OK, I'm seeking out Democrats for some "deprogramming"...

Have you read his book? He may be partisan, he may write things with a liberal spin, he may even say some pretty nasty things about people he disagrees with, but he is no bumbling idiot.
So, before you go making broad statements, why don't you inform yourself. It helps you not look so kneejerk. The one thing that Franken did, unlike Coulter, is supply all the sources of the FACTS he put in his book.
So like I said, read it first and then attack him.

If I had to choose the thing that gets me the most about the diatribe above, is that assumption you make that criticizing aspect of our government and our political leaders is somehow un-American. When in fact, it is possibly one of the greates rights we share as Americans. To be able to call Clinton whatever you want and not be sent to the Gulag. For Susan Sarandon to speak out against the purpose of our invasion of Iraq without facing a firing squad.
I don't care what you say about Clinton. It has no bearing on the facts of his service. I get a little tired of him being the only whipping boy, but hey, you're an American, exercise your rights to speak your mind. But while you are speaking it, try to open it a bit to grasp that not everyone agrees with you, nor should they.

Ha, ha, ha, ha. I did. And man that is some funny shit. Kind of like when Nixon had Kennedy shot. (ok, I made that up, but you get the point. I hope).

 

Dude, when I get the chance, I will spend the time to personally research and refute the allegations of Coulter. But until then, I was suggesting you read the work of someone who has already done so. It wasn't pointing to anything to justify anything. You asked for info to "deprogram" you and I told you where to look.

Or are you afraid of what you might find?

 

Tigermojo Statement:

If I had to choose the thing that gets me the most about the diatribe above, is that assumption you make that criticizing aspect of our government and our political leaders is somehow un-American. When in fact, it is possibly one of the greates rights we share as Americans. To be able to call Clinton whatever you want and not be sent to the Gulag. For Susan Sarandon to speak out against the purpose of our invasion of Iraq without facing a firing squad.
I don't care what you say about Clinton. It has no bearing on the facts of his service. I get a little tired of him being the only whipping boy, but hey, you're an American, exercise your rights to speak your mind. But while you are speaking it, try to open it a bit to grasp that not everyone agrees with you, nor should they.


Calco Tiger:

If you read my whole post you should have understood my point better. I did not call what Sarandon, Frankin, or Streisand said un-american.

You missed the whole point. Even though i disagree with these people as much as one human could. I will always be willing to die for the Freedom for us all to be free to voice ones opinion. Even those that make my skin crawl.

My point was that they only attack the Republicans when those in their own party who make mistakes are allowed to go by without them saying anything.

Why didnt these people openly condemn Bill Clinton for the wrongs that he did.

My point on being an American first was that neither Republicans or Democrats are perfect and its always easier to see the wrongs the other party does and not look at your own shortfalls.


I am a Republican in Philosophy but i am intelligent enough to admit that some people that i like also make mistakes. I like Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr. and George Jr. but they are human and like us all make mistakes.

I guess the biggest problem i have with the Actors and such making their political statements is that why should their opinion on anything count more than mine. I vote and i have opinions on things. But you dont see me speaking at Harvard on politics when i am an actor . If Barbara Streisand wants to voice her political views so much then by God run for political office.

If she isnt willing to do that then why should her opinion be heard on news programs and the like. It doesnt mean anything more than mine. Thats one thing i resent about the Liberal Press .

Geaux Tigers

 

Here’s the thing: you do have a voice. You are voicing your opinion in a public forum now. Likewise, the majority of talk shows have a conservative slant, to put it mildly. Consequently, people such as Rush, O’Reilly, Coulter, Hannity, Savage, et. al. speak at least in part for you, as they are right wing.

You ask why an actor’s opinion should count any more than yours. The quick answer is, it doesn’t. Just as the above listed talk show hosts shouldn’t have their opinion count more than mine. That they have a wide-reaching outlet for their opinions doesn’t make them any more or less right than me. Or you, for that matter.

That “liberal press” line is so tired. It was the “liberal” press which gave Bush a post-9/11 free ride for over two years because it was reluctant to say anything negative. It’s why no mainstream press voiced concern over the decided lack of evidence when the notion of invading Iraq was pushed by the Bush admin. The U.N. asked for proof. What it and we, the American people, got were a bunch of “wait and sees” which turned out to be if not lies, then accusations based on blatantly bad intelligence. Only now, after it’s way too late, is the press starting to ask the right questions.

 

"The Liberal Press thing is so tired" Thats a crock. The reason it is said so much because it is true. Only now is the conservative press having an outlet. And believe you me people are turning to the O'reily's of this world more and more because of it.

As for Bush's decision to fight the war in Iraq that is always gonna be a difference of opinion issue. But i can tell you this. If Bush Sr. had done the right thing to begin with we wouldnt have had to go back over there. But the reason he got us out is for the very reason we are having problems today. Guerilla warfare.

Another thing is that gutless , spineless Clinton didnt do anything while he was in office to resolve the situation. He was too busy getting blowjobs in the Oval office and selling the country to the Chinese.

But i guess thats ok. In the words of John F. Kennedy " Peace at the expense of freedom is no good. You must have both Peace and Freedom"

Whether they find the weapons or not it was the right thing to do. The question is do the American people have the will to stay the course. Yes Americans will be killed and it sickens me to think of it. But i think back to the Revolutionary War and people died then too who didnt want too so we could be free today.

Is Freedom worth fighting for. I think so!!! I honor every family who has loved ones in harms way. I also understand they may disagree with me. But we are both living under the freedom that our armed services provide.

I love this country and im sure you do too. I think that sometimes the right thing isnt always the easy thing. I am glad i dont have to be the one to make that decision. It is the hardest one the President has to make.

Geaux Tigers

 

Another point is this:

You dont live in one of the most Liberally Biased areas of this country. I am right in the middle of it here in the San Francisco Bay area. So pardon me if my Conservatism cries out for a voice where it can be heard by open minded people.

I guess i have a choice by living here but this is where my job took me.

I worry about the future of this country . Isnt 9-11 a wake up call to people to show you what ignoring these kind of people like saddam hussein will lead too. Bad Muslims dont give a damn about human life. This is a threat to our way of life. And if we look the other way and say this is somebody else's problem pretty soon it ends up on your doorstep anyway. I dont want to wait till those lunatics start releasing Nuclear bombs before we do something.

If history taught us anything is that Hitler and his kind of people are not content . If we hadnt stopped Hussein in Kuwait he might control Saudi Arabia by now. Who would have been next.

Im off my soap box now so let me have it hehe

Geaux Tigers

 

But are those things, in your mind, mutually exclusive? One can be both liberal/conservative and be open minded. It's simple: just listen, try to comprehend, become informed, and then make a decision. It doesn't require judgment on a moral basis.
I can understand why you might be frustrated by the liberal majority in your region, but right now, it is your party that rules the big Roost, so take comfort in that.

Please, let's get this straight. There is not and never has been any proof that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11. The problem with your repeating a false statement such as that, is what causes the public to believe it to be so. Something the Bush administration is getting miles and miles out of. Mind you, I'm not defending Saddam. He certainly has committed atrocities. Just not any that were an immediate threat to the U.S. Like we were told.

Well, what about those bad North Koreans? They have shown not to be too overly concerned with human life. Even more, they actually have a nuclear weapons program. Seems to me, they actually posed a greater and more immediate threat. Our response: we ignored them.
One other thing: to boil it down to "bad muslims" may be the oversimplification of the year.

That would be the Saudi Arabia that funded plenty of the actions of Al Queda. Good thing we saved them from Saddam or else we might have been next. Ooops, too late.

Soap box is yours now.

 

If you get a chance you should move to Brazoria County, Texas. My rep is Tom Delay. You will fit right in.

Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11. Even Bush can't produce evidence of this. If this were the case, we would not have needed the WMD excuse to attack Iraq. It's not a question of whether Saddam is evil. He is. It is a question of where our priorities and national interests are in this matter. North Korea is looking to be a bigger threat than Saddam ever was.

We are going to spend a lot of money in Iraq (is it about $150 billion so far?) that could be dedicated to beefing up the CIA or dedicated towards R&D for defense or even paying down the deficit (heaven forbid).

Hitler had the most advanced military in the world. Saddam was nothing but the head of a gang. Also, history has shown us the colonialism has problems as well. And, that is exactly the net effect of our venture into Iraq.

 

I wonder if you wouldnt mind paying 20 dollars a gallon for fuel Tigermojo. I agree with you that i have no sympathy for the two faced Saudi Arabians but i wonder if we allowed Saddam Hussein to take over all the oil producing countries what we would be paying for gas right about now.

As for the Chinese Communists Jr's called North Korea. We are in a damned if we do or damned if we dont situation. You guys are screaming now about us doing something in Iraq.

We are not the worlds police you say!!! Lets let the French take care of North Korea. They seem to be such good negotiators.

We will send the French Foreign Legion to take care of them. Ehhh!!!

I wonder why Bill Clinton didnt do something about the North Koreans when he was in office? When they were doing all this Nuclear gathering. I think you know but i will spell it out!!!

Because President Hilary didnt want too!!!

Sorry i couldnt resist stating the obvious!!! Remember i am a republican.

Geaux Tigers