Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AK2004 who wrote (496293)	11/20/2003 6:46:31 PM
From: Orcastraiter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

right about Japan but wrong about Germany. We did not have NATO back then so any attack against Germany can be viewed as defensive. Right about both. Just because NATO was not formed yet does not mean that England and Europe were not allies. We were allies for generations before WWII. Beside our allies being attacked, many US merchant ships were sunk by the Germans as well. You're argument is as hollow as your head. is there a need? USSR is no more... Did I say go back to USSR? No I said go back to Russia. You are Russian right? Or are you from Ukraine? yes, and for the Iraq too - something that needed to be done I agree. Failed policies of the United States allowed Saddam to prosper. We needed to do something about him, but invasion as we did will prove to be costly, and not necessarily as productive as other means we had at our disposal. Look at how the Soviet block fell to capitalism and democracy with out the need for military conflict. Freedom is it's own reward. yes but would not that also imply that I questioned the governments policies? Oh yes, questioned them in your own mind. But did you voice your opinion to the government? Since you left you may have been in disagreement with your government, but you did not have the courage to fight for your people. You took the easy way out and came to America. We already have done the hard work of building democracy, so you can come here and instantly enjoy freedom. I do not slight you for that decision, but know in your heart that you took the easy way out. "The republican party is a conservative white party. Most conservative whites are racist." You take offense to the truth? The republican party is 90% white. Would that not qualify as a white party? And they 100% conservative, you're not arguing that right? And most conservative whites are racist. I did not say that all of them are racist which is the way you twisted it. "I am talking about rank and file Republicans being racist. They are in the main racist." Again, I am not saying that all republicans are racist. In the main they are. This means that more than 50% are racist. I think it's probably higher than that. re: The political spectrum is not black or white you make it sound like it is though No you read my words the way you want to twist them. I have said over and over that the political spectrum runs black to white, with many shades of gray in between. so how much twisting did I do? Enough to leave your arguments impotent and irrelevant. seems like in 60's republicans were still pro civil rights and democrats were against those Seems like? Not true. Before the 60's and before the rise of Dr. Martin Luther King, Civil rights took a back seat to business as usual in both parties. But the Civil Rights movement found common ground with the democrats. John Kennedy and Dr. King were close. And as the democrats began to embrace the Civil Rights movement, conservative democrats in the south switched parties to the republicans. Nixon made it a party policy to embrace the southern conservatives so that he could win the south, which he did. and thus the republican party became the party of anti civil rights. That is the way the party is today. White, conservative, and to a large degree racist. I am glad you realize it because it sounded like that you thought Duke was a representative of main stream republican party David Duke was, and is still very popular in the south. He has been elected a republican congressman in Louisiana. He was once the head of the republican party in the state, and has been deeply involved in state republican party politics. Same goes for Jessie Helms, Strom Thurmond, Trent Lott and a host of other segregationists in the republican party. As you know Trent Lott was elected as the Party majority leader in the senate, one of the most prestigious positions in the republican party. And this even as his segregationist leanings were well known in the party. the complex issues are usually to mislead - most of the thing in the world are fairly simple.... Oh my friend, you are so wrong. Most of the worlds issues are very complex. They are not that way to mislead, that is simply the nature of people and politics. It's very complex. And really most of the world is complex. That is why we enjoy it so much when elegance can be found in the simple. Because to the contrary is is not typically found, it is rare indeed. Sometimes we are amazed by simplicity, and sometimes we are annoyed by it's inadequacies. The latter of which I would have to say holds true for me when I read your simple writings. Orca