What president is advertising? Who said anything about ridding Terrorism, Fight it, but not rid of it...
For this I must laugh!
As a 46-year-old male, who was a Nixon supporter in my youth, I must agree with Keillor. I think that Pat Buchanan's new book "Where the Right Went Wrong" makes many of the same points.
The problem with being led by the fanatical fringe is that it pushes the pendulum beyond what is prudent, and makes for a more radical swing the other direction. If people do not think that the pendulum theory of politics is valid, look at what the liberals did to their party in the 60's.
In embracing and promoting the lunatic fringe of any movement, the danger grows that it's not based on solid principles.
Living in the times that we do, it's easy to get blinded to the long-term effects of our actions. What President Bush is advertising is that he is going to do away with terrorism. Does anyone believe that?
What are the chances of one person killing hundreds or thousands of people in the future if America continues towards more and more conservative values? The chances are exactly the same as if America becomes more and more liberal. To believe that this, or any President of The United States of America can make us safe is folly. The fewer pissed off people we have around the world, the lesser the chances of widespread terrorism. To make this a "Crusade" is to do exactly what the lunatic fringe of Islam, or any other group wants.
Believe it or not, it really does make sense to keep the gap between the richest countries of the world and the poorest countries to a minimum. There will always be differences, and we will have more, but if we are to hold to the "Christian Values" that the majority believe in, in America, we can't ignore the effects of our own actions, or in-action.
Neseattle
Red carpets for two, s'il vous plait.
Oh do shut up. Even if redistribution were desireable (and it's not), if the United Nations cannot manage an Oil for Food programme for one country humanely, what in the name of GOD makes you think that anyone can do the kind of global redistribution of which you speak?
Secondly, most of the Al Qaeda leadership are sons of privilege, not poverty.
The real answer is for 3rd world countries to adopt policies which will enhance free markets and economic growth. There are even signs that the North Koreans get this. Which makes them marginally more intelligent than the Rockefeller Republican or the liberal Democrat.
Ivan
What president is advertising? Who said anything about ridding Terrorism, Fight it, but not rid of it...
For this I must laugh!
Now go play on the freeway....
Pat Buchanan and Garrison Keillor must be considered great minds there in la la land. Go drink some more kool aid.
Welcome to FR.
Uh, did you FORGET about the fact that it was Osama bin Laden that DECLARED WAR on US??Your buddy Bill Clintoon - 'the Centrist' - ignored his attacks for the most part.
- 1993 the first WTC attack - a bombing
- 1998 the attack on the embassy in South Africa
- 2000 the USS bombed, killing 17 military personnel
Bush is fighting the terrorists and they are being KILLED in Iraq and Afghanistan.HOPEFULLY, we won't have to fight them HERE like Israel does on a daily basis .....
Give me proof that if we stop fighting or cave to the demands of the terrorist how this will stop terrorist attacks around there world or prevent them here on our own soil?
Arab countries for years when attacked by the fanatics of Islam have caved given into demands for ransom or made changes to their societies to "keep the peace". They still get attacked their people still get kidnapped. Appeasement does not work.
What people are still failing to understand, is that this is a battle of Idealogy. It is the supportors of fanatical islam vs the western world. They will not rest until they are either eliminated from this planet or they have achieved their goal of converting the world to Islam and eliminating the infidel. This has been their goal for hmm lets see over 1000 years. This is the battle in our time. So you can see where I am not ready to dismiss 1000 years of history in belief that appeasement will bring us peace. If you can prove me otherwis, I would be intrested to see it.
Many many of these "poorest" countries have serious problems that need to be fixed before throwing money at them will do any good.
Anyone that sticks their head in the sand refusing to acknowledge that the worlg has grown smaller in the last fifty years (Pat Buchannon) is the lunatic fringe.
Yeah, right. It's the rest of the world, and half the U.S., that is being led by the "lunatic fringe" on the left. You think it's "prudent" for us not to piss off that element, even though they will only be mollified by capitulation. Please go away.
Oh, and I am soooooooooooooooooooo damned impressed by your support of Nixon when you were a minor and unable to vote. Way to work in your conservative bona fides there! You are now beyond reproach. No one's even going to THINK of asking you "Who did you vote for in 1976?"
Certainly not me. :-P
Who, in your opinion, should be President.
John Kerry or Dubya?
Believe it or not, it really does make sense to keep the gap between the richest countries of the world and the poorest countries to a minimum.The best way to accomplish this, indeed the only way to accomplish this, is for those "poorer countries" to display the same respect for the rights of the individual, particularly including property rights, that we have here. At least, that most of us have here, to be sure we have our share of wackos.
As long as this does not happen, productive wealth will not be safe in those nations. The only way to minimize this gap will be wealth transfer from the richer nations to the governments of the poorer nations. I said "governments" on purpose...the pockets of those in power is where it will end up.
This is certain to cause economic stagnation and further political corruption. No thanks.
-Eric
Welcome to FR 
Here's your sign doofus
NESTLE?
Is that you?
What is it with the left, do you have an extra "coward" gene or something?