Political Garbage: Eulogy for America

The only ones who felt betrayed were the John Kerry’s, Ted Kennedy’s and
the Michael Moore’s of America. Through all their deceptions (especially
Moore) in their attempt to get rid of Bush, the majority of Americans
didn’t buy their hogwash and voted Bush for a second term. And where are
they now? Kerry is in a deep state of depression last I heard. Kennedy
is recuperating someplace (in some bar most likely). And what about
Moore? Through all his bellicose remarks about Bush before the vote, the
only thing I heard is that he plans on making a Fahrenheit 9/11 part 2.
I hope it’s a documentary about how Kerry’s campaign crashed and burn
due to idiots like Moore. I wonder what Kerry thinks about Moore today?
Perhaps, finally, Moore will simply fade away, which he so deserves.
And to top it all off, what has all this got to do with space policy
(unless there are plans to shoot these guys into space)?

The only ones who felt betrayed were the John Kerry’s, Ted Kennedy’s and
the Michael Moore’s of America. Through all their deceptions (especially
Moore) in their attempt to get rid of Bush, the majority of Americans
didn’t buy their hogwash and voted Bush for a second term. And where are
they now? Kerry is in a deep state of depression last I heard. Kennedy
is recuperating someplace (in some bar most likely). And what about
Moore? Through all his bellicose remarks about Bush before the vote, the
only thing I heard is that he plans on making a Fahrenheit 9/11 part 2.
I hope it’s a documentary about how Kerry’s campaign crashed and burn
due to idiots like Moore. I wonder what Kerry thinks about Moore today?
Perhaps, finally, Moore will simply fade away, which he so deserves.
And to top it all off, what has all this got to do with space policy
(unless there are plans to shoot these guys into space)?

(Tkalbfus1) wrote in message ...
And its begging that idiot right-wingers don't ruin the country in the
name of saving it.

They do the obvious thing to try to save it, while Liberals concoct complex
theories about how doing precisely the opposite of the obvious thing is what's
needed. For example, for a good part of


Love it when armchair warriors rattle sabres.

FYI from the Washington Post:

Under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran retains the right to produce
nuclear energy. The Bush administration insists, however, that Iran,
as the world's fourth-largest oil producer and second-largest gas
producer, does not need nuclear energy, even though the United States
approved about 20 nuclear energy plants for Iran before the 1979
revolution.

But Iranians counter that they need nuclear energy, specifically seven
1,000-megawatt plants, to accommodate domestic demand that already
absorbs 1.8 million of the 4 million barrels of oil that Iran produces
daily. Iran's population of 69 million is expected to increase to 90
million in 16 years, the government says.

As a result, Iran could be forced to use all its oil just to meet
domestic demands within 20 years. That would be devastating for an
economy dependent on oil exports for most of its revenue, said Ali
Salehi, Iran's former representative to the International Atomic
Energy Agency.

"This is the worst way of using our oil, especially since we won't
have oil forever," Salehi said. "If we did that, we'd be like the
United States, which is the third-largest producer of oil in the world
but also the first importer of oil."

Although the cost of a nuclear reactor is much higher than a plant for
fossil fuels, Iranian experts say the savings that would come from
being able to export more of its oil as a result would pay for a
nuclear facility in two to three years.

SOURCE: Desire for Nuclear Empowerment a Uniting Factor in Iran
Issue Seen as Matter Of Independence, Reaction to U.S.
By Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Sunday, November 14, 2004; Page A25

Paul ) wrote:
: The only ones who felt betrayed were the John Kerry’s, Ted Kennedy’s and
: the Michael Moore’s of America. Through all their deceptions (especially
: Moore) in their attempt to get rid of Bush, the majority of Americans
: didn’t buy their hogwash and voted Bush for a second term. And where are
: they now? Kerry is in a deep state of depression last I heard.

You're full of ****! Kerry is doing just fine.

: Kennedy
: is recuperating someplace (in some bar most likely). And what about
: Moore? Through all his bellicose remarks about Bush before the vote, the
: only thing I heard is that he plans on making a Fahrenheit 9/11 part 2.
: I hope it’s a documentary about how Kerry’s campaign crashed and burn
: due to idiots like Moore. I wonder what Kerry thinks about Moore today?

Probably nothing. Certainly he's not an apologist for the Republicans such
as yourself.

: Perhaps, finally, Moore will simply fade away, which he so deserves.
: And to top it all off, what has all this got to do with space policy
: (unless there are plans to shoot these guys into space)?

Moore, Kerry AND Kennedy aren't going anywhere. And as far as space goes
lets see if Bush can have even a 1/10th of a JFK moment WRT space and get
us back into space. Period.

Eric

Under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran retains the right to produce
nuclear energy. The Bush administration insists, however, that Iran,
as the world's fourth-largest oil producer and second-largest gas
producer, does not need nuclear energy, even though the United States
approved about 20 nuclear energy plants for Iran before the 1979
revolution.

The difference is that Now ever since they unlawfully took American Hostages in
1979, they say, "Death to America!" and they are pursuing "nuclear energy" The
Shah did not have a policy of murdering Americans. I don't think we have an
obligation to look the other way while the Iranians get ready to murder us.
Sure we can retaliate with nuclear missiles, but remember this is a
fundamentalist regime and they don't necessarily behave as normal humans might.
If they say, "Death to American!" and their is the slightest possibility that
they are developing nuclear weapons, we should stop them with as much force as
it might require. If we have to invade them before they get nukes, the cost
will always be less than waiting for them to develop nuclear weapons and then
attacking them. We cannot trust them, they have not given us any reason to
trust them. To protect ourselves, we must eliminate this regime that bases its
power on its hatred of us.

They have declared themselves time and time again as our enemy, why should we
not take them seriously this time, just because they are developing nuclear
weapons. Better to eliminate the problem now!

Tom

Who are the "anti-Americans rooting for Kerry" that you are referring?
Just curious.


Jaque Chirac for one, he rooted for Kerry primarily because he wanted George
Bush to be a one-term President, presumably, he'd want Kerry to be a one-term
president as well. A successful US Presidency is the last thing he wants,
because he claims that America is a "hyper-power" and he consequently wants
America to lose. President Chirac would deliberately root for the politician
that he feels would be the weakest leader for America, he wants Jimmy Carters,
not Theodore Roosevelts.

He does a good enough job of it himself. Do you want a society where we
are not allowed to bacmouth our government? You know, something on the
order of Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany. Is THAT what you want?!

He uses the most expansive interpretation of government's powers in the US
Constitution so that he has the maximum amount of tools in his arsenal for
combatting terrorism. If the Supreame Court stops him, well then at least he
can claim that he made the maximum effort to stop the terrorists. If he
deliberately shys away from the use of government power, then the terrorists
might get an attack through when their might have been something he could have
done to stop them. Its not the President's job to determine the limits of his
own power, that falls under the perview of the courts. The job of the President
is to use the maximum number of tools at his disposal and if he goes too far,
then the checks and balances in the system would presumably stop him.

Tom

Eric Chomko wrote:

Moore, Kerry AND Kennedy aren't going anywhere. And as far as space goes
lets see if Bush can have even a 1/10th of a JFK moment WRT space and get
us back into space. Period.

Ummm, Eric, we haven't left space. There's an American in space right
now as a matter of fact.

Mike

-----
Michael Kent Apple II Forever!!
St. Peters, MO

Right, no WMD were found. Pretty silly, huh?


Saddam Hussein failed to prove that he did not have them before the war
started. The Iranians are now engaging in supicious activity, they should take
heed of what happened to Saddam.

Saddam probably though that by looking supicious, as if he had something to
hide and that he perhaps did have WMD, that the US would be deterred from
attacking and it wasn't rather just the opposite. By looking suspicious, Saddam
Hussein gave the US a reason to invade. Perhaps Iran is following the same path
to folly.
An energy rich country suddenly becomes interested in nuclear energy for
"peaceful purposes" and rejects monitors to see to it that the enriched uranium
doesn't find its way into nuclear bombs. Iran is simply giving us reason to
attack us, and the chants of "Death to America" don't help to pursuade us that
Iran's intentions are peaceful.
What should we do about a country that repeatedly declares itself to be our
enemy, yet claims to be developing nuclear technology for only "peaceful
purposes"?

If Iran wants to be our enemy, fine then lets invade them and get it over with.
I see no reason to wait for Iran to build its nuclear weapons to attack us
with, do you? Its funny that democrats would defend a country that made Jimmy
Carter a one-term President. It seems many Democrats are animated by
ill-feelings toward George Bush, yet cannot muster a similar animosity toward a
country that caused a Democrat to be defeated by a Republican for president.
Because of Iran's illegal hostage taking, Jimmy Carter was defeated by Ronald
Reagan and that set the stage for 12 years of Republican occupation of the
White House. Yet here comes their big change to avenge the Carter
Administration's defeat, yet they don't take it. Why not?

So you think we should attack Iran now?


Would it be better to attack Iran when it actually has nuclear weapons?

If George S. Patton had his way, there would have been no Cold War, because
someone would have gotten rid of the USSR before they had a chance to build
atomic bombs and threaten us and the World with mutual annihilation, yet the
Democrats instead seem to relish cold wars, they seem to want to follow one
cold war with another, the French too seem eager for this. Now is our
opportunity to rid the world of a future nuclear threat before it comes into
being, why should we pass up this opportunity to make the World a safer place
for our children? Would you rather have a nuclear superpower ploting Islamic
Revolution around the World while hiding behind a nuclear arsenal? How do you
know that Iran would be deterred by our own nuclear arsenal if they have one of
their own? It is dangerous to assume that Iranians and other Muslims
necessarily think like us. If they did think like us, the 9/11 attack would not
have happened.

This is "Dr. Strangelove" and you remind me a little too much of the mad
colonel.

Eric

Not so mad, because Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons now. Once it does get
nuclear weapons there may be no means of preventing Iran from attacking us with
them. We can only retaliate after they attack us, we can't stop all their
missiles from reaching us, and besides, nukes can be delived by other means.
The best thing to do is to make sure they don't have them in the first place.
We don't have alot of time for negotiation and diplomacy. We should tell them
stop or else, if they don't, we then invade their country and replace their
government. the alternative is waiting for the Iranians to attack us, then we
can kill millions of Iranians with our own nuclear missiles. Would you prefer
this second option?

Tom

Tkalbfus1 ) wrote:
: Who are the "anti-Americans rooting for Kerry" that you are referring?
: Just curious.
:

: Jaque Chirac for one, he rooted for Kerry primarily because he wanted George
: Bush to be a one-term President, presumably, he'd want Kerry to be a one-term
: president as well. A successful US Presidency is the last thing he wants,
: because he claims that America is a "hyper-power" and he consequently wants
: America to lose. President Chirac would deliberately root for the politician
: that he feels would be the weakest leader for America, he wants Jimmy Carters,
: not Theodore Roosevelts.

Oner could argue that Jimmy Carter help make Ronald Reagan. So does
Chirac want Reagan?

: He does a good enough job of it himself. Do you want a society where we
: are not allowed to bacmouth our government? You know, something on the
: order of Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany. Is THAT what you want?!

: He uses the most expansive interpretation of government's powers in the US
: Constitution so that he has the maximum amount of tools in his arsenal for
: combatting terrorism.

In case you haven't noticed "national security" trumps the Constitution
whjen need be.

: If the Supreame Court stops him, well then at least he
: can claim that he made the maximum effort to stop the terrorists.

Yes, if the SC stopped him I'm sure Bush would claim that. Speaking of
balance of power, aren't you at least a little suspicious of all the power
on the right? I mean you have the SC, Congress and Bush all on the right.
Where is the balance of power?

: If he
: deliberately shys away from the use of government power, then the terrorists
: might get an attack through when their might have been something he could have
: done to stop them. Its not the President's job to determine the limits
of his
: own power, that falls under the perview of the courts.

No, we the people have the right as well. And through the media is how we
exposed Nixon and his skullduggeries.

: The job of the President
: is to use the maximum number of tools at his disposal and if he goes too far,
: then the checks and balances in the system would presumably stop him.

What checks and balances? Right now all the power is on the right. The
media is all that is left (no pun).

Eric

: Tom

Michael Kent ) wrote:
: Eric Chomko wrote:

: Moore, Kerry AND Kennedy aren't going anywhere. And as far as space goes
: lets see if Bush can have even a 1/10th of a JFK moment WRT space and get
: us back into space. Period.

: Ummm, Eric, we haven't left space. There's an American in space right
: now as a matter of fact.

Yes, who got there and will get back using Russian technology.

Back into space, I mean using US boosters and not Russian ones.

Eric

: Mike

: -----
: Michael Kent Apple II Forever!!
: St. Peters, MO
: