Posted on 10/07/2009 12:55:09 AM PDT by rabscuttle385
Jesus, are you for real? If you’re not going to even read the evidence backing the claim that is widely accepted by the intelligence community and instead feed more more 2002 Weakly Standturd catchphrases, you’re not even worth debating. Just crawl under your bed, clutching your copy of David Frum’s book, scared sh*tless that the muslim hoards will be coming over the hills any minute.
Thank you for your concession, albeit wrapped in an ad hominem temper tantrum.
So I take it that you believe a unified Korea, with little Kimmie as dictator, would be a good thing?
One less country to defend, for nothing. History shows the countries we screw with or try to “convert” (Cuba, Vietnam, Korea, ect) remained Communist or socialist while those left alone to decide their own destiny eventually threw off the shackles of Communism (with the exception of China).
“If Only To Be Left To Live My Own Life”
You claim this as your tagline, yet you’re willing to deny it to anyone who disagrees with you? But you don’t consider yourself hypocritical, now, do you? Amazing “logic.”
That statement is ironic considering your tagline.
No its not.
Definition of freedom-the power to exercise choice and make decisions without constraint from within or without; autonomy; self-determination.
If you libs would figure out that the government and the populace are not the same things, then you would get on board. The U.S. of A. is not mutually exclusive with the U.S. Government.
Government-the political direction and control exercised over the actions of the members, citizens, or inhabitants of communities, societies, and states; direction of the affairs of a state, community, etc.; political administration:
Population-the common people of a community, nation, etc., as distinguished from the higher classes.
Let’s see, being against governments that prevent the practice of freedom? Yes, my tagline still fits. You NEED to learn that the government and populace aren’t always the same thing. Soviet Russia and Communist China did not allow their people to participate in the governing process, that is not freedom.
The populace gives their governments the mandate. If said populace does not approve of said government then it’s the said populace’s choice to remove said government. It’s the people’s choice if they want to be free.
Just like it went so well for 30 million Soviet residents right? Or for German citizens under Hitler right?
Under the Khmer Rouge? Chairman Mao?
Let’s be clear here: You are saying that we, the American PEOPLE, should push freedom in the world, but that the Government of the United States should keep its nose OUT of foreign affairs? If THAT’S your point I can agree with you.
(Oh, and my response was based on my reading of your post AND your tagline, completely independent of others who saw the same irony as I did... Great minds DO think alike...)
Sorry, I don’t buy mandates. Whether its Obama, Clinton, or Reagan. Saying a president has a mandate, um, no. They are still accountable to the American people. If you say a president has a mandate then Obama and the current congress should have already passed healthcare, the stimulus should have had no criticism, and Obama should have already been able to close Gitmo. The only way a mandate could be clearly given is if we were to take a vote ourselves on every issue. You can give a mandate in a democracy, not a representative republic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.