Ray < THE CAPITULATION: I accept what you say
Not being an American, I don't have first-hand knowledge on the particular point. Therefore, when I am told, and clearly by someone who seems to know what he's talking about, that We the People have more influence now than before, even though I cannot believe it I cannot refute it (a) because I don't know what the influence was previously and (b) I don't know the basis for the assertion. So, it's easiest for me to accept it, put it aside, and pass on to the points which I want to make. If I wish to challenge the assertion and I am unable to, then I will lose the debate. One does not have to argue over every point.
> It's a god-damn nightmare
I would have thought so.
> And you should not be nearly as obsequious to a fascist like Lazarus Long as you have been. The hell with politeness. When confronted with pure evil, manners don't matter.
I think you persistently miss my point and position. Because I am civil does not mean I am obsequious. I have previously mentioned the reason for my politeness. Further, you do not know my position in all of this. You assume, because I am revolted by 911 and believe that people within the Bush administration were responsible, that I am of the "left". I am not. If anything, I could regard myself as a Libertarian of the paleo-conservative variety -- although never a supporter of W and his neocons.
> It is time to kill off this Bush madness
I fully agree, but in favor of what? Someone who may be even more gung-ho than W?! Someone who, because he is "untested", and therefore has to prove himself, may end up creating a bigger disaster than exists already. Frankly, although I recognize and fully sympathize with your position, I see no difference between the Democrats and Republicans on the issues we are concerned with. In my opinion, both parties are tainted. Both want war. Both are dishonest. If I was able to vote I would probably vote for Nader -- for all the good that would do! |
