"Conservative" Freedom?

[Rodeo]

You're talking about this guy, right? The one that used to blame "the libs," and is now blaming the military, for Bush's incompetence ... this is the guy you're talking about right?

Originally posted by RoninLB
fwiw.. if the military can't figure out a definative course in Iraq before Bush leaves he's going to be pissed off. If he's pissed off on what the military has done to his legacy going into his last yr then no telling what he'll do to straighte'n things out for history.

[hunter914]

Originally posted by RoninLB

fwiw.. if the military can't figure out a definative course in Iraq before Bush leaves he's going to be pissed off. If he's pissed off on what the military has done to his legacy going into his last yr then no telling what he'll do to straighte'n things out for history.

Easily the dumbest thing I've ever seen on OT, or perhaps we'll ever see.

Just imagine a nation chock full of "it's not my fault, someone else didn't figure out a 'definative course'" pass the buck, shift the blame RoninLB's.

Oh, that's right, we already do:

* iraq. instead of the Commander in Chief taking responsibility for 2500 dead soldiers, it's the dumba$$ Military who got it all wrong

* instead of parents responsible for the sacred responsibility of teaching religion to their children, let's have schools do it

just name a policy and look at how the neocons shift blame.

pathetic from a once-proud party.

Everyone says why don't the "good" Moslems rise up against their terrorist kin? I agree. Why don't good Conservatives rise up against their terrorist neocon faction?

[Nathans_Dad]

Ok, I've just got to say this...

Anyone notice how Hunter 914's posts almost always follow Rodeo's posts and either completely support what Rodeo says or say exactly the same thing?

I think those two are evil twins or something...

[Superman]

I think you guys need to consider Ron's posts more carefully. He's not an eloquent writer, but his ideas are solid. Even though I often disagree with him, his notions are to be considered with some care.

In the note you guys have criticized, he is suggesting that Dubya might do something drastic before leaving office, so that history books don't pin him with a "Most Damaging of All American Presidents" label. Ron is predicting that Dubya may "pass the buck" which, according to my observation........is a very likely scenario.

This "president" has done nothing but screw up everything he touches. Then blame everyone else. That has been his modus operandi all his bumbling life. Face it. We put a screwup in the White House. An arrogant dolt. And the world knows it. And our children are suffering as a consequence, and will continue to suffer.

The only good thing that will come of this is that the nation will wake up from its hypnotic trance and remember why we do not put greedy anarchists in charge of our government.

[techweenie]

Originally posted by Superman
I think you guys need to consider Ron's posts more carefully. He's not an eloquent writer, but his ideas are solid. Even though I often disagree with him, his notions are to be considered with some care.

In the note you guys have criticized, he is suggesting that Dubya might do something drastic before leaving office, so that history books don't pin him with a "Most Damaging of All American Presidents" label. Ron is predicting that Dubya may "pass the buck" which, according to my observation........is a very likely scenario.

This "president" has done nothing but screw up everything he touches. Then blame everyone else. That has been his modus operandi all his bumbling life. Face it. We put a screwup in the White House. An arrogant dolt. And the world knows it. And our children are suffering as a consequence, and will continue to suffer.

It's been pointed out -- and I think with some accuracy -- that Dubya is obsessed with doing everything differently from the way his predecessors -- both Clinton and GHWB did them: no negotiation in the ME, no international consensus-building, no modifying plans to suit changing circumstances. It's not a way to run a McDonald's, let alone a country.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally posted by Rodeo
You're talking about this guy, right? The one that used to blame "the libs," and is now blaming the military, for Bush's incompetence ... this is the guy you're talking about right?

No, no, no... not that guy; the guy out looking for his "godless bible", penned by one of our founding fathers, Mr. RPKESQ.

Anyway, on to RoninLB's statement. I can't believe you Bush bashers didn't pick up on this the way he intended. Supe appears to be the only one perceptive enough to catch this.

What does any President most dearly want to leave behind? A legacy of some kind. A positive one. At this point, history will no doubt paint Dubya in a less than favorable light. We could get into the usual why's (insert rant about anti-American liberal press, etc.) but that is a topic for another day.

So what do you do if you are in his shoes? Since you are already going down in history as a bumbling dolt will a spectacularly failed Mid East strategy, do you really have anything to lose? He could "stay the course", believing it will eventually work out. It might, but at this rate that will be several administrations down the road. He won't get credit for it. The ADD challenged masses will forget the groundwork he laid. The dumb schmuck sitting in the oval office at that time will be the hero, whether he has done anything to straighten out this mess or not. Not acceptable if you are Dubya. So do you go for broke? Pull out all the stops in one last desperate attempt to pull it together and bomb them into liking us and getting along with each other? Think about it. Far from one of the dumbest things ever posted here, RoninLB's remark shows a great deal of thought; a great deal of insight into what may drive men's actions at the Presidential level.

[speeder]

Maybe, but to pin the failure of Iraq on the military or the responsibility for turning it around is stupendous. The military does not make policy in this country. We're not the f#%king Philippines.

The tragic fiasco of Iraq is the sole responsibility of the leaders who conned the American public and congress into invading based on a false threat and then grossly miscalculated the results of that action. They thought that it would be a cakewalk, that the Iraqis would take over right away, etc., etc...

Everything they thought was wrong, and the vast majority of respected ME scholars predicted correctly what actually did happen. No, this is a story of a fringe group within the USA getting absolute power due to a tragic act of terrorism, and using that illegitimate power to ruin at least two countries for the foreseeable future while hugely enriching their corporate donors. Arrogance, ignorance, incompetence, hubris; if ever a bunch of crooks did not deserve a break from history, it's these guys. And they won't get one.

Oh yeah, one more thing: If any future President can salvage anything from today's failed policies, he (or she) deserves full, 100% credit for it. No leader has ever inherited a pile of Texas cow ***** like this loser is going to leave in 2008. Of course it won't be as bad as stealing the "w"s off of keyboards.

[techweenie]

Originally posted by speeder
Maybe, but to pin the failure of Iraq on the military or the responsibility for turning it around is stupendous. The military does not make policy in this country.

----

If any future President can salvage anything from today's failed policies, he (or she) deserves full, 100% credit for it. No leader has ever inherited a pile of Texas cow ***** like this loser is going to leave in 2008. Of course it won't be as bad as stealing the "w"s off of keyboards.

The tragedy is that everything that happened in Iraq was foreseeable. GHWBush foresaw it. Top generals foresaw it. Many 'experts' foresaw it. The people we most trusted to make final decisions for us (remember 'war will be the last resort?') could not or would not foresee it. They failed the 2600+ Americans (so far) who died and the 20,000 who were wounded holding on to the remains of Iraq.

The 3 trillion + added Federal deficit that will be inherited from this administration is daunting, let alone the mess that is our international reputation and standing. And then there's the damage to constitutional rights... the battle to reverse that is just starting.

[RPKESQ]

So very true. I love how all the French bashers want to show how France is a complete failure. But look at the ***** they have themselves!

[RPKESQ]

Well now, let us review some statements made here by Jeff Higgins:
1) “I have not heard of this re-written Bible”
2) “Must be a pretty thin tome.”
3) “That's exactly what I thought; you are making it up as you go”
4) “Time to put up or shut up, buckwheat. Show us this "godless bible".”
5) “Post the link to your godless bible if you can. I suspect it does not exist. If, perchance it does, I suspect you are wildly off base with your interpretation of what it means, and its significance in the religious beginnings of our country.”
6) “Hmmm... Another troll bites the dust? Couldn't put up; wouldn't shut up, now conspicuous in his absence. Must still be looking for that godless bible.”


Now please notice how Jeff admits to his ignorance concerning the subject matter, then dismisses the evidence before he even sees it, does no research on his own, then declares that obviously I must have interpreted the evidence wrong (because it doesn’t fit in his narrow closed minded world) and finally deceives himself that somehow with his blustering ignorant stance he has “won” some kind of victory.

All typical responses from someone who “knows” and would not be bothered by anything that upsets his tiny little worldview. Jeff, you were even given a big hint when IROC posted: “Actually it is true. Read Thomas Jefferson's well published thoughts on the subject of the separation of church and state.

To quote:

"Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.
We have solved ... the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries."
-- Thomas Jefferson"



But did you open your eyes and look? Of course not, you’re blinded by the “common knowledge” and “firm beliefs” that make you such a horse’s ass.

Well, here it is. I really was wishing that you had more gray cells connected than you really do and you would try some research on your own for once. But, alas, you must be true to your limitations. The bible I spoke about is called the “Jefferson Bible”, written by guess who and has all reference to Jesus’ divinity and miracles omitted (no divinity = no god or godless, for the slow ones out there).
So of course Jeff will spin his song and dance about misinterpretation (like he would know, not having studied any of this before) and insults, forgetting how Jeff himself provided evidence that they are accurate.

[Superman]

RPKESQ, perhaps you'd like to start a new thread entitled "Jeff Higgins is a Big Fat _______" That way you could discuss the topic that seems dear to you without messing with thread regarding other topics.

[trekkor]

From my quick search, Richard, it appears that the Jefferson Bible is only a commentary on the four gospels that he edited to his liking.

Certainly not the whole Bible as you eluded.
I can not imagine any sane person trying to do what you tried to convince us of.


Oh, and you're forgetting something.
Where's your "natural" explaination? Tell us.



KT

[Moneyguy1]

Presidents and other CEO types have one thing in common...the ability to "spin". Assume that GWB leaves office without a solution to the ME. If a future solution is found, GWB will say that his successor followed the blueprint that GWB and his administration laid out and that is why there was success. If there is no solution, and things get worse. GWB and friends will say that the successor did not follow the blurprint, and that is why they failed. A true "win-win" "spin-spin" solution.

The question really becomes precisely what can an administration actually take credit for? How much that credit is taken for is outside the sphere of influence? And, can an administration that is out of office take credit for something that happens on the next president's watch?

I would love to see an administration 'fess up when they make an error. People like candor. I would love to see less emphasis on fearmongering and a little more constructive action take place. I cannot buy into this "fight them over there instead of over here" rhetoric anymore. Not when it is contradicted by admissions that "sleeper cells" exist here and we do not know who or where, and the borders are as porous as they are.

How much should we actually believe?

[Jeff Higgins]

KT is right on; The Jefferson Bible is no more than his attempt to comment on, and tie together, the four Gospel accounts of Jesus' life. It excludes the Old Testament and the Epistles. It was in no way a significant commentary on the religious climate under which our nation was formed, as claimed by RPKESQ. Another wild miss-interpretation. And, yes, I am familiar with it. I was just hoping you had something better. Combined with your assertion that Protestantism and Lutheranism are seperate "religions", your ignorance of religion is painfully obvious. Don't let that slow you down though...

[nostatic]

Originally posted by Superman
I think you guys need to consider Ron's posts more carefully. He's not an eloquent writer, but his ideas are solid. Even though I often disagree with him, his notions are to be considered with some care.

Agreed. I rarely agree with Ron, but will read his posts and ponder them as I respect his opinion. In this case we actually are in agreement. I don't think that GW had a very good "plan" and now he worries about how he will be viewed historically. It requires a massive ego to run for POTUS. And that ego doesn't want to be tanished after losing a chance to do anything.

I fear what powerful men with raging egos will do when they feel cornered...

[Nathans_Dad]

Originally posted by nostatic
I fear what powerful men with raging egos will do when they feel cornered...

They ban Mul??

[RPKESQ]

Jeff, of COURSE you knew about it before. What a liar! Any reading and indepth research of jefferson's writtings will instantly show the position he had. Typical closed minded response.

And as for Trekkor. One more time. Since homosexuality exists in many different species, it is by difinition, natural. Only the bigots and religious nuts think otherwise.

[Moneyguy1]

Come on Rick....You can do better than that!!

[Rodeo]

If you guys are right about RoninLB's post, then I take it back. But I just read it again and, as the Spaniard Montoya said to Fezzini, "I don't think it means what you think it means."

.. if the military can't figure out a definative course in Iraq before Bush leaves he's going to be pissed off. If he's pissed off on what the military has done to his legacy going into his last yr then no telling what he'll do to straighte'n things out for history.

.. if the military can't figure out a definative course in Iraq .... The military is supposed to fighre out a "definative course?" I don't think so.

If he's pissed off on what the military has done to his legacy ... If this refers to Bush PERCEPTION of what the military has done to his legacy, I guess it could make sense. If Ronin is saying that Bush is even more out of touch with reality than we think he is, and that he will go nu'clear because of what he believes the military has done to his legacy, we should get him out of office now. There's not a moment to lose.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally posted by Rodeo
If Ronin is saying that Bush is even more out of touch with reality than we think he is, and that he will go nu'clear because of what he believes the military has done to his legacy, we should get him out of office now. There's not a moment to lose.

That's how I read it. Even as a Bush supporter, I see the potential for this. Again, I'm kinda surprised the actual Bush bashers seem a little soft on this.

Originally posted by RPKESQ
Jeff, of COURSE you knew about it before. What a liar! Any reading and indepth research of jefferson's writtings will instantly show the position he had. Typical closed minded response.

You claimed to have a "godless bible" that was indicative of the general religious climate of the day. Jefferson's work has never been recognized as such. He never claimed it was. It was merely an attempt to chronicle Jesus' life by tying Gospel stories together. Modern theoligans are still doing this; they are great study aids. The Gospels are not necessarily chronological; while that does not detract from their message, some folks get hung up on that. It does make them somewhat hard to follow until one becomes familiar with them.

Jefferson's position was certainly one of the seperation of church and state. No one argues that. The sticking point is the nature of that seperation. Modern revisionists would have us believe it was to protect the state from the church. The opposite was in fact true. The real intent was to protect the church from the state. Colonists had experienced state meddling in church affairs accross the pond. They did not want that here.

So that is where we started this argument, after derailing Supe's thread. We have come full circle. You are still wrong. All of your childish ranting has gone nowhere. No one really wants to hear it polluting these threads, either. I have taken the liberty of creating a thread purely for the purpose of railing on me. Please feel free to use it. It's pretty easy to find.