Policy problems / LJWorld.com

Archive for Tuesday, August 1, 2006

August 1, 2006

To the editor:

U.S. foreign policy was once aimed at making friends abroad (remember the Peace Corps) instead of making more and more enemies by attempting to force our systems and ideas on other people at the point of a gun.

The Bush administration saw 9-11 as a chance to declare war on terrorists and thus expand its powers and then misled the American people about weapons of mass destruction in order to get its power-grabbing agenda past the U.S. Congress.

The Bush administration also has altered NASA documents and generally misled the American people about global warming in an ongoing effort to reward big oil companies who are among their biggest supporters and who are currently reaping greater windfall profits at the expense of society and the American economy.

Besides an overextended and exhausted military and a busted treasury, the United States is facing more severe droughts, storms and heat waves, and sometime soon huge lawsuits will begin against the United States for abandoning the Kyoto Climate Treaty and allowing islands and coastal areas around the world to go under the rising ocean waves and for many, many other crimes against nature and humanity.

When is enough, enough?

Les Blevins,

Lawrence

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

1 August 2006
at 8:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

conservative (Anonymous) says…

There was an article on CNN yesterday that outlined how all countries are failing in their Kyoto mandates. Virtually all major industrial countries are at levels of emissions above where they should be, and most have actually increased emissions. The one area that looks good until you look at it is the European union. But when you break down the info you find that their minor decrease comes from the shutting down of East German major polluters in the wake of the wall coming down, and that their emissions have been rising steadily since 1995.

Bottom line, at least America was willing to stand up and say that the accords were unworkable. The really funny thing is that according to the article our level of emissions has actually been growing at a profoundly lower rate than that of most of the countries who signed.
1 August 2006
at 9 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

rightthinker - “Arminius, Blevins has had no less than three LTE's that I can remember since engaging myself with LJW on-line”

He's been writing these LTE's for years, along with two or three other LCPJ-leftist types. It's just the sort of 'bomb-throwing' drivel that the LJW editorial overlords want.

And before the usual useful-idiotae show up, the 'owner' may show up occasionally with an editorial that makes some sense and is somewhat conservative - that doesn't make it a conservative company or newspaper. They know which side of the business gets buttered.
1 August 2006
at 9:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jamesaust (Anonymous) says…

“The Bush administration also has altered NASA documents….”

NASA documents?! That is news. Haha - now that is a new low. What next? The Geological Survey archives?

If that wasn't rich enough - “… sometime soon huge lawsuits will begin against the United States for abandoning the Kyoto Climate Treaty….”

Is there an appropriate emoticon for that one?

8-|
:-C
<:-I
|-)
1 August 2006
at 10:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

Jamesaust—

He was referring to James Hansen, chief NASA scientist on global warming, who BushCo attempted to censor.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/0…
1 August 2006
at 10:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

fishcat (Anonymous) says…

I guess it's George Bush's fault that Hezbollah started slinging missles at Israel, and I guess it's his fault that they are mixing in with the population instead of wearing red uniforms and marching in a straight line. And I guess its his fault that the Chinese's projected increase in power plant emissions is in line with an additional 3 trillion SUV's emissions, CO2 only since they don't have to use the same amount of controls that we do. I'm so depressed. We should go bomb an asprin factory.
1 August 2006
at 10:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

“I guess it's George Bush's fault that Hezbollah started slinging missles at Israel”

Yes, it is Dubya's fault. The missiles were launched AFTER Israel began its attack on Lebanon. If Bush had told Israel to just do a prisoner swap with Hezbollah instead of declaring war on Lebanon, the missiles would likely not have been launched.
1 August 2006
at 10:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

fishcat (Anonymous) says…

Give the Hezbo's legitimacy by negotiating with them? And why should King George tell Israel how to conduct business after they had been invaded by an illegtimate polital group?

1 August 2006
at 10:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

fishcat - remember the mantra, it's always:

'It's Bush's fault!'
1 August 2006
at 12:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

conservative (Anonymous) says…

logicsound, I think you should go back and reexamine more of your posts. You only seem to take exception to slander and offensive implications from people on the right. I have yet to see you call out one from the left for the same behavior. That would be why many would label you a rightwing hater.
1 August 2006
at 12:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

conservative (Anonymous) says…

logicsound, funny, but I didn't even mention you the other day when I told Bozo he didn't know what he was talking about. But you did jump in and take exception to that post.

Seems you suffer from selective amnesia.

I never directed a post at you, and in fact usually don't resort to the level of posting I did the other day. But I've watched your posts since then and they definitely have a leftward slant.

Nothing wrong with what you post, in fact I'd say you're one of the more intelligent posters from either side, but I am calling you on your hypocrisy about who you respond to.
1 August 2006
at 1:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

moderationman (Anonymous) says…

I want to back up to the tripe about declaring war after the first WTC bombing. What Clinton and the DOJ did was catch the perps (where is Osama?), try and convict them without a Patriot Act, rendition or Guantanamo detention facility. They also uncovered and stopped plots to blow up the UN building, Statue of Liberty and the Holland Tunnel. Again, there was no Patriot Act, just good police work and good work by Federal prosecutors. I worked in NYC at the time and had friends in the WTC. I remember it well, apparently some here choose not to.
1 August 2006
at 1:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

conservative (Anonymous) says…

Unfortunately I'm well aware of conservativeman. I've had to defend myself several times from people who don't take the time to pay attention.

Gotta point out however that in your first paragraph you state. “I try to reserve my tirades for guys like him, that reduce the debate to name-calling ” and then end your post with “right-leaning ilk”

guess you resort to name calling also. But I don't take offense. You're welcome to your low opinion of those of us on the right, some of us even deserve it. However so do some on the left. :)
1 August 2006
at 4:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Defender (Anonymous) says…

Arminius, of all the users on this forum, you're the most moronic
1 August 2006
at 8:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

“And the neocons…”

Will somebody PLEASE explain this to me. What they *think* a neocon is?

I am pretty sure YOU do not know what it *is*?
1 August 2006
at 8:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

HEre it is from wiki, pay CLOSE attention to the portion refering to the NEO and the Democrat issue.

“Neoconservatism is a political current and ideology, mainly in the United States, which emerged in the 1960s, coalesced in the 1970s, and has had a significant presence in the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. It is today most closely identified with a set of foreign policy positions and goals: a hawkish stance during the Cold War and, more recently, in various conflicts in the Middle East. At times there have been distinct neoconservative positions in domestic policies; in particular, the first generation of neoconservatives were generally less opposed to “big government” and to social spending than other U.S. conservatives of the time, though they also called for significant restructuring of the goals and methods of many social programs.

The prefix neo- refers to two ways in which neoconservatism was new: many of the movement's founders, (*)originally liberals, Democrats or from socialist backgrounds, were new to conservatism;(*) neoconservatism was also a comparatively recent strain of conservative thought, which derived from a variety of intellectual roots in the decades following World War II. While some (such as Irving Kristol) have described themselves as “neoconservatives”, the term is used today more by opponents and critics of this political current than by its adherents, some of (*)whom reject even the claim that neoconservatism is an identifiable current of American political thought.”(*)

1 August 2006
at 8:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

A Hawkish liberal, that is a neo con. Big GOvernment with a BIG F*(&^* GUN!

so please use the term correctly.
2 August 2006
at 12:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

swbsow WISHES that someone would touch her!

;)

Thanks.

Marion.
2 August 2006
at 5:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

And from a lying, wannabee Democrat. How that piece of vermin even has the temerity to post anything on this site after he tried to run for the Kansas House as a democrat is another indictment of his “desperate attempt to achieve some undetermined ambition” - Dr. Forrest Swall
2 August 2006
at 7:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Defender (Anonymous) says…

rightthinker:

“The Clinton(s) have general contempt for the masses and authority and the military and decency. No doubt about it.”

And how this is different from Bush?
2 August 2006
at 10:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Defender (Anonymous) says…

“You know, Defender, you could have written a LTE like this….hmmm????? You're one of those who has simply lost touch with reality due to your abject hatred of GWB. And ya'll say Arminius, aka, Kevin Groenhagen (tehehe) is obsessed with hating Clinton????”

Yeah…….right. Sorry you're so out of touch. You're right about one thing, I despise the job Bush has done, but you're wrong in that I gave the man the benefit of the doubt when he came into office. Too bad he screwed up so much in this country. I think it is funny how all you 'conservatives' (which is an out and out lie) yakked so much about how Kerry was such a flip flopper, and yet you have flip flopped on this board more than anyone. I have seen you drill the hell out of Bush over Iraq, but when one little things goes your way, you're his best buddy again. Give me a break, at least I am true to my beliefs.
2 August 2006
at 1:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

staff04 (Anonymous) says…

Wow. Why are you all hanging out over here instead of defending your vast majority over on the election pages?
2 August 2006
at 1:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

staff04 (Anonymous) says…

Arminius-

Afraid to admit that perhaps your twisted view of the world might not be in the mainstream?
2 August 2006
at 2:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

staff04 (Anonymous) says…

Arminius-
I spent 25 years in Kansas, and despite my current location, believe I have pretty good eye on my home and loved ones.

If by mainstream, you mean a majority of the majority party, then yes, you are in the mainstream. I choose a definition of mainstream that refers to the prevailing ideas a society, not just a particular group within that society. I know you have a penchant for semantic manipulation, so I don't really expect you to understand what I am saying here, but there you have it anyway.

2 August 2006
at 2:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

meggers (Anonymous) says…

Did Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice lie when they each said separately in early 2001 that Iraq did not have the weaponry to pose a threat even to it's neighbors, let alone to the US?

Things sure changed in a hurry.
2 August 2006
at 4:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ksmoderate (Anonymous) says…

Arminius:

You act like the Daily Show tells lies. I argue that the Daily Show (the Fake News) contrives most of its humor from the observation of lies and foibles of people and groups; in other words, its truthiness is solid. And damned funny!

Stewart/Colbert '08!
2 August 2006
at 9:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

And Hitchens is a joke. His bias against Clinton leaps out of every sentence. A “leftist”? Not hardly. Sounds like a sound-bite from the lunatic fringe of the Rebooblican Party.

But he is your soul-mate. He probably has no honor either.
2 August 2006
at 9:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

Nope. I write literary fiction. It's what makes me happy.

BTW, Minnesota legislators kept copies of our paper at their desks in the statehouse as references inre criminal justice issues. We were that good.

Aggrandize that.
2 August 2006
at 10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

rightthinker:

I'm disappointed in you. You can do better … and you will need to when Democrats prevail in November.

I'm calling 21st Century Democrats in Washington tomorrow; I'll ask if they have anyone on staff willing to talk to you about your problems.
2 August 2006
at 10:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

logicsound04:

Good post, but you give the Present Occupant too much credit for intelligence.

His daddy's rich friends got him elected to do their bidding - via Cheney and Rove - and that is precisely what he does. He is much too stupid to figure out any complexities inre Iraq on his own. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz told him to invade Iraq, and he simply acquiesced.

His daddy at least had enough sense to leave a chastened Saddam as a counterbalance against Iran, but GWB lacks the intellectual fortitude to decipher such a simple foreign policy gambit.
3 August 2006
at 12:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

booster:

Good point! He sounds like an “end times” looney, but even more so resembles a drooling, lickspittle sidekick, and to a neo-fascist monster like conservativeman no less.

One should not pay any attention to rightthinker; without his cap-lock, he'd be essentially immobilized.

Has anyone else noticed that we liberals are essentially happy, optomistic people, while conservative wretches like rightthinker and conservativeman are angry, bitter people?
3 August 2006
at 6:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Les Blevins!

Go here quickly and follow the instructions!

http://zapatopi.net/afdb/

Thanks.

Marion.

3 August 2006
at 10:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

logicsound04:

I know how to hit Kevin where it hurts. Holygrailale (I had some Holy Grail Pale this evening) routinely eviscerates him - to the point where his blood dribbles down his keyboard onto his slobber - leaving him drooling in impotent frustration, then I gently remind him of his many Madonna-like “recreations” - like when he styled himself a “Jeffersonian Democrat” in a vain attempt to secure Democratic backing for his quickly-aborted political ambitions.

Also, the contention that conservative Republicans are happy - even happier than liberal Democrats - is so much folderol. Their “studies” and research are as bogus as their protestations that they are not racists, elitists, mysogonists, and neo-fascists.

Liberal Democrats are truly happy people. We are optimistic about the country, about our people, about life in general. We are optimistic about our ability, willingness, and commitment to preserve and extend the essence of what it means to be an American, to live in a pluralistic democracy that is the fruit of all the trials and labors of all the countries and civilizations that preceded us.

Conservative Republicans are pessimists. They abuse, exploit the environment, people, their wives and families and loved ones, and view their sins as their right and proper due. They are racists in that they are unwilling to accept minorities as equals, or extend to them the status of human beings. They are elitists in that they not only believe, but actively pursue the false belief that they, and only they, should be allowed to profit in our capitalist system. They are mysogonists in that they don't really like women, or consider them equals. They are apprehensive about sex; they'd like to be better at it but aren't and resent anyone (William Jefferson Clinton) who demonstrably is.

And they are neo-fascists in that they don't truly understand, or cherish, individual rights and liberties, or responsibilities, that make America what we are.

In short, conservative Republicans are much like people who exist in other countries, other civilizations, other periods in history - but they don't embellish or add anything, for they aren't really Americans.
4 August 2006
at 12:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

Hypocrite? Hmm. I've committed just about every offense except sex crimes and air piracy, but can't recall ever being a hypocrite.

Is that like, after getting bitch-slapped by my nominal party (Douglas County Republicans) I suddenly re-invent myself as a “Jeffersonian Democrat” and try to sell myself as a legislative candidate to the local Democratic organization?

Just curious. And, am not your “little fella,” literally, figuratively or otherwise. Am a former three-time Kansas Open powerlifting champion … in the 242 lb. class.
4 August 2006
at 8:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

logicsound04:

Ouch! Little Bunny Foo-Foo. He reminds me of the cartoon character “Quick-Draw McGraw.”

Your point is valid. The discrepancy between exit polls and the final tally is a conundrum our journalistic protectors failed to examine thoroughly.

I doubt that you will get an intelligible answer from the liar-idiot. He is too wrapped up in his psycho-sexual affliction with William Jefferson Clinton to do more than spew hatred and calumny on this site.

Again, good post.