[bgates]

Carlislematthew,
I’m not sure the distinction you raised (pedophile vs homosexual pedophile) is actually used all that much, nor do I think its use would imply a link between homosexuality and pedophilia. An adjective can highlight an unusual characteristic as well as a common one. John Paul II was routinely described as the ‘Polish Pope’, not because Popes generally come from Poland, but because for several hundred years none had.

Personally, I found Boswell quite convincing on the subject of homosexuality in the Church, though I was predisposed to his point of view before reading his book.

Perry, is government censorship part of the Scandinavian formula you’re applauding? The people the Swedes want to appease take a decidedly dimmer view of gay marriage than anyone writing in this thread, you know.

[bgates]

What ‘luxury’ home can you buy in CA for $2 million?

[bgates]

Do you have an example of a country that does not impose its will on others to the extent it is able? China blocks international action in Darfur because of its oil interests; France maintains a military presence in its former African colonies. If anything, the US does not impose its will enough. Japan’s constitution was written by MacArthur, and Japan has been a stable democracy for 60 years. In Afghanistan and Iraq, we stood by and watched as Islamic bigotry was enshrined in the central law of both nations.

I’m not reflexively opposed to the rise of non-US nations, but there aren’t very many responsible actors on the world stage. India, from what little I know, seems respectable, and I think Bush has done well to improve relations with them. But I have scant hope that the gentlemen behind the Tiananmen Square crackdown want to treat me any better than they treat their own citizens.

Where would you like to see more cooperation? With whom would we cooperate? What would it cost us? And what would we get?

[bgates]

The world got richer between 1900 and 2000, yet American influence increased. I often detect some breathless anticipation among those forecasting a decline in American power, which is troubling given the potential successors. China, Russia, Iran, and the EU are each more authoritarian than the US. Perry, I take it you look forward to diminished US power; who would you like to see fill the void, and why?

[bgates]

No, outrages by the rich aren’t going to be stopped by hobbling small-business owners. Raising the minimum wage does nothing to stop cronyism at the top of large corporations.

[bgates]

poorgradstudent, when you say “taking money from the poor and giving it to the richest Americans,” what money is being taken from the poor? The Congressional Budget Office is under the impression that the poorest 20% of Americans have a disproportionately low tax burden.

[bgates]

Perry, would you say your offhand insults of religion reflect the arrogance that is a well-known Gallic flaw, or is it a personal rather than ethnic failing?

Rest assured that children in Paris still walk to the store or take the subway. They can’t get a ride in a car; the North Africans have set all of those on fire already.

[bgates]

We’ve not had all attention on Iraq; there have been 6-party negotiations involving NK for years, plus an American military presence on the border. North Korea is a problem that affects some of our allies at least as much as us; South Korea and Japan have strong incentives to work with us there. I don’t think the administration approach is very likely to succeed, but I can’t think of a better one.

Some on the left like to accuse the administration and its supporters of arrogance, but they have the assumption that it is within the power of the United States to produce any outcome it desires if only it acts correctly. That’s not how the world works. There are other independent actors on the planet, with interests opposed to ours; sometimes there is no good way to stop them. North Korea may be like that.

Iran may be too far gone as well. Here again the administration has forgone military action and relied on negotiation and our allies, the exact strategy many bad-faith leftist critics urged for Iraq. Unlike in Korea, we have no allies willing or able to impose consequences on our opponent. I think the admin should have expanded the ground war years ago; instead Iran and Syria have served as safe havens for our enemies. Our effort in Iraq has suffered, and the danger from Iran has grown.

I can’t imagine options besides continued negotiation; increased military intervention; or surrender. The first and third will not reduce the risk from Iran, the second might. Bubba, do you have any other ideas?

[bgates]

Diego, conservatism is still about lower taxes and smaller government. The Republican party has left their base in that respect, but I have hope they’ll come back.

Your second paragraph just doesn’t fit with facts, though. Conservatives don’t hate immigrants, we just want to make sure that immigration is fair and orderly, and produces loyal American citizens. I know decent guys who are in the country illegally. But I also know decent guys in the tech sector who have been working towards citizenship for years. Seems like the Democrats (and, sadly, the president) want to let the folks who came illegally from central America jump in line in front of legal immigrants from the rest of the world. That’s not fair. I’d like to see immigration overhauled so people coming in legal channels from India, China, Europe, and elsewhere have a better experience with the immigration bureau. As a conservative, I think the less contact with govt agencies the better, so the process needs to speed up.

I also think the legal limit on Mexican immigration is absurdly low. (Around 25,000 a year.) Clearly we can use more than that. At the same time, I think the US is a better country than Mexico, and I’m concerned that allowing too many immigrants from one country risks importing the pathologies of that country.

I also think there’s no more conservative hatred of gays than there is gay hatred of conservatives – animosity both ways, but no outbreaks of violence I’ve heard of. Personally I have no problem with gays, civil unions, etc, and I say that as a straight man (and a pretty one, judging by the attention I got the last time I was in SF on Pride Day.)

Incidentally, even if conservatives did hate immigrants and gays, how much government spending would that entail? Couple million bucks for a fence?

Finally, the ‘love war’ canard has got to go. Conservatives are the ones signing up for the military, right? You think they want to get shot? They’re the ones prone to marry and have kids. You think they want to kill people? Why are they doing foot patrols instead of artillery assaults?

We don’t love war, and you don’t want the terrorists to win, ok? We just think there are things worse than war. If an extra year of the Korean war had turned Pyongyang into Seoul, wouldn’t that have been worth it? If we had pushed into Baghdad in 1991 – when Saddam was reeling, a popular revolt was beginning, and he indisputably was working on nuclear weapons – wouldn’t that have been better than what did happen (tens of thousands of Iraqis killed by Saddam, a decade of the sanctions that the Muslim world blamed on us, a costly US presence in Arabia that was bin Laden’s principal grievance)?

There’s a guy in my old apt complex in Cardiff who’s in the service. You can’t miss his apartment – it has a crayon drawing of the flag with ‘welcome home daddy’ under it. You can’t miss his car – it has the Purple Heart license plate. And you can’t miss the guy – he’s 6ft about 230, maybe 32 years old but will have hearing aids the rest of his life. He doesn’t want to die, and he doesn’t want to kill people. But he believes in what he and his comrades are doing over there. If you don’t, or you think the war’s run badly, or a mistake, those are all defensible positions; but don’t say he loves war.

[bgates]

dz, the statement “why don’t you go over there and shed some of your own blood” is in no way figurative, and I have no interest trying to communicate with someone dishonest enough to claim that it is.

[bgates]

Deadzone, I appreciate your wish to see me bleed. It confirms something I had suspected about your character. Thanks very much; rather than wishing the same in return, I hope you live long enough to gain some wisdom and grow to regret making that sort of comment. Since you won’t bother answering any of my questions, I’ll keep my answers to yours short: Our chief ally in Iraq is Iraq. If we stay and help them, together we can beat the various factions that want to take the place over. If we leave, the people who had supported us will be killed as collaborationists. If I were an Iraqi working with the Americans, I would be very troubled by talk of giving up and going home.

Deadzone, your hatred of Bush and anyone who supports him is the only partisan thing in our debate. I don’t like Bush’s stance on immigration, his campaign appearances at Bob Jones, his failure to veto bloated budgets, or his position on gay marriage. I’ve voted for Nader as many times as I’ve voted for Bush and his father combined. My defense of an aggressive foreign policy to spread freedom around the globe, the kind of thing Truman and JFK tried to do, isn’t based on some love for the Republican party, you narrow-minded hate-filled hack.

Kristine, what goes around comes around. Since you can’t take it, you shouldn’t be trying to dish it out.

[bgates]

Yeah, you didn’t so much ‘refute’ the comparison as spread personal attacks, including rumors about somebody’s sex life. It is sad.

Perry, what about that link did you find especially convincing? The picture that was photoshopped to turn Limbaugh’s eyes red?

[bgates]

Everyone I’ve talked to who’s been over there, and most of the guys I’ve read, are more optimistic than you. What’s you definition of losing the war? Who did win, since we lost?

What is being accomplished is a slow process. Building a civil state from the ground up takes time. Building professional police and military from the ground up is slow. The US Army has over 200 years of tradition, and can train its people in a very secure environment at West Point, and it still takes 4 years to get the lowest level officer ready to go out in the field – at which point he gets led around by a senior noncom with several times as much experience. The American government took seven years to junk the Articles of Confederation, and they weren’t being shot at. Iraq has a written constitution, its government has broad popular support, and its enforcement ability is growing – all thanks to the efforts of American servicemen, including those whose graves you spit on by saying little has been accomplished.

It’s not over. It will be if we give up and go home. The Americans can go home. Our allies in the Iraqi government are home, and will still have to deal with the terrorists, the criminals, the militias, and the Iranians no matter what we do. If the Iraqi people know we will help them as long as they want it, but will leave when asked, their resolve will be strengthened. People like yourself, who would rather hurt Republicans than help people trying to establish something like a free country, make it more likely that our allies try to cut a deal with our enemies before they’re abandoned by us. That would leave Iraq and us worse off.

You have an interesting definition of ‘allies’, if you think most US allies were never involved. Who are you talking about?

[bgates]

You tell’em, CONCHO. Keep away from those distractive debate techniques to focus on the main issue you brought up:

Rush Limbaugh’s ass.

You are the first educated, informed adult who’s ever given me information about Rush Limbaugh’s anal cysts. Please keep me up to date on other equally nuanced stories about the rectums of prominent conservatives.

[bgates]

CONCHO told us yesterday to “all grow up and stop posting to these stupid threads,” apparently so we could spend more time discussing a subject more important to him:

Rush Limbaugh’s ass.

[Author]

Posts