy is, in your opinion. Sometimes I feel that I must fit that definition, since there are differences in our philosophies. But, in asking questions and trying to understand how other people think, I do not consider myself giving "aid and comfort" to anyone.

You see, for example, neither Sen. Kennedy or Mr. Moore signed the order that sent people to the M.E. As they must take responsibility for what they say and do, so must the President, right or wrong. Now, I have posted earlier, I think that Afghanistan was the correct thing to do, since direct ties could be made. However, the follow-up has even become questionable as to whether we should have gone after Iran rather than Iraq. I do not have an answer for this. But, I do agree that, since we broke it, we bought it and we had better see it to its conclusion, one way or another.

The best I can do is conclude that our national policy in the Middle East is incomplete; like a puzzle with some of the parts missing. Whether there is a complete or equitable solution is questionable. We are streched thin as it is; another hot spot and we just might meet our breaking point. Our resources are not unlimited.

I am not trying to pick an argument; just point out that the world may be a little more complicated (but just as dangerous) as you paint it. We must plan our political and military moves carefully so we do not waste our assets.

In conclusion, I think a lot of the folks you place on the "left" see themselves as Americans first, and are convinced that they also have valid points of view. It does no one any good to dismiss other ideas with flippant comments that add neither understanding or tolerance for our differences. We are all flawed, even those who lead. No one has a corner on perfection, at least not in this life. If a person comes up with a cogent idea, even if it runs contrary to my thinking, I will consider it as long as it is presented in a logical, respectful manner. That is all I ask.

And that is the way I have tried to present my beliefs..with courtesy, logic and respect.

Of course you know the conservatives on this board debate honestly and do not use multiple identities....But, thank you. I consider comparison to Mul as a compliment. He seems well-read, well informed, and can certainly take anything you guys can dish out. The big difference is that Mul still seems to believe as I did at first....that the lefty posters here are just misguided and if armed with the truth...they would change their viewpoint. Sadly, now I believe that they already know that most of their posts are innaccurate misrepresentations conceived to fool the ignorant masses ....but that the end justifies the means.

350-It seems that one only needs a fraction of a brain to debate with you.

I really like the argument on here that "artists are paid to sing and dance and should shut their mouths about all else", as if they've been commanded by gun-point to entertain us. They aren't paid to entertain, you choose to pay them because they have entertained you.

"Why can't they all just shut their damn mouths and act/sing?"

Because artists are people with opinions, and art is as political as it gets. So, if you're a true believer in Mr Bush, I suggest you turn off your radio, turn off your TV, and stop going to movies, because the "big-time Hollywood actors" and your favorite musicians are not in the "mainstream" and most likely do not support this administration. Rock on.

oh, and don't forget their wonderful propensity to call those that disagree assclowns :D

On this one narrow point, on this BBS in particular, I think any observer would have to agree - the ones that seem to flood the board with FNC talking-points and slanderous RNC rumors about the other side have typically been the conservatives.

They have tried to do it in overt ways, encouraging others to post up the latest headline from DrudgeReport or talking-points from OReilly factor, etc.

And one side seems more inclined to arrogant and bawdy tactics like continuing to post the latest muck even though last weeks muck has been proven wrong by just about everyone, when they lack the courage to argue "intelligently"

Do a search in the past few months and you'll confirm it. Trying to confuse everyone is a tactic unique to one side here - which is more than a little ironic.