I am guessing that the majority of the people in this audience are not joining the military any time soon and do not have kids serving in Iraq. Ron Paul gets booed for being thoughtful, caring and respecting the wishes of his constituents? What a crock of shit.
Also, plese don't show me any more messages of moms with dead kids who support the war to defend continuing the war. The "My kid died so you have to let more kids die to avenge his death." argument is a total crock of shit. I understand that there are grieving mothers out there who have been sold on the idea that if we don't continue the war then her son died for nothing. They were sold a lie. Their sons died for their country. They did what was asked of them and they marched off to war and fought the way a good soldier does. They upheld their part of the deal. They took responsibility for the contract they signed with their country. We need to be responsible to them now and get them the fuck out of Iraq.
I don't know if any body else was paying attention when the above phrase started getting floated around pretty heavily a few weeks ago in reference to our troops. I remember feeling like it was just part of the Petraeus report and 9/11 anniversary campaign to drum up support for the war. I wasn't sure of it but now that that ad campaign seems to have imploded noone seems to be using it anymore. I have to say that it sounded kind of odd and it turned me off when I first heard it. I'm pretty glad they dumped it. I am pretty sure that Rs thought the Ds would say something against the slogan and then jump all over them for belittling our troops actions. I guess the bait didn't take so they hauled in their lines and decided to go fishing somewhere else.
When he talks about the risks outweighing the rewards I think, "What is the downside of going and appearing to not be a racist?" The answer is that a large block of republican primary voters ARE racists. That doesn't mean the candidates who didn't show up are racist but they are very aware that many of their constituents are. Makes me feel kind of sick to my stomach.
G-Bushy and the Republicants (I sometimes spell this with a U) have decided that it is more important to fund the war and not raise taxes than it is to repair the nation's roads and bridges as well as other infrastructure projects. This is a Libertarian like argument and it really pisses me off. They expect that federal projects can build roads and then leave them to the states to maintain. It's such ridiculous bullshit since the division of wealth from state to state is vastly varying. Taxes provide funding for infrastructure projects that create jobs. Estimates say that for every billion that goes into an infrastructure project, 40,000 jobs are created. Why would anyone argue against it? Because we are a nation of children who want everything but want someone else to pay for it. I am not a rich man and I would rather pay more in taxes than have another person die because a levy breaks or another bridge falls.
I am intersted in politics, community work, history and write about just about whatever comes into my head. Sometimes that's good. Sometimes that's not so good. Anybody who finds themself like minded is asked to email me a suggested post.
