From: "Rich Gauszka" 

I don't think we're doing the 'invective thing' either.


"Mark"  wrote in message
news:44caebf8{at}w3.nls.net...
> P.S. Hey, so far I don't think we're doing the "invective thing" that
> started this thread   for many years, any occasional overheated exchanges with apologies as
> appropriate all around and in a timely manner>
>
> "Mark"  wrote in message
news:44caeab4$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>
>> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
>> news:44cae767$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>> Millions of us give our money and labor - it's called taxes.
>>
>> Please. I'm talking way above and beyond that. I recall some low-life
>> dweeb at the UN accusing the US of being "stingy" (I
think it was right
>> after the tsunami, when we had already spent 100s of millions just on
>> logistics of moving our ships into place) but you go ahead and look up
>> how much more money flows directly into charity causes from us (little)
>> citizens than does from US (big).
>>
>>> It's not Democrats ( I'm not one )  that have embraced bureaucracy
>>> lately. Bush appears to love big government and it's scope in affecting
>>> and intruding on our lives
>>
>> I can't argue against the fact that Bush hasn't been a good steward of
>> smaller government, but as bad as he is in that regard, I shudder to
>> think where we'd be by now if the alternative(s) had won.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> "Mark"  wrote in message
>>> news:44cae4e0$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>I don't think that citizens should be forced into any
service (military
>>>>or not), I think good citizens take care of the service
aspect to their
>>>>country in a variety of ways (volunteering here and there
for this and
>>>>that) with no need for coercion. I think the predication of
service as
>>>>administered by a government is reflective of a socialist
point-of-view,
>>>>i.e. if it's not "official and government
induced/controlled/coerced" it
>>>>doesn't really count, seems to be the mind-set.
>>>>
>>>> Well, hell, millions of us give of our time, our money,
our labor, and
>>>> our thoughts both domestically and abroad with no such
coercion, with
>>>> no prodding needed, and the efforts are much more efficient than
>>>> running them through a government mill. Why is it that unless it's
>>>> measured through the Federal government it doesn't count? Why do
>>>> liberals so embrace the bureaucracy?
>>>>
>>>> That the usual suspects here in the US, and without intent
to lump you
>>>> in with them unfairly, are so upset with Bush (not to mention the
>>>> various foreign powers) strikes me as good news and
reminiscent of how
>>>> bent out of shape so many were about Reagan. In other
words, Bush ain't
>>>> going for the usual BS and status quo -- if he were, people would be
>>>> more at ease and thus content in their complacency.
>>>>
>>>> This is not a time for complacency, he understands that.
>>> and how ironic that "many Ambassadors" are
unhappy with John Bolton --
>>>> well hell yea, they don't want to upset the status quo
either, how sad
>>>> too, that the Dems are more concerned with looking good
with those same
>>>> Ambassadors than they are with promoting our interests at the UN>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote
in message
>>>> news:44cadd6a$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>I was just stating my views on the draft. I'm sure some
just want it
>>>>>reinstated for political purposes. I have more of a
Heinlein ( starship
>>>>>troopers ) viewpoint on service in that citizenship and
it's subsequent
>>>>>rights should be predicated on service ( not
necessarily military )
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry Mark - Many who grasp the severity of the
current conflict are
>>>>> also quite worried that this administration has no
clue on what to do.
>>>>> Iraq is a mess. Rumsfeld is still debating the civil
war question with
>>>>> himself. The current Israel/Lebanon conflict appears
to be swelling
>>>>> the ranks of Hezbollah and Bush is under some delusion that
>>>>> 'democracy' there will make everything right.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Mark"  wrote in message
>>>>> news:44cad988$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>> Eh, I disagree. My take on the efforts of the Dems
to get a draft
>>>>>> reinstated is fairly dark. I'm quite sure their
underlying motives
>>>>>> are to undermine any military action any where at
any time by
>>>>>> reinvigorating and motivating those of a
sheep-like protester
>>>>>> mind-set who don't have any regard for reality on
the ground.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I feel that they, the Dems, don't grasp the
severity of the current
>>>>>> conflict(s) and that if they are successful in
their efforts to stop
>>>>>> us from taking action as necessary, that those
efforts would be
>>>>>> extremely dangerous to the very existence of our
nation. >>>>> feel that, I'm absolutely sure of it>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
>>>>>> news:44cad197$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>I always thought ending the draft was a bad
idea.  I feel that having
>>>>>>>a no deferment draft lottery would really make
people think about any
>>>>>>>proposed conflict. Right now it just appears
too easy to go to war
>>>>>>>when most don't have to worry about any consequence
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Mark" 
wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:44cacba2$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>> That's true too, as one aspect anyway.
Which is why so many Dems
>>>>>>>> are pining for reinstating the draft,
although their "ooh we're
>>>>>>>> gonna have a draft" scare ploy prior
to the '04 elections went over
>>>>>>>> like a lead balloon. >>>>>>> year, but they are most certainly looking
with interest at Israel
>>>>>>>> calling up 30K reservists and trying to
figure how to scare people
>>>>>>>> here with more success this time --
they'll fail if they do>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:44caca0b$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Mark"
 wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:44cac981$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "John Cuccia"
 wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>
news:keflc21vmstll8fhuub7nh5a0ohpq9bjlp{at}4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 20:52:40
-0400, "Mark" 
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IIRC, the anti-war
protestors of the Vietnam era didn't show
>>>>>>>>>>>>> up for a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> single march and then
spend the next few years bragging about
>>>>>>>>>>>>> how many
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of marched and whining
that they weren't listened to.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>number of
>>>>>>>>>>>>them
>>>>>>>>>>>>stayed on the mall
permanently after the first protest>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> People protested for years,
all over America.  Some of them even
>>>>>>>>>>> blew
>>>>>>>>>>> things up.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Which goes to show you, despite
the postulations 'round these
>>>>>>>>>> parts, that
>>>>>>>>>> people are not really, in any
substantial numbers, against our
>>>>>>>>>> taking out
>>>>>>>>>> the islamo-fascists in the current
conflicts. It's probably a
>>>>>>>>>> function of
>>>>>>>>>> both this being a required war on
multiple fronts, and people
>>>>>>>>>> knowing it is
>>>>>>>>>> because of free flowing
information, as opposed to those in the
>>>>>>>>>> 60s eating
>>>>>>>>>> up whatever old Uncle Walter (and
his two cohorts on the other
>>>>>>>>>> two networks)
>>>>>>>>>> fed them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There was a draft back then. People
are now semi-divorced from the
>>>>>>>>> conflict
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5