Abolish the Iowa Caucuses

Abolish the Iowa Caucuses.

They are a disgrace. They mean nothing, they contribute nothing, and they are worth nothing. In fact, they are worse than nothing. They actually detract from the political process. The Iowa Caucuses are not democracy at its finest. They are the political equivalent of the “Lord of the Flies,” anarchy running wild.

Even worse than that, they do not represent the American electorate. Before everybody in Middle America pillories me as a coastal snob, Iowa may be Middle America, but the voters in the caucuses are not in the middle.

The Iowa republicans are a disgrace. They have proven this for the last three decades. They care about one issue, and one issue only, and that is abortion.

Abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion, abortion.

That is the only thing they factor into their decision.

It is not that there is anything wrong with being pro-life. What is wrong is neglecting every other issue and sacrificing conservative principles as a whole for one issue.

There is no other explanation for the support being given to Mike Huckabee.

I want to make it clear that I think Mike Huckabee is a good, decent man. He is an honorable person with a good family who leads a positive life that can and should be admired. So what? The same can be said about Barack Obama, and nobody in their right mind would call Obama a conservative republican.

Yes, Huckabee is a conservative compared to Obama, but he is well to the left of most republicans.

I made a vow to uphold Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment of not attacking another republican. However, I do have the right to point out positions on issues without denigrating the person.

Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Fred Thompson all want an aggressive strategy regarding the War on Terror. They all have staunchly supported the War in Iraq, and are concerned about Iran. Mike Huckabee has not been in this category. The other four men want to reduce taxes, and have done so through executive action or legislative votes. Mike Huckabee was a tax raiser.

So what does Mike Huckabee offer that the others do not? A social conservative streak that he mentions in every speech.

Rudy Giuliani was a hero during 9/11, and his Mayoralty was one of the greatest examples of leadership ever. He is pro-choice, and therefore disqualified.

John McCain and Fred Thompson are both staunchly pro-life, but they are guilty of the sin of not mentioning it in every sentence. They actually speak about other issues.

Mitt Romney gets some support for his pro-life credentials that he repeatedly emphasizes, but faces suspicion from others for not being that way since birth himself.

Mike Huckabee may not have any answers for Islamofacists who want to kill people once they are born, but he will absolutely make sure children are born into this world of uncertainty.

Like a Harvard MBA that has to announce in every sentence of every conversation that they are from Harvard, Mike Huckabee continues to hammer the pro-life message, other messages be d@mned. He claims that he is running for President, not Pope, but his campaign displays the exact opposite message.

The democrats in Iowa are even more pathetic. Qualifications do not matter. Speaking in a clear voice, offering lofty rhetoric, and blathering about “hope,” matter more than any experience or grasp of foreign policy issues.

Yes, Barack Obama is a decent man. So is my local dry cleaner, and neither of them are qualified to be President.

On top of that, the caucuses for the democrats are designed to facilitate bullying, or as liberals call it, “discussion.” Any candidate not getting 15% of the vote will watch as their supporters are cajoled, bribed, and arm twisted into supporting one of the frontrunners. These are the same people that want to allow unions to do away with the secret ballots for workers. Private voting allows people to vote their conscience, free from intimidation. The democrats would rather have union bosses muscle out certain candidates and stifle dissent in the name of unity. Apparently the people who talk about the future still think that 2008 Iowa is 1930s Chicago.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/01/02/countdown-to-iowa-let-loose-the-testosterone/

So the democrats have a broken process and the republicans have a single issue electorate. Democrats are held hostage by the unions and republicans by the Churches.

Past candidates that have been well received in Iowa include Pat Robertson and Alan Keyes. Ronald Reagan lost in Iowa, which people in the other 49 states cannot fathom.

Dick Gephardt and Tom Harkin won, proving that as Iowa goes, so goes Iowa.

As an added bonus, despite many politicians obsessing about diversity, Iowa is lily white.

Every once in awhile, an Iowa winner goes on to win other states, but they would have won those states anyway.

This year the frontrunners on both sides are the candidates that have unifying support–among the other party.

Republicans are salivating over the prospect of facing Obama. It is not his race, although anyone daring to criticize Obama gets the race card played against them (which proves it is the left that focuses on race). It is complete lack of a resume. His suit is emptier than John Edwards, and that is not an easy thing to achieve. Obama is the king of pablum. He thinks we should talk with Iran and Syria, and that hope is the answer to everything.

Democrats, not known for publicly admitting to anything involving prayer, are praying that they face Huckabee in the general election. They cannot wait to paint him as a knuckle dragging bible thumper. It will work. Anybody that thinks the pro-life issue and the culture wars are what every American focuses on have short memories. Pat Buchanan’s speech at the 1992 republican convention in Houston was the gift that kept on giving to the Clinton campaign.

I have a deep respect for Christian America, and Christianity. My objection is to sacrificing principles. The democrats can vote for Obama because they truly are that dense. They generally do not care about real issues that matter.

Republicans have always been better than that. Except in Iowa. Republicans claim to be free market conservatives, but then support welfare in the form of ethanol subsidies. Yet make no mistake about it. Abortion is what matters.

The republicans have a superb Mayor, a War Hero Senator, a brilliant business executive, and a high powered Washington lawyer. Then they have Huckabee.

The democrats have a Senator with years of experience on the Foreign relations committee. They have a former Energy Secretary. On a rung below they have a guy who sues hospitals and a lady who happened to be married to a President. Below that they have Obama.

Huckabee and Obama speak well. As Chris Rock says, “Speaks well is not a compliment.”

Yes, it has been over six years since 9/11. However, it has been less than six days since Benazir Bhutto was murdered by Al Queda terrorists. Can we really trust any candidate that is a deer in the headlights on how to handle terrorism? For those that want to change the channel, we can’t. Unlike the nonsense many fight about, this life and death struggle actually is important.

The other 49 states might even consider Islamofacism a serious matter. Not Iowa. They would rather hear empty rhetoric about hope and endless preaching from preachers.

This is what Iowa has brought us. There is no excuse for it.

The Iowa Caucus needs to go the way of Old Yeller.

Then we can focus on the uselessness that is New Hampshire. Then again, if New Hampshire does one thing right, which is debatable, it ignores Iowa.

So should we.

eric

39 Responses to “Abolish the Iowa Caucuses”

  1. micky2 says:

    I’m glad you brought up the ethanol thing.
    The Iowa corn farmers vote is a no brainer.

    “Republicans claim to be free market conservatives, but then support welfare in the form of ethanol subsidies. ”

    Farm subsidies are exactly that.
    We need ethanol like we need another Carter.

  2. Spree says:

    You tell em Eric!!! Voted for this.

  3. Jersey McJones says:

    Unfortunately, we have a constitution that pretty much leaves the elections to the states. By becoming the fist, Iowa has entrenched itself in that position – it’s who would dis’ the first state? it’s a Catch-22. Giuliani is trying it, and I’m curious to see how he does. But remember, the GOP will never allow the big states to have to much power, otherwise the party will swell with Giuliani’s, Christs, and Schwarzeneggers, and if that happened the party would lose it’s power over Jesusland. Already we see a huge rift in the GOP base because of the Jesusland folks and their anti-establishment Huckabee. Clearly, with such intractable issues as immigration and free trade (most of the GOP funders want these things but most of their voters do not), and the social issues that serve to keep the flock so well but eventually have to come to some kind of conclusion (the GOP can’t let that happen, or they’ll lose the issues as base motivators), the GOP has reached a fork in the road. Iowa is pointing that up. It’s very interesting. Regardless, there are plenty of Iowa’s out there. If it wasn’t Iowa who would it be? Kansas? Wyoming? South Dakota? All these states would have the same problem, and there’s plenty more where they come from. The GOP can’t survive without the small states, and most of the small states are in Jesusland. I see the Iowa issue as moot.

    JMJ

  4. micky2 says:

    Jersey; They’re growing corn in all those states too

  5. micky2 says:

    Damn laree !
    Did you see those teeth in Hillarys pic over at chickaboom ? The English and George Washington would be envious.

  6. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, I pointed out for that reason that there are plenty of small GOP states in which agro-subs and ethanol are primary political issues. There aren’t so many small (or large) Dem states that share that prime issue. I was being polite about it. I took it that you guys knew what I meant. It’s the GOP that has the electoral problem with Iowa – not the Dems, though they should. But I think people like you and I (and Eric?) are very weary of the ethanol rush. Where I differ would be in non-ethanol agro-subs. I think there is a place for agro-subs, though I think it should be very targeted toward R&D, help with the USDA regs, etc.

    JMJ

    ps – By “help with the USDA regs” I meant to help them COMPLY, not AVOID.

    JMJ, again

  7. GeorgeH says:

    Huckabee is Jimmy Carter with a Pro-Life spin.

    It may be time to re-form the Whig party.

  8. Eric-
    I firmly believe Huckabee will be the next President, for better or worse. I predicted it November 30 (risky, but what the hell?):

    http://tinyurl.com/ytjzfb

    Sorry for the tease, but I didn’t want to paste a long explanation in your comments…

    Happy New Year!!

  9. micky2 says:

    George H.
    I dont think anyone could EVER be as bad as Carter, but I get what you’re saying.
    Jersey; Are you sitting down ?
    I was only bolstering your point.
    But this doesnt mean we’re doing dinner.

  10. Mr. Fabulous says:

    Wait a minute now, I think your local dry cleaner is very qualified. In fact, I look forward to working on his campaign.

  11. Jersey McJones says:

    The Carter thing was clever, guys. Huckabee could be an honest outsider who fails miserably in the end, like Carter. Like I always say – Carter was one of the finest human beings to set foot in the White House and that’s why he was one of the most ineffective presidents. Wouldn’t it be funny if we got a Jimmy Carter Republican this time around? LOL!!!

    JMJ

  12. micky2 says:

    He’s not a fine human being if he runs the White house for 4 years and screws up everything he touchs and becoming known as the least effective president the country has ever had.
    As a matter of fact, it makes him an idiot.
    If he wasnt smart enough to see that the rest of the world did not want to hold hands as he thought they would, that makes him an ideolistic idiot. As a matter of fact, it got alot of people killed and put undue pressure on administrations that followed.
    If he truly believed that the world would run out of oil completely before 89, he was an idiot.

  13. chris naron says:

    Isn’t saying you’re not a coastal snob, and then explaining why the Iowa caucus should be ashcanned a bit like saying “I’m not a racist” then explaining why black people shouldn’t be allowed to vote?

    One can make a pretty convincing case that the Iowa caucus isn’t as relavant to the outcome as the hype would suggest, but that’s no reason to diparage it any more than the Alaska primary (I pick that example because the last time I checked, Ron Paul was in the lead there).

    Now, whe you say, “My objection is to sacrificing principles” I wonder what you mean. Christian voters who hold pro-life as a litmus test aren’t sacrificing principles–pragmatism perhpas, but not principles.

    I will not vote for Rudy or Romney even if they win the nomination. I’d have to hold my nose big time on Huck or McCain. But I don’t see my position, though based on principle, necessarily unpragmatic as I don’t see either Rudy or Romney standing a chance against the Democrats. There’s just not enough separation between them on many issues. Republicans don’t win elections by moving closer to the middle than Democrats, they win by moving the debate to the right and forcing the Democrats to either move with them or position themselves as ultra-liberals. And we know how that’s worked out for them.

  14. Jersey McJones says:

    “Republicans don’t win elections by moving closer to the middle than Democrats, they win by moving the debate to the right and forcing the Democrats to either move with them or position themselves as ultra-liberals.”

    Ultra-liberals? In the middle??? What the heck does that mean? Does that mean that if you’re not an anti-choice misogynist wingnut then you’re an “ultra-liberal”???

    That’s senseless.

    Micky, I meant what I said. Jimmy Carter was an ineffective president BECAUSE he is such a good human being. Apparently (judging from most past presidents) one has to be a corrupt puppet to be an effective president. And I’m not, if you notice, attaching any ethical value to “effective.” By “effective” I simply mean “get what they want done.” Bush (an idiot if there ever was one) was quite effective when he had a one-party state (I still can’t the American people were so intensely stupid as to elect a one-party state), and amazingly is effective even now that the Dems have the Hill. If there is a devil, surely Bush has made some kind of deal with him.

    JMJ

  15. micky2 says:

    There you go, calling the American people stupid again. Except this time its “intensely stupid”
    We were “intensely stupid” twice. Seeing as how Carter never made it to a second term.
    Liked Eric said about his dry cleaner. He’s a decent guy, but not qualified. Neither was Carter. He was an idiot to think he could make a difference.
    Lets get one thing straight here Mr McJones. I didn’t hate, nor was I crazy about Clinton. But the man is not an idiot.
    I am not head over heals in love with Bush, but the man is not an idiot.
    I freeking hate Al Gore, but the man is not an idiot.
    For all of these men including our president Bush, it takes a certain amount of devotion and “hustle” to do what they do. Jimmy Carter had neither one. It has nothing to do with “deals with the devil” . If Bush can run a single party state with the Dems on the hill it just makes him that much smarter and you less able to understand what a real leader is.
    I take offense to it when you constantly call most of the people I choose to surround myself with “idiots”. Especially the guys and gals spilling blood for your ungrateful ass. Which you have previously called “not that educated” ( and I proved you incredibly wrong on that)
    I don’t think you yourself are the sharpest knife in the rack. But that doesn’t cause me to call the majority of people in my country “stupid” or “idiots”.
    Just because someone doesn’t run around kissing everyone’s ass, it doesn’t mean that there is anything sinister going on. And just because you lost the potatoe sack race it doesn’t mean that your opponent was cheating. Grow up and stop taking your confusion out on people who never did a damn thing to you except not see things your way. You have proven yourself hypocritical on this point. As I have pointed out to you before that you love the majority when they see it your way, and they are all geniuses. But if they differ with you, they are idiots. Thats just plain childish.
    Sometimes it is you or I that is the idiot and not the whole country. To imply that the whole country is full of idiots , is idiotic.
    This is and has been the greatest country ever on the face of this planet. And it didn’t get that way because its full of idiots.
    But I must confess, right before Carter was elected, drug use in this country was at its highest ever. Which could be one reason he got elected. I have a feeling all the junkies and low life’s knew they where going to need that welfare package down the road in their life. And Carter was just the guy to ask. Or they were just stoned at the polls. It was a lost generation , I was there, I was a part of it. And I remember it very well. I have feeling you were still in diapers and don’t even realize the magnitude of Carters mistakes. We had to wait in line hours for gas, and only on every other day. As far as his foriegn policies went, they went backwards , they all failed. And so now we have the mess we have now and have had for decades. And when Reagan came along we could all look at Carter and say ” what the hell have we done?” He had to go, and he did.
    Reagan got elected and the first thing he did was launch a war on drugs because saw how they were responsible for getting an IDIOT elected into office.
    So do us all a favor and stop calling the majority of your fellow country men “idiots”
    Because frankly. It makes you look stupid , mean and incredibly arrogant and disrespectful towards people who are otherwise a lot nicer than you.

  16. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, I learned a long time ago that one party government – at all levels – is a recipe for disaster. It doesn’t matter what party it is, if that party has control over all branches of a government, it will be corrupted. As Lord Acton famously said, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

    Yet after seeing this in Acton action with the GOP from 2001-06, you still don’t see the problem, huh?

    As for Jimmy Carter, he was a true outsider. Because of this, his political capital – especially in the face of the turbulent late-70’s – just wasn’t enough to get congress on board many of his initiatives, although he did accomplish quite a bit. Far from an idiot, he creds are vast and highly impressive. Unlike that idiot Bush you conservatives put in the White House, Carter is a prolific author, a Nobel Prize winner, the only president who made real peace in the Middle East, and a reknowned humanitarian, he served unquestionably honorably in the military, ran a successful business, managed to become governvor of Georgia as an integrationist at a time when that was no easy task, and is and most always was a true and committed Christian. Bush has accomplished and is NONE of those things. Carter’s tenure was marked by foreign and domestic events that were for the post part out of his control, and congress, for a variety of reasons, was not helpful at all.

    “Especially the guys and gals spilling blood for your ungrateful ass. Which you have previously called “not that educated” ( and I proved you incredibly wrong on that)”

    No you didn’t. By definition, of course, most enlistees are not that educated nor have the benefit of coming from wealthy, educated backgrounds. Most of the recruits are too young to have attended college, so your argument is moot anyway. And today, the military is having a much harder time recruiting from the middle and upper classes. The milittary can help these recruits later acheive more than they could without the military, but while in the military they are not laerning skills valuable to a modern, capitalist, Frist World state, as joblessness numbers point out.

    “This is and has been the greatest country ever on the face of this planet.”

    LOL! Now that’s hubris!

    “Reagan got elected and the first thing he did was launch a war on drugs because saw how they were responsible for getting an IDIOT elected into office.”

    LOL! Now that’s idiotic!

    The war on race, er, uh, drugs was started and reamins to this day to establish a police state, repress undesirables, create a law and order industry with allegiance to the Right, and to steal taxpayor dollars for the prison industrial complex. Reagan was among the worst human beings to ever set foot in the White House – that’s why he was so popular.

    I stand by what I said and I’ll say it again any time. Americans can be very, very stupid. I believe it is the fat, lazy, spoiled attitude of the inheritors of an old, dying empire.

    JMJ

  17. micky2 says:

    JMJ said;
    “As Lord Acton famously said, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
    Confucious said;
    ” Lady who fly upside down, have crack up”
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said;
    “Yet after seeing this in Acton action with the GOP from 2001-06, you still don’t see the problem, huh? ”
    Only if you look at it as a problem Jersey, if stopped bitching maybe you could figure it out and it wouldn’t be a problem anymore.
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said
    – just wasn’t enough to get congress on board many of his initiatives,
    This is where the majority that you so often call “idiots” stepped into action.
    Congress knew stupidity when they saw it.
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said;
    “Carter is a prolific author,”
    Yea right ! All his books do is kiss Palestinians asses ! I read one !
    Anyone can be an author today. And almost anyone can get published , so what !
    And here’s an example of just how bad his last book was .
    A Comprehensive Collection of Jimmy Carter’s Errors

    Jimmy Carter purports that “everything” in his new book is “completely accurate,” and maintains (incorrectly) that the book’s critics deal in straw man accusations and ad hominem attacks. But many if not most of the facts on which his book’s premise rests are demonstrably false.

    • Jimmy Carter Distorts Facts, Demonizes Israel in New Book

    One gets the feeling after reading just a few pages that if [Carter] could have blamed Hurricane Katrina on Israel, he would have.

    • S&S Stands Behind Carter (Publishers Weekly)

    Andrea Levin, executive director of CAMERA, which describes itself as a nonpartisan media watchdog organization, said she and her association don’t take issue with Carter’s stance but, rather, with his handling of history. “We have nothing to argue with about his opinions,” she said. “What we’re talking about are issues of fact.” …

    When asked whether S&S will change the book, Rothberg said: “We’re going to stick with the president’s version.”

    • Jimmy Carter’s “Settlement Freeze” Deception

    Jimmy Carter has consistently and falsely claimed that during the Camp David negotiations Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin agreed to a settlement freeze to last the duration of subsequent peace talks, and that Begin violated this unwritten agreement. …

    [But] Begin promised and delivered a three month freeze, and further, Jimmy Carter knows this.

    • Correcting Carter’s 242 Distortion (Jerusalem Post)

    In the controversy over Jimmy Carter’s error-ridden new book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, the role of publisher Simon and Schuster has been largely ignored. The assumption, evidently, is that the company producing, promoting and profiting from a supposedly non-fiction history on a contentious topic, bears no responsibility for the book’s accuracy – or falsity. Indeed, Simon and Schuster makes no pretense of assuring the factual merit of its product or of planning to redress errors.

    Vice President of Corporate Communications Adam Rothberg told Publishers Weekly when asked whether S&S will change the book: “We’re going to stick with the president’s version.”

    That “version” includes myriad untrue statements of a kind newspapers routinely correct.

    • Carter Admits to Ignoring Key Source

    Not only did Carter ignore the authoritative source on what transpired at the Camp David negotiations, he apparently also didn’t bother to consult news reports from the era.

    • NPR’s Fresh Air Allows Carter to Revise History While Smearing Israel

    … Terry Gross, host of “Fresh Air,” interviewed Carter and allowed all his falsehoods to pass unchallenged, one-by-one. The broadcast was also filled with incendiary language and misleading charges.

    • Time Inc. Turns to Propagandist for Book Intro

    It is wrong to treat a partisan activist—especially one whose views are on the extreme end of the spectrum of a contentious debate—as a credible and objective expert. Yet Time Inc. turned to Jimmy Carter for its book on the Middle East.

    • Historian Severs Association with Carter Center Over Distorted Book

    Professor Kenneth Stein of Emory University denies having anything to do with “the research, preparation, writing, or review of President Carter’s recent publication,” which he charges is “replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments” and resigns his 23-year association with the Carter Center.

    • On CNN, Many More Carter Fabrications

    The sheer number of factual errors in these two CNN appearances suggests that Carter either has scant knowledge of the facts, or little desire to truthfully discuss those facts.

    • Another Emory Professor Denounces Carter

    Professor Melvin Konner declined an advisory position at the Carter Center, and wrote of the former president that “Something has happened to his judgment. I don’t understand what it is, but I know it is very dangerous. At a minimum, his legacy is irrevocably tarnished …”

    • Mass Resignations from Carter Center

    Fourteen members of the Carter Center advisory board have resigned after concluding that the Center’s founder, former president Jimmy Carter, has turned to “malicious advocacy” for the Palestinians and against Israel.

    These are facts Jersey ! Not some dreamy super hero you invented in your mind !
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said;
    “and a reknowned humanitarian, ”

    Darryl Hannah and Pamela Anderson are renowned humanitarians, so what ?
    ==================================================================

    JMJ said;
    ” Carter is a prolific author, a Nobel Prize winner,”
    Hey ! if they’ll give one to him it explains why Al Gore got his !
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said;
    “and is and most always was a true and committed Christian. Bush has accomplished and is NONE of those things. ”

    Uh… last time I checked, Bush was a Christian.
    Besides that , isn’t being a Christian an bad thing in your book ?
    You refer to us as living in ” Jesus land” and call us “fools”
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said;
    “Carter’s tenure was marked by foreign and domestic events that were for the post part out of his control, and congress, for a variety of reasons, was not helpful at all.”

    And he made it worse with his little kumbaya band aid remedies and congress knew his head was up his rump and so he got little co operation.
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said;
    “No you didn’t. By definition, of course, most enlistees are not that educated nor have the benefit of coming from wealthy, educated backgrounds. Most of the recruits are too young to have attended college, so your argument is moot anyway”

    Yes I did, because you never replied back when I presented you with the average qualifications of the average enlistee.
    “This is not a drafted army, it’s a professional force, so folks are staying in longer, they’re older and they’re more likely to have families.The average age of Iraq soldiers is around 27.

    http://www.aim.org/guest_column/4996_0_6_0_C/

    “In the modern American military, between 93 and 95 percent of current recruits have high school diplomas, compared with 75 to 85 percent of their military-age civilian counterparts. Those averages are based on far too many studies to cite here, but no one on either side of the political fence is disputing the numbers
    According to a U.S. Department of Defense document, Who is Volunteering for Today’s Military, “nearly two-thirds of today’s recruits are drawn from the top-half of America in math and verbal aptitudes.”
    According to a just-published study by Dr. Tom Kane with the Heritage Foundation, “In 2004, 92.1 percent of active-duty officer [commissioned officers, lieutenants and above] accessions held baccalaureate degrees or higher. From 2000 to 2005, between 10 percent and 17 percent of active-duty officer accessions held advanced degrees, and between 35 percent and 45 percent of the active-duty officer corps held advanced degrees. This indicates that officers continued their educa­tion during the course of their mili­tary service.”

    Moreover, the study indicates approximately seven percent of enlisted recruits between 2003 and 2005 have some college under the belts coming into the military, and 11 percent of active-duty enlistees in 2004 had some college experience. Many of today’s enlisted soldiers in fact hold degrees prior to entering service.

    Fact is, our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines today are smart: The smartest we’ve ever had, and certainly the brightest bunch on average taken from those in the general population who age-wise are eligible for military service. Numbers don’t lie, though politicians might.”

    Still think they’re uneducated ?
    Actually it would be you who is uneducated on the facts.
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said;
    “LOL! Now that’s hubris!”

    The dictionary describes hubris as excessive pride or self-confidence; arrogance.

    DAMN RIGHT ! Do you have a better country to mention Jersey ?

    Hopefully you can pack your sh** and move there !
    ==================================================================
    I said;
    “Reagan got elected and the first thing he did was launch a war on drugs because saw how they were responsible for getting an IDIOT elected into office.”

    JMJ replied;
    “LOL! Now that’s idiotic!”

    Reagan called drugs “a menace to our society” In light of that he was elected by the people who were tired of people who made poor decisions and who’s actions were pillaging our society.
    I know its a definite statement that came from humor, but it still holds some truth.
    And I do agree that him and Nancy were actually clueless on the issue. As I mention in one of my articles.
    http://micky2.wordpress.com/2007/09/10/thoughts-from-a-recovering-addict-2/
    I don’t see how any one can argue that the cost is not worth it, especially compared to the prison system’s miserable failure rate. A productive citizen generating revenue and self esteem is far more worthy than a convicted drug addict sitting on his ass, getting mad at the world next to a stainless steel crapper.

    Its not nearly as idiotic as blaming 911 on Bush, the history proves you incredibly wrong on that one. Which you obfuscated from.
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said;
    “I stand by what I said and I’ll say it again any time. Americans can be very, very stupid. I believe it is the fat, lazy, spoiled attitude of the inheritors of an old, dying empire.”
    First of all, Reagan was re-elected and there’s a difference between saying that Americans “are all stupid” and “can be stupid” And your case you have repeatedly called “all ” the Americans who don’t see it your way “stupid and idiotic” Do some research and be honest. You’ve said it a million times (maybe less).
    And second of all, why in the hell would you want to be surrounded by so many people if you thought they were idiots ? And since you believe so much that our country is soon to be in the crapper. Or as you say” an old dying empire”
    WHY DONT YOU LEAVE ?

  18. Jersey McJones says:

    “Yea right ! All his books do is kiss Palestinians asses ! I read one !”

    Obviously you haven’t. I have. Though I find his style dry, he does get his points out well, and he’s a brilliant man.

    As for his “Apartheid” book, I haven’t read that, but I have seen some of the knocks on it and they seem petty, defensive, and more than just a little irrational. But the Israel debate always seems to fall along those lines. Adult conversation about Israel is a rare thing indeed.

    As for the Military, whatever, Micky. You’re a pie-eyed patriot. I can’t argue with that sort of irrational epistemology.

    As for Reagan, he was a dirty scoundrel who narced to the HUAC and was a lousy president.

    As for 9/11, while I do think it may well have happened with or without Bush, I do think his election made for a perfect storm of events with which OBL took advantage.

    As for America, like I said, you’re a pie-eyed patriot. I love my country, but I don’t like everything it does. Real love requires honesty and constructive criticism. Phony love is just an expression of insecurity.

    JMJ

  19. micky2 says:

    JMJ said;
    “Obviously you haven’t. I have. Though I find his style dry, he does get his points out well, and he’s a brilliant man.”

    There you go again, knowing things that only God or myself could know.
    because I didn’t agree with his most recent book does not mean I did not read it. As amatter of fact. How could I say I didn’t agree with it if I did not read it.
    How could I say ‘all he does is kiss Palestinians asses” ?
    Timothy Leary and Charles Manson were brilliant men. But I would hardly consider them smart. Ward Churchill is very educated also They all got their points across, but they’re all idiots.
    ==================================================================
    Jmj said;
    “As for the Military, whatever, Micky. You’re a pie-eyed patriot. I can’t argue with that sort of irrational epistemology.”

    Epistemology is a theory of knowledge.
    What I presented you with are facts and verifiable knowledge, not theory.
    You can kick and scream like a baby all you want, but the FACTS are there.
    And the facts prove you and you’re blind hatred for anything Bush wrong again.
    The link is dedicated to accuracy, if you went there you would not of said something terribly inaccurate.
    And the source W. Thomas Smith Jr. is director of the Counterterrorism Research Center of the Family Security Foundation and a Contributing Editor to FamilySecurityMatters.org. A former U.S. Marine infantry leader and shipboard counterterrorism instructor, Smith writes about military/defense issues and has covered conflict in the Balkans and on the West Bank..
    I think I will take his word which is verifiable instead of your pissy opinion of our servicemen and women.
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said;
    “As for Reagan, he was a dirty scoundrel who narced to the HUAC and was a lousy president.

    Who gives a rats ass ? It was 1947 and he was more an actor and lib than anything.
    just cuz you like commies doesnt make him wrong.
    He was re-elected, nuff said.
    ==================================================================
    And then you try to weasel out of this one by first saying this;
    “Personally, Micky, I am quite convinced that Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 BECAUSE Bush and the GOP became the one party ruling majority.

    And then saying this;
    As for 9/11, while I do think it may well have happened with or without Bush, I do think his election made for a perfect storm of events with which OBL took advantage.

    First you are convinced its because of Bush.
    And now you trim it down and say; “you think it may well of happened with or with out.”
    Thats are far departure from “convinced”

    The two statements less than two days apart make you look like a hypocrite .
    Laree and I blasted you with FACTS to contradict your claim and made it look ridiculous.
    ==================================================================
    JMJ said;
    “Real love requires honesty and constructive criticism.”

    Calling people you love “idiots” is not “constructive criticism” by any stretch of the imagination.
    Lying about our military men and womens scholastic abilities and educations by calling them “not that educated” is unconstructive criticism.

    Do you remember how John Kerry dug his grave when he said that if you did not get an education you could end up in Iraq ?
    The crap hit the fan ! And all branch’s of the service flooded the media with info to prove him wrong. Its old news, its real because it happened and is well documented, its sliced bread and you ‘re wrong.

  20. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, you had earlier said, “All his books do is kiss Palestinians asses!” That is not true. So, either you are being disingenuous, or you haven’t read his books.

    As for the military, 5 minutes on “the google” will show you that the education levels of enlisted people tends to be pretty low, and level IV recruits are growing in numbers on top of that. It’s not a knock on our troops (I considering signing up myself, but they told me they wouldn’t take me back then). It’s just reality. I do not trust your source. And now there’s this!

    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/12/16/army_knew_of_cheating_on_tests_for_eight_years/

    but really, it’s just common sense. If you join the ranks at 18, then by definition you don’t have much if any higher education. You don’t have facts, just an opinion projected through the prism of pie-eyed patriotism.

    As for Reagan, if you “don’t give a rat’s (@$$)” about a man’s character, then you are not going to be a very producitve voter.

    When Americans act like idiots, I’ll call them on it. I love my country, but I hate stupidity.

    JMJ

  21. micky2 says:

    Well gosh, no sh** sherlock ! Who do you think you’re talking too ?
    Just because you think most of America is stupid , dont even think of me that way !
    Of course they cant have college under their belt if they are only18 !

    THE FACT of the matter is that they are still smarter now per age level and qualifications than they have ever been. And if you even read the stats in my post you would just stop being such an ass and trying to convince the world that our soldiers are not that educated.

    And then you expect me to believe an UBER liberal rag owned by the NY times ?
    The Boston Globe ? Whoo ha ha ha ha
    But I should mention that your measly chinsey little document only talks about entry exams !
    Not the educational content of the average serviceman !
    Good God almighty ! You really do think people are stupid ! And that you can just bull sh your way through life.
    You want to compare my source to a lib rag that hates the military ?
    Whooo ha ha ha ha.

    I dont have facts ? You’re insane !
    My source is a miltary specialist in counter terrorism. Hes done tours in the Balkans and the West Bank. And is a contributing editor for FamilySecurityMatters.org
    And then theres more, much more.

    http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/10/31/135841.shtml
    Kerry’s troop-bashing remarks belie the truth about the educational level of U.S. troops. According to figures readily available on the Internet, 99.9 percent of the enlisted forces have at least a high school education, 73.3 percent have some college, 16.2 percent have an associate’s degree or equivalent semester hours, and 4.7 have a bachelor’s degree.
    What’s more, over 85 percent of field grade officers have advanced degrees – 70.7 percent have master’s degrees, 12.1 percent have professional degrees and 2.5 percent have doctorate degrees.

    ==================================================================
    If you cared about a mans character or even knew what the word meant you wouldnt say such things about our soldiers and citizens just because you disagree with anything connected to Bush.
    Carter chumming it up with Chavez is character ?
    Clinton getting head in the oval office and lying about it is character ?
    You may not like the guy in the oval office, but at least he doesnt bring interns in there to get a hummer.
    And what about the character of your lovely congress ?
    Not only are they lacking in character( I voted for the war but I’m against it).
    But they are impotent.
    Reagan was calling out commies because he didnt like them.
    Thats pretty good chracter if you ask me.
    But not from a commies perspective

  22. micky2 says:

    I’m sorry. I did not read “all” of Carters books.
    I’m not that stupid.

  23. Jersey McJones says:

    “THE FACT of the matter is that they are still smarter now per age level and qualifications than they have ever been.”

    Take a wild guess what those qualifications used to be! LOL! Look, they’re regular folks like everyone else. Unfortunately, far more of them come from the working class, rurality, inner cities, and the poor than does the general population. And veterans unemployment, criminal and homeless rates are staggering and rising. The truth smacks your argument upside the head and all of this is well known and could be looked up in a matter of seconds if you’d just bother.

    Oh, and I never mentioned officers, Micky. They are a small minority of the force.

    As for character – engaging in statesmanship or getting a BJ in the OO, nothing compares to squealing on your friends to the HUAC. Reagan should have a special place in hell for that.

    JMJ

  24. Jersey McJones says:

    I can’t believe you would be so fickle about a man’s character, Micky. If you think Reagan was right for doing that then I hope it is because we will never know what he really said as opposed to presuming what he said. I really hope that for you. Otherwise… I don’t know what to say to you, man. You do know the story, right?

    JMJ

  25. micky2 says:

    JMJ said;
    ” I don’t know what to say to you, man. You do know the story, right?”
    Those people werent his friends anymore. What is this ? South central L.A.? You cant squeel on commies ?
    If I thought you were a commie or supporting the cause via propoganda or whatever, I would squeel all day long. Even hunt your butt down myself. 🙁
    I ‘ve read the transcripts from 47 and I was there for the whole Lennon thing while you were in diapers and its really all a bunch of crap.
    About as significant as all the Kennedy conspiracy theories and Rosie O Donnels sex life.

    This whole debate has boiled down to you getting pummeld on all issues again.
    So now you want to change subjects again to something nobody but you really gives a crap about.
    Whatever you may think, thats cool. But the fact remains that our soldiers are not as uneducated as you try to tell everyone they are.
    My sources kick your sources ass.
    Reagan is seen even by most libs as a good man and president.
    He scored two terms, beat the commies without firing a shot, period , nuff said.

    JMJ said.
    The truth smacks your argument upside the head and all of this is well known and could be looked up in a matter of seconds if you’d just bother.”

    Get this right POINDEXTER ! For the hundreth time , its not my job to do your research ! You make the claim, you prove it !
    KAPEESH ?

    And whether you like it or not, officers are servicemen also. And they are also better educated than they have ever been.

  26. Jersey McJones says:

    Do you think that HUAC blacklisting was a good thing, Micky?

    JMJ

  27. micky2 says:

    I hope you realize that HUAC itself did not blacklist people.

    And if you must know, yea I think weeding out commies was a good thing.
    But hey ! Clinton didnt inhale ! We all make mistakes

  28. Jersey McJones says:

    That’s disturbing. I knew you were a bit of an authoritarian, but now… I don’t know what to believe. I can only hope that you just have no clue what I’m talking about.

    JMJ

  29. micky2 says:

    Its not about authority at all.
    In the middle 40s we had a large paranoia floating around, and it was a just paranoia because commies were attacking everywhere in europe and we at home were suspicious of commie propoganda and indoctrination being placed through hollywood.
    So you had the huac investigate and “unfriendly ” witnesses as they were called (nixon, reagan, etc..) brought fourth names of those they suspected were trying to corrupt our country. The huac never blacklisted anyone. It was the producers and magnates who did the blacklisting.
    But you see, in those days the threat was real and gave viable concern since this enemy had actually already killed millions.
    Unlike the prefabricated “Gerbil Warming” scare we see today.

  30. Jersey McJones says:

    Micky, really, I get it, the HUAC didn’t personally do the blacklisting. Really, I get it. I’m quite well read on the subject. But if you think Reagan was right to name Hollywood names – his friends and collegues as it were – because they may have had certain political beliefs, knowing what Jack Warner et al would do once those names came out, then I think you are about as UnAmerican a person as I have ever known. What Reagn did was despicable and anyone who thinks otherwise… well, I’ll just leave it at that.

    JMJ

  31. micky2 says:

    I’m getting close to squeeling on you Jersey. Sometimes you sound like an Al Queda plant.

  32. chris naron says:

    Jersey,

    Read my post again. It makes perfect sense. Republicans win by making the Democrats move to the right, which for them would mean towards the middle. If the Democrat takes the other approach, moving further to the left, he or she positions herself as an ultra-liberal. It’s pretty simple.

  33. Jersey McJones says:

    Chris, you summed it up.

    Micky, good luck with that sort of rhetoric.

    JMJ

  34. micky2 says:

    Its not luck Jersey. You obviously had your head somewhere when Kerry opened his yap and within hours the stats that prove you to be just plain mean went all over the airwaves and hit every talk show and news cast there was.
    You have one pee ass little source that comes from one of the most liberal citys in America. And has spawned one of the most liberal rags in the country.
    Thay is the rag you take your info from and ask everyone to believe it.
    At least my sources come not only from the military itself but many, many others as you so efficiently failed to notice.
    Once again, all you got is bla bla bla and nothing to back it up.
    You are in some serious need of luck when all your points can never be verified or proven.

  35. AL says:

    As a former enlisted man in ’72 and currently an officer< I have to back up Micky2, even though his facts already speak volumes. Many of the draftees did not have high school education, and it was not considered “honorable” to serve, so many middle and upper class did not join. Many got deferments. Level of training today is phenomenal compared to then. It’s no longer, “low crawl, shoot, follow the leader”… Soldiers at all levels have to learn diplomacy, negotiation skills, sophisticated technology (radioes, GPS, night vision devices, scopes, blue force tracker, et al), and any number of skills we didn’t even dream of years ago. I am scared about what this nation is becoming. We’ve always had yellow journalism, but we are succumbing to demogoguery – don’t confuse me with facts because I “feel” or “believe” this way or that. If you are “right” you are wrong, and if you are “left” you are stupid. Not always the case. President Bush has done an exceptional job identifying our second greatest threat and declaring war against terrorists. He has done a terrible job with information operations. Our greatest threat is from within. Dialogue and negotiation can go a long way. These same things are now being used in Iraq, and it’s working. OK, not perfectly, but better than kicking in doors and alienating everyone, as these posts seem to do – it would be nice to concede a point now and again – that may give bargaining power later and let’s people know we aren’t completely brain dead..

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.