T Nation

Did You Ever Notice


#1

WARNING: THIS IS A RANT!!

Did you ever notice that conservatives on the whole defend their country and love it and only seem to talk about what is right with country. In contrast liberals always find what is wrong with the country and harp on it, no matter how insignificant the wrong is.

Did you ever notice that liberals are more concerned with protecting the criminal than the law abiding citizen.

As an example of my last statement I will use the ACLU(liberal entity) defending all the Gitmo terrorists. Yet if liberals had their way(for the most part) they would revoke my right -as a law abiding citizen- to have a gun. If liberals had their way they would also ban the death penalty of convicted heinous murderers. Yet in the same breath think nothing of abortion.

In my opinion the death penalty is nothing more than an abortion that has been delayed by about 25 years(give or take a few).

If liberals had their way they would take more of my hard earned money and give it to people who don't want to work for a living.

I got news for you folks if you want a socialist society join the military: healthcare for EVERYONE, same pay for same rank regardless of how much actual work you do and you get to serve and protect your country. The only thing you have to do to obtain this socialist utopia I call the military is have no physical disabilities and have no serious crimes on your record.

The only problem is that liberals hate this country so much, they don't think we should have a military.

As a sidenote, I did serve 6 years in the army, active duty, it was the best and worst 6 years of my life.

Overall I loved it and it gave me a love for my country and wanting to protect it and everyone in this country, which leads me to my next point. Mandatory military service, 2 years for all males. It would mature these boys beyond belief and easily cut the crime rate by 2/3's. It may also give all these borderline lib's a new found love for their country.

If you don't love this country I say leave it, I'm not saying you don't have the right to hate this country, but if you think we suck just LEAVE. Go somewhere else and see if the grass is greener, then comeback if it isn't, if it is, drop me a line.

The US is not perfect, but we have never slaughtered millions of our own, nor have we oppressed anyone with our beliefs. As a matter of fact we have led the charge head on to fight oppressive regimes and maniacal leaders.

I'm ready for the responses and flames from all.


#2

This is the most ignorant bunch of horeshit I've ever read. How embarassed you must be to have displayed your political ignorance so openly.


#3

I cannot argue very many points here. Let's be fair and give us a brief rundown of the points you disagree with. It's just not right to make a blanket statement about someones post without an explaination. Ad hominem attack anyone?


#4

Ever notice that some members of the rabid right like to demonize liberals?

Ever notice that they refuse to acknowledge the concept of cause and effect?

Ever notice they feel that the ends justify the means?

Ever notice that they don't like having to think about issues very deeply?

Anyway, if my statements don't apply to you, don't bother slipping under the title of "rabid right" in order to get offended.


#5

I did respond to certain points but only the last part is highlighted in yellow for some reason


#6

how about two years mandatory service for both men and women...I think this would be a great idea...

and may also make some conservatives who have never seen combat pause and think before rushing to invade another country...

have you ever heard of a thing called the civil war? we killed quite a few of our own...

or how about the american indian's...how many of them did we slaughter? how many of the ones that we didn't slaughter did we oppress with our beliefs?


#7

I think it'd be a great idea. It'd be a tough sell though.

If you have to go back 150+ years for an example, your argument probably isn't that strong.


#8

my bad...when he said 'never' I thought he meant through the whole history of the United States...not just since the civil rights movement...sorry!

maybe he meant to say 'haven't lately' instead of 'never'?


#9

Whether Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, there are no ABSOLUTE distinctions. There are complete assholes in both parties. However, on issues dear to me and my family (gun ownership, taxes, domestic safety, the penal system and abortion) the Republican party seems to be much more in line with my beliefs. Like I said though, there are no absolutes and I can find myself in agreement with some of my more liberal-minded friends.


#10

Ok. That's it. I can't take it anymore.

Did you ever notice that the same conservatives are the ones who call anyone who disagrees with them unpatriotic? Did you ever notice that the same conservatives seem to consider loving their country synonymous with supporting the right-wingers in power? Did you ever notice that the people with fanatical love for their country or patriotic zeal are the first to get sucked into the government's latest patriotic ideal (call me extreme, but didn't most of 1930's Germany consider themselves patriotic? Or the 1860's south?)?

Did you ever notice that if you only focus on what's right with a country you come to regard it as perfect/the best/no 1? Did you ever notice that the constitution isn't infallible, nor should it be treated as such? Did you ever notice that most liberals place too much faith in humanity? Did you ever notice that the rest place too little and feel to need to dominate the masses so as to protect them? Did you ever notice that those who only show the problems without proposing solutions never become leaders? Did you ever notice that it's incredibly hard not to be proud of who you are, and therefore even harder to disagree with your fellows? Did you ever notice that Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh need to follow the Velocity Diet?

Did you ever notice that conservatives are more concerned with protecting CEOs that would kill their mothers to get tax breaks than with helping "the commmon man"? Did you ever notice that most pro-life people support the death penalty and large-scale military assaults? Did you ever notice that conservatives seem to assume that most people with dark-shaded skin are probably criminals?

Did you ever notice that most liberals see no wrong in caring more about poodles having clothes than ravaged AIDS victims in Somalia?

Did you ever notice that some liberals really DO care more about criminals than about law-abiding citizens? Did you ever notice that removing all differences from all cultures is just as bad as focusing on the worst of each? Did you ever notice that political correctness is a plie of shit?

As an example of your last statements I will show how two sentences in the same paragraph have nothing to do with one another. AS an example of your last statement I will show how you're quick to assume that the fact that someone is in Gitmo automatically makes them guilty. Yet why is it than guns are so treasured in the United States? Surely not everyone here is a bloodlusting hunter. If conservatives had their way they would make special laws for speeding up the death penalty for:
a.)minorities
b.)liberals
c.)unpatriotic people
Yet why is it that if there's supposed to be a seperation between church and state, most people vote and act according to the bible?

As an example of your last sentences I agree that the ACLU is an overbloated behemoth that too often defends people who deserve no defense. Why is it that liberals are so fixated on finding a fault with everything the government does?

In my opinion this is the most ridiculous statement that you have made. In my opinion, even if this were true, you could not be for one while being against the other.

If conservatives had their way they would take more of my hard-earned money. If conservatives had their way they would live by social darwinism so long as it benefitted them. If conservatives had their way the poor would be rounded up and shot (but then who'd be poor?).

If liberals had their way they would legalize marijuana and then give tax breaks to addicts because "they have a disability". If liberals had their way they would try again to make socialism work without understanding it or human nature.

I got news for you folks, if you want a socialist society, tough shit because the closest thing are the scandinavian countries. I got news for you folks, if you want to risk your life/ideals and further the imperialistic America in exchange for menial pay and health care, join the military; you get to serve the corporate elite and protect capitalistic interests. The only thing you do to join this infernal hellhole I call the military is be a naive (young) man that believes he is serving his country by serving his president.

The only problem is that conservatives think that everyone but them should be in the military. The only other problem is that liberals think that the military is responsible for every problem that faces the third world.

As as sidenote, I am neither old enough nor dumb enough to serve in the military. If I want to help the world, I'll actually do it and join an aid group (a real one mind you, none of this peace corps shit), which is why I'm leaving for Somalia in 2010.
As another sidenote, I am also neither old nor dumb enough to join in with the liberal 'conservation groups' that usually pocket 60-80% of the funds and pretend to be altruistic humanitarians that 'just want to make the world a better place'.

Overall, I loved it when Vicente Fox finally gave the finger to Bush in 2003. It didn't give me a love for my country, as I already loved my country and did not need to spend six years stationed, being bombarded with propaganda saying I was doing the right thing. Mandatory military service, 2 years for all males. It would indoctrinate these boys beyond belief, to say nothing of the newly-acquired agression.

It may also give all these bordeline libs an excuse for showing how they're 'right', when in fact believing that no organized force is needed (which is just as bad as believing that all the organized force in the world is needed).

If you don't realize when you contradict yourself, just go back to the military. I'm not saying you have to, I just like the idea of people like you digging holes in the middle of nowhere while believing they're fighting the war on terror. If you don't realize that loving your country and being a patriot are two different things, that you can love your country without loving your government, then please shove your oh-so-precious American flag up your ass. Maybe that way you'll realize that the people who live in a country and the culture(s) that give it identity are far more important than any lofty ideals the government is spoon-feeding you.

If you think that by hating the U.S. you are somehow making right its mistakes, you deserve to be called a liberal scumbag. If you think that by focusing on such trivial shit such as demanding that blacks be called African-Americans, then you deserve to keep losing elections that should be landslides.
If the rest of you don't realize that bickering amongst each other over whether Al Franken or Bill O'Reilley has the bigger penis does nothing to solve your problems, then God help you, because neither of them will.

The U.S. is not perfect, and yes we have slaughtered millions of our own and opressed nearly everyone with differing beliefs (and sometimes those with the same beliefs as ours). As a matter of fact, we are now considered to be the root of all evil by the rest of the world; we have led the charge head one to replace oppressive regimes and maniacal leaders with those to our liking.

The U.S. is not perfect, but it is not the cause of all evil, nor is Bush responsible for my grandfather dying. That the U.S. government has commited great evils does not forgive those committed by the rest of the world, nor make meaningless the great acts that the U.S. has done. That the U.S. government is no different than from the most powerful government of every other time does not annul the greatness of many of its residents or citizens.

The U.S. is not perfect, but neither is anything else. To forget this, no matter what your beliefs are, is to be more unpatriotic (a favorite phrase these days) that to start a protest or start a rally.

I'm ready for the flames from all.


#11

Wow that is something.
Did you ever notice that people of different political views have a different perspective that coresponds with their political view?
Thats the difference.


#12

Just wanted to say that was anawesome post IMO, from Nopal, aI don't have much to add to that. DPH you had some good shit too.
Think what you may about the military but ALOT of younger folks I've met could use the discipline that they seem to be lacking from their upbringing.


#13

You know, I feel this way about both sides. Neither side wants to consider the other. It's really become a sports team mentality.


#14

You had me until you wanted forced servitude (2 years required service) brought back. Don't you know that my life belongs to me, that it is precious to me, that forcing me to be a slave is the most heinous of sins? I love my country very much! If it becomes a country willing to enslave its young people, then I will leave it. I know -- yadda, yadda, we won't miss you and all that crap-blather. Jesus Christ man, you want to defend the country of freedom by enslaving some of its citizens. Your rant deserved a rant!!


#15

I have got to agree with DJOHN . I think it is a Republican versus Democrat mentality. The only thing that would unite them would be a threat from a serious Third Party.


#16

Thanks...the issue is that neither party in the end wants what is best for America...they want what's best for their party, and that is re-election.


#17

Interesting article from Strategy.com

WHO WINS: The Plan

August 29, 2005: The savage criticism of the way America is fighting the war on terror is nothing new in American politics. In every major war, the party (or parties) out of power were sharp and brutal in their criticism of how the government was fighting the war of the moment. You can look it up. That?s a lot easier with Google, but if you have access to a major university or research library, you can find microfilm copies of newspapers from World War II, World War I, or even earlier. Makes interesting reading, and induces a measure of d?j? vu.

The current situation is somewhat different, in that the war on terror is not being fought against a nation. That makes agreement on strategy and tactics even more difficult, and disagreement much easier. Everyone is inventing it as we go along, and no one will know who is right until it?s all over. Actually, the disagreements will probably continue, with one faction insisting that if things had been done their way, the terrorists would have been defeated much sooner.

But what is, ?the plan? currently in use for defeating Islamic terrorism? There is a plan, although for political reasons, all details cannot be admitted. Some knowledge of military (and terrorism) history, plus a close look at what has been done so far, makes it pretty clear what the plan is.

The first move was to round up as many members of the organization that planned and supported the 911 attacks. That included taking down the Taliban government in Afghanistan, and closing all the terrorist training facilities there. The world-wide roundup resulted in the arrests of thousands of suspects, and the jailing of most of the known al Qaeda leaders. We tend to forget that, while focusing on the few who are still at large.

Then came the invasion of Iraq. This was apparently done for two reasons. The main one, based on everyone?s agreement (including Bill Clinton, France and Russia), was that Iraq had chemical, biological, and possibly nuclear, weapons, and would be likely to supply terrorists with such weapons. Many terrorists had taken refuge in Iraq, and Saddam was known to use terrorists to do his dirty work (like the Iranian rebel groups he hosted, and helped to carry out terrorist operations inside Iran.) Such use of terrorists was common throughout the Middle East, but Saddam was seen as very unpredictable and unreliable, even by Middle Eastern standards. There was general agreement that the removal of Saddam would be a good thing.

The second reason for going into Iraq was given less play, but was more important. The Arab world needed a wake-up call on the subject of Islamic terrorism, and the reason for most of it (corrupt government). Overthrowing Saddam, and giving the Iraqi people an opportunity to create a democracy, confronted the Islamic terrorists in the sharpest possible way. Al Qaeda, and many Islamic conservatives, have pronounced democracy as ?unIslamic.? One reason Islamic radicals hate the West is because of their decadent attitudes towards elections, women and freedom of speech. By invading Iraq, and preventing any more attacks inside the United States, the Islamic terrorists are revealed as impotent loudmouths. This, naturally, enrages many Moslems who back Islamic terror, but it also forces the vast majority of Moslems to reconsider their tolerance for Islamic terror, and the corruption in their societies that they all complain about, but won?t deal with. The Iraqis are now forced to deal with it. The Sunni Arab minority, that had long dominated Iraq, refused to surrender, and, along with Islamic radicals, sought to show that the old tricks (terrorism) still worked. Who will win? That's what some of the arguments are about.

That?s The Plan. What are the complications? The first one is that the Arabs may not be able, or willing, to deal with their own, largely self-inflicted, problems. So far, Iraqis have turned out, despite death threats, to elect a government. There?s no shortage of volunteers for the police and security forces. But the terrorists have plenty of volunteers as well, and corruption is still a problem.

To further complicate things, Europe, and much of the rest of the world, loudly opposes The Plan. This is partly a knee-jerk reaction to the defeat of the leftist Democrat government in the United States in 2000. Europeans felt more comfortable with the Democrats, even to the enthusiastic call for American participation in the invasion of Kosovo in 1999 (which, like the invasion of Iraq in 2003, was carried out to overthrow a ?terrorist state? in an operation the UN would not approve.) The Europeans also felt that they could live with thugs like Saddam, and convince him to stop supporting terrorists. Iraq, like several other Middle Eastern nations (Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Yemen), had been willing to host, or at least tolerate, al Qaeda operations. Europeans are not big on bold moves and risk taking. They would rather try a bribe or a well timed assassination. But now they are stuck with the after-effects of the antics of those American ?cowboys,? and they don?t like it, especially if the American tactics work.

Arabs, and Moslems in general, opposed the invasion of Iraq because the leaders of most Moslem states operated the same way Saddam did, just more discretely. The people got their information from sensationalistic, and rabidly anti-Semitic mass media, that portrayed all the ills of the world as a Jewish conspiracy. Despite this revival of Nazi doctrine (and, with some Islamic radical groups, the Nazi salute), Europeans looked the other way. That has also started to change, as the European attitude towards Moslem migrants produced a far more fertile breeding ground for Islamic radicals that in the United States. Europeans largely dismissed this at first, until the bombs went off in Spain (2004) and Britain (2005). No one likes to admit they are on the wrong side of history, so most Europeans continue to contort themselves into positions that dismiss The Plan, yet still allow them to do what needs to be done to deal with their more immediate (than those ?wrongheaded Americans?) exposure to more terrorist attacks.


#18

Hedo, there is justifiable critiszm regarding this admins actions. Many people who are against this war aren't against killing a muslim, a jew, a catholic, or whoever else plots to hurt America or Americans.

When Bush declared action against the country harboring the terrorists who were responsible for 9/11, I supported his actions 110 percent. I felt they were warranted and just and in my opinion it was worth the great responsibility of risking Americans and other innocent peoples lives.

This Iraq war was based on lies from the start and it wasn't critical in the war against the terrorists who are waging war on us. It in fact has spawned a training camp for those that hate us for them to refine their skills and it was motivated for less then honorable reasons in my opinion.

We will never see eye to eye on this and that's I suppose just the way it is. All we can do is wait and watch and see what ultimately comes of this.

I even laugh at myself when I think of how we argue this over and over again. Your side will say "UN resolutions" "Ties to Al Qaeda" "supporting terrorism" "WMDs".

And, me and others will continue to say it wasn't worth starting a war that in many ways has very negative consequences for the U.S.


#19

Elk

I hear you. And I agree we are always going to be on opposite sides. It's the undecided we are trying to persuade perhaps.


#20

BTW, I know that's not how you spell "annul". Anyone know the correct way to spell it?