retire05:Comment Posted By funny man On 22.12.2008 @ 00:07
the Soviets perfected 'harsh interrogation techniques' in the times of the Gulag. They knew you can break almost everyone with sleep deprivation, hunger etc and you don't need to resort to medieval techniques. I'm sure the Bolsheviks also thought what they did was for the good of the country. These were people from the 'left'. Well and then you had the Nazis on the 'right'. I do not want to be in any of their company when it comes to torture because that is what you are talking about. I respect your view but just spare me this 'naive lefty' spiel. This has nothing to do with left or right.
Government has to continuously set the rules so that FAIR competition is possible. That is always murky business. However, failure to do so would lead to monopolies and robber baron capitalism. Of course this is different in today's world than in Rockefeller's. I would maintain that capitalism is only viable because it can constantly correct itself and the government certainly has to play a role. If the ability for correction wasn't there, Karl Marx would have been right.Comment Posted By funny man On 18.12.2008 @ 19:37
To Jharp and others who accuse us of wanting to rewrite history. There are some of us who were always against global hegemony as aspired by neocon think tanks. See here:
Of course, there are also some others, as easily identified by the responses here, who lean towards militaristic solutions. All of us would probably still call ourselves 'conservatives'.Comment Posted By funny man On 15.12.2008 @ 13:16
Very good analysis. The problem in my opinion always was that the neocons had a dogmatic belief that wasn't based on reality. They truly thought that by just destroying the despotic power structure of Middle Eastern countries, democracy could take hold. That is why they never wanted to accept any need for rebuilding the country etc. I just want to point out that this was never what I would call conservative foreign policy but an ill-fated attempt into imperialism. That has never been a role that suited the United States well. However, be that as it may, now is now and then is then. I for one am glad that a more realistic policy is being pursued now and I give the Bush administration credit for kicking out the neocons (except for Cheney) and putting in people like Gates. Hopefully this marks a return to a more bipartisan approach to foreign policy.Comment Posted By funny man On 14.12.2008 @ 11:50
busboy:Comment Posted By funny man On 13.12.2008 @ 10:45
I kind of have to agree with you here. It is interesting though that everyone on most conservative websites is concentrating on Obama not on the vacated senate seat where I think we would have a realistic chance. Blago is a slimeball of the lowest order but I don't think Obama is going to be much effected. More importantly, there are more pressing issues now such as the auto industry and a guy defrauding investors of up to 50 billion. Just a thought.
Hollywood would not have come up with a story like that!Comment Posted By funny man On 10.12.2008 @ 10:49
What is it with this job? As you put it:
"At least you can say we here in Illinois are bi-partisan when it comes to corruption".
Are they going to be cellmates?
I have often disagreed with Gayle (mostly regarding Palin) but she is right on this one. If you want to see this country go down just so you can say I told you so, you are no better than the moonbats at DailyKos.Comment Posted By funny man On 9.12.2008 @ 17:29
David,Comment Posted By funny man On 9.12.2008 @ 14:17
why don't you take your racist trashtalk elsewhere.
The United States is in competition with other economies/societies (China, India, the European Union etc). So we always have to work at staying at the top. So to wish for our country to go down the drain just to make a point is not only foolish but also unpatriotic. However, your point about the lack of a 'conservative' stimulus plan is well taken. Let's look at the Auto Industry, the main competitors being Japan and Germany. So a lot of conservative economist suggest going into bankruptcy and then rebuilding from scratch is a better solution (that would probably send all but Ford down the drain). However, I'm not sure these companies would have the resources to go up against Toyota, BMW and the likes. Remember that they are also backed by their respective governments. So while I am against the current bail out I do believe assistance from the government is necessary to protect our last manufacturing stronghold.Comment Posted By funny man On 9.12.2008 @ 12:41
Nessus,Comment Posted By funny man On 8.12.2008 @ 17:26
I'm not sure evoking Bakunin is the answer to the current crisis.
I for one never understood why so many conservatives have a problem with 'conserving' the environment. I think it has more to do with identity politics (all those tree huggers) than rational analysis. So of course the Clean Water Act makes sense and was (is) very successful.
As far as the bail-out is concerned, I have yet to hear 'conservative' proposal. I'm not exactly sure how to proceed myself (but open to education, smile).