On Nov 5, 11:06 am, Wexford <wrya...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Nov 5, 1:09 am, "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <t...@aint.me> wrote:

"Ray Fischer" <rfisc...@sonic.net> wrote in message

news:472ea94a$0$14120$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...

A "hero" is somebody who kills tens of thousands of people without
risking his own safety?

If you will recall, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.
Their demeanor continued to be similarly or even more
heinous for the next four years... until colonel Tibbets
performed his duty.

The women, children and old men killed in Hirsoshima and Nagasaki were
hardly anyone's enemy.

The tens of thousands of soldiers packed in Hiroshima were our enemy.
And so were the officers staffing the vital military headquarters that
was located in Hiroshima Castle.

And the war industry of Nagasaki was a legitimate target as well.

Pearl Harbor, by the way, was a military target.
Warships were sunk and many sailors were killed.

And had it been attacked during wartime it would have been a
legitimate strike.

But it was attacked before war was declared.

but with one difference, the Japanese didn't
seek out and kill the civilian population of Honolulu.

I hope you aren't implying that Japan isn't guilty of seeking out and
killing civilians during the war.

A History of Liberal Disasters
By Jeffrey Lord
Published 11/6/2007 12:07:43 AM


It's a long list.

Add Hillary Clinton's endorsement of driver's licenses for illegal
immigrants ("it makes sense") to a very long list.

The list? A seemingly unending series of bad policy proposals and
loopy values that liberals have championed during the course of
decades. What all of these subjects have in common is that they
upended common sense in favor of a fit of moral superiority and
emotional feel-goodism. They are a history of liberal disasters. All
backfired or were proved dead wrong. Sometimes they were outright
lethal. Collectively they are part and parcel of the real reason the
once honorable term "liberal" has won such disdain from so many
Americans when it isn't being hooted out of a serious policy
discussion with laughter. And lying just under the surface of all the
current crop of polls that predict a Democrat victory in the race for
the White House is the lurking reality that any candidate who makes a
point of flying the liberal flag stands a serious chance of being
defeated outright. Why, after all, do you think Senator Clinton hemmed
and hawed her way through the driver's license issue in last week's
debate?

Here's just a handful of my personal favorites:

* Forced School Busing
The idea: to raise the education level of blacks by forcibly
integrating urban schools with white kids who lived in "segregated"
neighborhoods. The result? Disaster. School enrollment in Boston
plummeted, the percentage of whites dropping from 65% to 28%. In one
urban area after another across the country where forced busing was
instituted amidst angry turmoil "white flight" to the suburbs took
off, igniting a surge of what liberals now moan as "suburban sprawl."
And education? A study by the National Institute of Education could
not find a single study that showed black kids were better off as a
result. Prominent liberal advocates, of course, sent their own kids to
private schools. Slowly, painfully, most busing programs wound to a
stop. But the damage -- to the kids, to the neighborhoods and to the
cities -- was done

* Welfare
The idea: The Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) was
established in 1935 with the objective to provide welfare relief for
needy families and their children. The result? It wound up promoting
baby bearing-for-benefits scams, smothered incentive to work,
destroyed marriages and created what came to be called a "culture of
dependency" that helped devastate the family structure, particularly
in the black community. The election of a Republican Congress in 1994
forced the issue to the front, with Speaker Newt Gingrich making it
point three of the ten-item Contract with America. Conservatives
insisted on a five year lifetime limit to be on the welfare rolls, and
a system that led from welfare to work. Only after vetoing the
resulting bill twice, as his presidential re-election campaign loomed,
did President Clinton sign the conservative reforms. The consequences
were dramatic. Welfare rolls plummeted by 57%, costs fell
significantly, the work requirement was a success and child poverty
rates for African-American families dropped sharply. But again, the
damage done before reform was considerable.

* Luxury Tax
The idea: Pushed by liberals in a 1990 tax bill, the idea was to tax
big-ticket luxury items and increase government revenue. The result?
Buyers of luxuries such as yachts, jewelry, furs and cars stopped
buying them in the United States. Among others, American carpenters,
electricians, fiberglass and metal workers lost their jobs. Boat
building businesses went bankrupt. And the revenue? A projected gain
of five million in taxes resulted in an actual loss of $24 million.
The luxury tax was finally repealed, but not soon enough to undue the
damage to hundreds of thousands who lost their jobs or businesses.

* Alternative Minimum Tax
The idea: Enacted in 1969, the AMT was to disallow deductions and
exemptions in computing tax liability. Why? There were 155 -- 155! --
"rich" households who were deemed by liberals to have too many tax
breaks, thus meaning they paid little or no income tax. The AMT would
supposedly cure this. The result? The Congressional Budget Office now
says that 34% of taxpayers earning between $50,000 and $100,000 will
have to pay the tax -- which is another way of saying that liberals
believe if you earn $50,000 you are rich. That 155 taxpayers has now
expanded to 11% of all taxpayers. The CBO also says that if this is
not changed by 2010, nearly every married taxpayer earning between
$100,000 and $500,000 will be forced to pay the AMT. Predictably,
after all the unintended consequences have kicked in once again,
liberals in Congress are now frantically calling for repeal to avoid
the wrath of their constituents.

* Bringing Peace to Vietnam and Cambodia
The idea: Withdrawing from Southeast Asia completely in 1975 would
bring "peace" to the people of Vietnam and Cambodia. The result? A
tsunami of murder, concentration camps and desperate "boat people"
engulfed the area, not only not bringing peace to the region but
resulting in what is now recorded as "the killing fields." The subject
usually brings forth a deafening if not embarrassed silence from
liberals when they are not busy, in face of massive evidence to the
contrary, in denying the result of their idea altogether.

* Free Love
The idea: If it feels good, went this old idea that was dusted off at
the end of the 1960's do it. Promiscuity? No problem. Result? The AIDS
epidemic, a stunning rise in sexually transmitted diseases. Oops.

* Drugs
The idea: Turn on and drop out. Glamorized by the media, hey man, this
was supposed to be great stuff! Let's party! The result: when the
party was over for all those cool white kids from the sixties America
woke up to a generation of drug addicts who had either died of
overdoses or gotten hooked for a lifetime on any number of drugs. It
drove up crime rates and the cost of health care, ruining families and
wreaking havoc in the black community. Way to go.


TOO SUM UP: Whether it was education policy, welfare policy, economic
policy, foreign policy or social policy, time after time after time
what became the guiding lights of modern American liberalism proved to
be utter disasters. Obvious consequences were ignored and unintended
consequences were rampant. All too frequently people who were supposed
to be helped -- African-Americans, the poor, the Vietnamese and
Cambodians, women, the young -- were severely harmed. Most
disturbingly, the proponents of these policies seemed to simply shrug
their shoulders at the results and move straight on the next disaster.

This time? The idea is to provide a driver's license to illegal
aliens. In other words, an official government photo ID that can be
used to facilitate everything from voting to travel to obtaining
government benefits for people who aren't American citizens. Smart,
no?

Liberalism today as a philosophy is burning up faster than Southern
California. Bereft of common sense, wreaking havoc on whole sections
of the American and global population, it is still being championed by
followers utterly oblivious to the consequences already long on the
record.

"I have a million ideas," Senator Clinton said recently, thoughtfully
adding that "the country can't afford them all."

No kidding

"Almond" <almond@brothers.orgy> wrote in message
news:fgr6vb$2j1h$1@sage.ukr.net...

In article <4730bf34$0$495$815e3792@news.qwest.net>, "Chairman Mao says:"
<Mao-ze-Dong@prc.com> wrote:

I know to you Liberals a hero is someone who marched in a Gay parade or
demonstrated in front of the White House.

Liberalism is a Mental Disease!

And you?

--
The most powerful Usenet tool you have ever heard of.
NewsMaestro v. 4.0.7 has been released.

* Bug fixes and improvements.

Note: In some previous releases some class files were missing.
As a result, the program would not run.
Sorry for the inconvenience.

Web page:
http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/

Download page:
http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/Download_Information.htm

Send any feedback, ideas, suggestions, test results to
newsmaestroinfo \at/ mail.ru.

Your personal info will not be released and your privacy
will be honored.

rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) in

Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote:

rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) in

J Young <younginsights@aol.com> wrote:

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- A spokesman in Columbus said the U.S. pilot whose
B-29
dropped
the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, has died.

A "hero" is somebody who kills tens of thousands of people without
risking his own safety?

Did you ever hear of being shot down?

The US military made damn sure that the chance of that particular
airplane being shot down was zero.

Oh? Exactly how?