Pat Robertson shows again why the Christian Right is such a laughingstock

Not towing the party line isn't just unpatriotic, it's unChristian.Obviously only Satan worshiping leftists would have a problem with our overthrowing sovern nations to plunder their resourses.Manifest Destiny doesn't stop at the Pacific.Jesus wants white Americas to kill all other groups and take their stuff.Christianity teaches us "Might makes right".

Quote: Well how about this -- Karl testified under oath before the investigating committee that he was not the source of the leak.So he LIED UNDER OATH...I seem to remember someone else who lied under oath and about sex, not a violation of national security.Good things the Republicans were such staunch supporters of Clinton, otherwise you'd look like a bunch of hypocrits

This is correct. "Left" leaning ideology is why Sweden has such a horrible health care system. Oh, wait, I'm sorry, they're kicking our butt.So, your response should be - but we are a much more significant economic power. But, I counter by pointing out that it's our natural resources that make us stronger. Sweden isn't exactly a bread basket, unless they find a way to export snow.Meanwhile, let's look at the very successful right leaning countries - Syria, Iran, North Korea...Wait, that list looks awful familiar. Oh, right, Axis of evil.I keep seeing "Christians" claiming that Robertson doesn't speak for them. Well, he sure speaks for some of you. The Christian Coalition wields enormous power in DC. And, their possitions on issues social and political are just as poorly thought out as the ones PR is spouting.

Hate to break it to you, but conservative Canadian reads pretty much like pinko in the red states

Right, because Pat is advocating a policy of assassination and plunder and Dean is advocating that we shouldn't be in Iraq on false pretense.If you call that a wash, I'd hate to see your laundry.

Proof?He was called before the committee, they asked him "Are you the source?" He said he was not.Additionally, Clinton fudged about an improper but not illegal relationship.Karl Rove committed TREASON

You're right. I remember all those years of hard labor Paris Hilton put in to get to where she is now. Back breaking work being the offspring of the super rich. She's a paradigm for honest American labor. Clearly, you've lost your mind. Yes, the insanely rich pay more both numerically and as a percentage than the bottomed out poor. And the Right is doing EVERYTHING in it's power to change that equation. The Estate tax (or as it's better known - the Dynasty Tax) is under attack by the Right wing as unfair.It's so hard for those poor poor children of the super rich to get only 30 million dollars inheritance instead of 50 million. How will they feed their families?!Meanwhile, people earning 20,000 are paying a large portion of their income in taxes. Not income tax, but taxes on gas, liquor, sales tax, social security, cigarettes... They are getting clobbered, but by all means, let's only look at how unfair it is that gazillionaires should pay taxes at all.

Whoa, wait a second. We gave China favored nation status. We treat the royal family of Saudi Arabia as if they were the royal family of America (which there is a good argument that they are).You don't have to come out and say, "We support China's abuse of human rights" to be supportive of it.If someone were to go on a shooting rampage in a mall and gave them a discount shoppers card, you could argue that we are supporting their shooting rampage.

Wow, talk about the blind leading the blind right off a cliff... Um, I don't think that stock options of mega-rich CEOs count as "earned income" in many people's books. Most of this corp. privateers enjoy enormous salaries and extreme stock incentives, then sit back and watch as the company plummets into bankruptcy.Also, there is an entire class of people in this country who survive on family money. They don't "earn" anything. They live off the interest that their war profiteer ancestors left for them.As for this Would those be the self same pension funds that the aforementioned corporate raiders plunder as they destroy the companies and fatten their pocket books? When you say the middle class "owns" the vast majority of the wealth, the implication behind ownership is that they would be able to do something with the money at some point. The money is not in their hands, they don't control it, they don't own it.

This is false Emergency rooms are required to treat emergencies. There are a whole host of deadly, allbeit not immediately life threatening, diseases that hospitals will elect not to treat.I've never heard of anyone going to an emergency room with a brain tumor and getting brain surgery for free right then and there.Don't see a lot of homeless people on Chemo.And, by the way, one of the BIGGEST problems with the health care system is people going to the Emergency room (very expensive) for things like hang nails and head colds.edit- spellingThis message has been edited by Nuggin, 08-25-2005 02:58 PM

You were asked to provide evidence of Dean's idea's being "not smart, not passionate or not honest" You gave a long list. I'm going to refute them one at a time.I'm completely skipping the "passionate and honest" arguement since we have no real way of testing that. I assume that Dean believes all these things and supports them passionately.So, I'm only going to address how smart the idea is. We are a country governed by rule of law. Therefore everyone, even a terrorist, faces that rule of law through the same process. To have one legal system for one class of people and a different legal system for a different class or people is to have no real legal system at all. The war on drugs has been a war against Suppliers and Users. We've spent billions of dollars and have imprisoned an entire generation of Americans. And the end result -- More drugs, purer drugs, cheaper drugs.Obviously the current system is not working. The suggestion that we try to reduce demand through addiction treatment and thereby shut down the engine that is the drug trade is not a bad suggestion at all. If we had let the UN handle the Iraw situation then thousands of American service men and women would still be alive. Tens of thousands would still have arms and legs. And out debt wouldn't have ballooned by billions and billions of dollars.Additionally, it would have been proven that Iraq didn't have WMD.Seems like the smart thing to me.The other option is going in gung-ho with no plan on how to handle the aftermath of the war and the quagmire of a conflict without a set goal. You think this is a dumb suggestion, yet this is exactly what we're involved in right now.I have no problem with us doing nation-building, I just think you build better with a hammer than a grenade. I don't understand why this in on your list. Are you suggesting that NAFTA is complete and therefore doesn't need changes? Or are you saying that NAFTA is horrible and shouldn't have been put in in the first place. Again, how is having standards and enforcing them not smart (or passionate or honest). The Right is constantly complaining about jobs going overseas to countries where the pay pennies on the dollar. Well, globalized workers rights would help halt that flow. We only have a few tools to use on China. We aren't going to threaten them into compliance. We aren't going to shame them into compliance. That leaves trade. The lifestyle of people in Wyoming is very different that the lifestyle or people living in NYC. It's much more likely that someone in Wyoming is going to need a rifle for hunting than someone in NYC. Right now, any maniac can go to a gun show and buy anything they want. If you want to keep guns out of the hands of the criminally insane, checking to see who the criminally insane are is a pretty good start. This isn't really something Dean said, it's the result of his policies.Leading Dems distance themselves from divisive gun debate. (Oct 2003)
Supports assault weapons ban and Brady bill. (Apr 2003)
Get guns off the national radar screen: no new federal laws. (Nov 2002) [/qs]It's true than many Dems don't agree with Dean's possitions on gun control.There is an appartent conflict between supporting assault weapons ban and suggesting that we not have more federal gun laws, however that gives a false impression. What's happening there is that Dean is supporting continuing the assualt weapons ban, that's not a new gun law, it's a continuation of an existing one. Again, I don't understand what you are trying to say with this statement. Is there a typo? Could you clarify? While I personally don't agree with this possition, it does have some merit.I'm in Los Angeles, and the immigrant problem is as bad here as it as anywhere.We can't simply round up and deport all the illegals even if we wanted to. First, who would do it, the IS is way understaffed. Second, the effects on the economy (short term) would be disasterous. Taking that much labor out of the labor pool would raise wages, but many of the tasks the illegals are doing involve time sensitive products (fruit). The labor disappears, the fruit rots.The US needs to pick a policy and stick to it. If we are going to enforce the law, then fine. If we aren't, then the law needs to be changed. Very few jobs actually pay minimum wage, but those workers who are making min. are really struggling to get by. Additionally, they are the people who will spend the money the most. Someone making 14k a year who gets bumped up with 16k a year is still going to spend every penny of it in the marketplace. I'm not exactly sure what your point is here. That he should suck it up and pay the $76 fee? What was the circumstances of his appeal? What the tax paid late? Are you saying that his fiscally conservative views are "not smart". What's your point?

How do you define "arms"? Pistols? Rifles? Machine Guns? Grenade launchers? Tanks? Nukes?These are all arms. Obviously we need to draw a line somewhere in the list.The right constantly says they support the 2nd, but unless you want militia groups with tactical nukes, you've got to draw a line.

Check out Indian country. Check out rural West Virginia. There are plenty of places in America were people are devistatingly poor.Now, having said that, I will say this. America's poor don't really hold a candle to the poor of 3rd world countries. We don't have villages on the edges of dumps surviving off garbage.When we talk about America's poor, we are really talking about the difference in quality of life between the various classes of US citizens.Yes, many of the poor here have overweight children. Obesity and malnutrician can exist at the same time. A child living off cheese burgers will be very fat and still not "well fed".Yes, many of the poor here have shoes compaired to poor children in Central Africa, let's say. However, the point is that we are an incredibly wealthy country. It's insane that there are any children here who need to go without.Additionally, you point to Nikes as being an indicator of wealth. One of the problems the poor have is misuse of funds. I promise you there are people out there who are very poor, who have new Nikes and only one pair of pants. The shoes are a status symbol that makes the person feel better about all the things they lack. Could the money be spent better. YES. Does that mean the person isn't "poor" by US standards. NO.Finally, I want to say this. It's extremely hard to fight, let alone abolish poverity. As we raise people above the "poverity level", that bar tends to raise. If everyone in the country made 5k more a year, people would be better off, but the people at the bottom would still be at the bottom.

Health Care = Check ups and preventative medicine.Emergency room = emergencyA person who goes to the doctor, has cholesterol checked, is put on Lipator and therefore doesn't have a heart attack is getting Health Care.A person who doesn't go to the doctor, doesn't get medicine, has a heart attack and goes to the emergency room is not receiving "Health Care" he's receiving emergency services.BIG difference. Different in concept, different in execution and extremely different in cost. Preventative medicine is WAY cheaper than emergency medicine

Obviously you want something specific for evidence and will deny anything that anyone gives you. So, pray tell us, what do you want as evidence?