[Dukehorn]

I would humbly disagree with your comparison to Dan Quayle. I’ll just show my elitism right now when I say that someone who graduated magna cum laude from Harvard, was on the Harvard Law Review and taught Con Law at the University of Chicago has shown a lot more brains (and ambition) than a grad of DePauw University and a middling grad of IU Law School.

I have no idea how you consider Bush Jr. qualifications that much better than Obama. Bush was a well known waste-about at Yale and Harvard (no honors at either). His oil business was premised with seed money from his Dad and his Texas Rangers score was based on connections at Yale.

My criticisms of Bush (so don’t put words in my mouth) have never been about the inexperience. I’ve met the google founders and have great respect for Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Michael Dell. Inexperience is not necessary a bad thing if you have smarts and a curiousity of the “issues.” I would assert (and you will disagree) that Bush has shown a propensity to not care about the “truth” but to have his subordinates mold the truth to fit his view.

This lack of intelletual curiousity is my express criticism of Bush and is seemingly confirmed by his miscues in Iraq and in domestic policy (multiple DOJ scandals, illegal wiretaps, top down torture memos). The expansion of executive powers by someone who is “crusading” against Islam, the promotion of faith based charities by the federal government, the belief that abstinence should be an essential part of the AIDS package to Africa shows an intellectual lightweight.

Obama may be overly optimistic but he’s not an intellectual lightweight.

Also surveyor, I don’t think America’s greatness is premised on any of the following:

a) no firearm restrictions (you’ll have to explain why semi-automatics makes America so great)

b) tax cuts (isn’t Bush’s tax cuts combined with the war spending one of the issues with our economy)

c) lack of understanding of foreign issues (hmmm, so the Dems are to blame for our Iraq policy of the past 6 years, try again)

d) lack of any fundamental understanding of business and economics (hmmm, so you think white collar criminals will turn themselves in? Who’s fooling themselves here?)

e) Do you think I hate America?

Frankly, I think people like you who over simplify matters are the real danger to America. People who think that science is evil, that scripture can only be appreciated by true Christians (so Dobson says that Obama can’t use the Old Testament, hey, let’s throw out the 10 commandments), that substance is passe (you haven’t made a single substantive comment on this thread).

Oh wait, am I stereotyping? Hmmmm, that makes two of us…..

[Dukehorn]

I’m personally more worried about China. With the number of Chinese spies recently prosecuted in the US, their increased jingoism and their skewed male/female ratio, I think it’s a recipe for disaster.

I’ll have to scrounge up the article, but someone noted that with a restless young male population that have no prospects for marriage one of the few ways that China can proceed to harness that youthful “energy” is to go to war with somebody (perhaps somewhat akin to the British second son syndrome in India).

As for Bush and company, I guess I did call it BS when it happened. I studied military history with Ted Rope at Duke and studied WWII in France at the Normandy Beaches. There was classic military propaganda techniques employed on our civilian population. Look at Cheney’s set of interviews pre-war. I remember my friends yelling at me when I dismissed the Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman heroics as fabrications. My comment was there was no way that these stories about their bravery can be confirmed in such a short amount of time. Ergo, the stories are false. Sadly enough, I was proven right.

As for Iraq reconstruction, just a review of history indicated that the chances for success were going to be limited even if we planned for it.

I consider myself well-read and moderately well-traveled but nothing special and I guess I am just shocked at how our political leaders could get it wrong on so many fronts that seemed so obvious to me.

[Dukehorn]

I’m personally more worried about China. With the number of Chinese spies recently prosecuted in the US, their increased jingoism and their skewed male/female ratio, I think it’s a recipe for disaster.

I’ll have to scrounge up the article, but someone noted that with a restless young male population that have no prospects for marriage one of the few ways that China can proceed to harness that youthful “energy” is to go to war with somebody (perhaps somewhat akin to the British second son syndrome in India).

As for Bush and company, I guess I did call it BS when it happened. I studied military history with Ted Rope at Duke and studied WWII in France at the Normandy Beaches. There was classic military propaganda techniques employed on our civilian population. Look at Cheney’s set of interviews pre-war. I remember my friends yelling at me when I dismissed the Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman heroics as fabrications. My comment was there was no way that these stories about their bravery can be confirmed in such a short amount of time. Ergo, the stories are false. Sadly enough, I was proven right.

As for Iraq reconstruction, just a review of history indicated that the chances for success were going to be limited even if we planned for it.

I consider myself well-read and moderately well-traveled but nothing special and I guess I am just shocked at how our political leaders could get it wrong on so many fronts that seemed so obvious to me.

[Dukehorn]

I’m personally more worried about China. With the number of Chinese spies recently prosecuted in the US, their increased jingoism and their skewed male/female ratio, I think it’s a recipe for disaster.

I’ll have to scrounge up the article, but someone noted that with a restless young male population that have no prospects for marriage one of the few ways that China can proceed to harness that youthful “energy” is to go to war with somebody (perhaps somewhat akin to the British second son syndrome in India).

As for Bush and company, I guess I did call it BS when it happened. I studied military history with Ted Rope at Duke and studied WWII in France at the Normandy Beaches. There was classic military propaganda techniques employed on our civilian population. Look at Cheney’s set of interviews pre-war. I remember my friends yelling at me when I dismissed the Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman heroics as fabrications. My comment was there was no way that these stories about their bravery can be confirmed in such a short amount of time. Ergo, the stories are false. Sadly enough, I was proven right.

As for Iraq reconstruction, just a review of history indicated that the chances for success were going to be limited even if we planned for it.

I consider myself well-read and moderately well-traveled but nothing special and I guess I am just shocked at how our political leaders could get it wrong on so many fronts that seemed so obvious to me.

[Dukehorn]

I’m personally more worried about China. With the number of Chinese spies recently prosecuted in the US, their increased jingoism and their skewed male/female ratio, I think it’s a recipe for disaster.

I’ll have to scrounge up the article, but someone noted that with a restless young male population that have no prospects for marriage one of the few ways that China can proceed to harness that youthful “energy” is to go to war with somebody (perhaps somewhat akin to the British second son syndrome in India).

As for Bush and company, I guess I did call it BS when it happened. I studied military history with Ted Rope at Duke and studied WWII in France at the Normandy Beaches. There was classic military propaganda techniques employed on our civilian population. Look at Cheney’s set of interviews pre-war. I remember my friends yelling at me when I dismissed the Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman heroics as fabrications. My comment was there was no way that these stories about their bravery can be confirmed in such a short amount of time. Ergo, the stories are false. Sadly enough, I was proven right.

As for Iraq reconstruction, just a review of history indicated that the chances for success were going to be limited even if we planned for it.

I consider myself well-read and moderately well-traveled but nothing special and I guess I am just shocked at how our political leaders could get it wrong on so many fronts that seemed so obvious to me.

[Dukehorn]

I’m personally more worried about China. With the number of Chinese spies recently prosecuted in the US, their increased jingoism and their skewed male/female ratio, I think it’s a recipe for disaster.

I’ll have to scrounge up the article, but someone noted that with a restless young male population that have no prospects for marriage one of the few ways that China can proceed to harness that youthful “energy” is to go to war with somebody (perhaps somewhat akin to the British second son syndrome in India).

As for Bush and company, I guess I did call it BS when it happened. I studied military history with Ted Rope at Duke and studied WWII in France at the Normandy Beaches. There was classic military propaganda techniques employed on our civilian population. Look at Cheney’s set of interviews pre-war. I remember my friends yelling at me when I dismissed the Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman heroics as fabrications. My comment was there was no way that these stories about their bravery can be confirmed in such a short amount of time. Ergo, the stories are false. Sadly enough, I was proven right.

As for Iraq reconstruction, just a review of history indicated that the chances for success were going to be limited even if we planned for it.

I consider myself well-read and moderately well-traveled but nothing special and I guess I am just shocked at how our political leaders could get it wrong on so many fronts that seemed so obvious to me.

[Dukehorn]

Thanks Allan for the long response. I think the funny thing is that there are a lot of liberals and conservatives that know there is a middle ground which most of the country will be happy with, but we argue at the extremes so it’s very frustrating.

I’m a liberal, but back in 99 I actually wrote a letter to Richard Gephardt demanding that Clinton be impeached for lying under oath. I think it’s consistent to hold the leaders of both parties to the same standard (which, of course, means I’m unhappy with the Iraq War and the lack of plans for reconstruction).

Today’s ruling on the DC handgun law is very interesting. I haven’t followed it super closely but when I lived in DC I had a rifle in the home. I don’t know in oral arguments how alternatives to handguns were argued, but I would imagine that for home defence, a shotgun would be more effective than a handgun or for militia purposes, a rifle with its range would be better than a handgun. Guess that the SCOTUS didn’t want to delve into the specifics of each type of firearm. Sort of disappointed in the decision.

As for Obama and McCain, if either of them perform poorly, they’re out in 4 years, I can live with that. I don’t know if this country would be best serve with a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court (nor a 6-3 liberal majority). For our laws not to swing back and forth, I think I’ll be fairly happy with a 4-4 and Kennedy as a swing vote. That alone would dictate a vote for Obama.

Please remember that it was liberal judicial activism that destroyed the “separate but equal” doctrine.

For all the hue and cry, can you imagine living in a country where colored folks have separate bathrooms. [Hmm, I’ve always wondered what Asians did in the South, did they go to the colored restrooms or the white restrooms or did they just go outside).

Let’s not pretend that separate but equal, mandatory school prayer, mandatory Bible readings were not in effect during (for some of us) our lifetimes. I have to remind some of my immigrant relatives how things were so they can appreciate some of the aspects of social liberalism (even though I’m essentially a fiscal conservative)

And I look at someone like Justice Brennan, who came out of WWII as a Colonel and was one of the most liberal judges during the last 40 years as someone who got what this country was about (freedom of choice, freedom from oppression, fundamental fairness).

[Dukehorn]

Thanks Allan for the long response. I think the funny thing is that there are a lot of liberals and conservatives that know there is a middle ground which most of the country will be happy with, but we argue at the extremes so it’s very frustrating.

I’m a liberal, but back in 99 I actually wrote a letter to Richard Gephardt demanding that Clinton be impeached for lying under oath. I think it’s consistent to hold the leaders of both parties to the same standard (which, of course, means I’m unhappy with the Iraq War and the lack of plans for reconstruction).

Today’s ruling on the DC handgun law is very interesting. I haven’t followed it super closely but when I lived in DC I had a rifle in the home. I don’t know in oral arguments how alternatives to handguns were argued, but I would imagine that for home defence, a shotgun would be more effective than a handgun or for militia purposes, a rifle with its range would be better than a handgun. Guess that the SCOTUS didn’t want to delve into the specifics of each type of firearm. Sort of disappointed in the decision.

As for Obama and McCain, if either of them perform poorly, they’re out in 4 years, I can live with that. I don’t know if this country would be best serve with a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court (nor a 6-3 liberal majority). For our laws not to swing back and forth, I think I’ll be fairly happy with a 4-4 and Kennedy as a swing vote. That alone would dictate a vote for Obama.

Please remember that it was liberal judicial activism that destroyed the “separate but equal” doctrine.

For all the hue and cry, can you imagine living in a country where colored folks have separate bathrooms. [Hmm, I’ve always wondered what Asians did in the South, did they go to the colored restrooms or the white restrooms or did they just go outside).

Let’s not pretend that separate but equal, mandatory school prayer, mandatory Bible readings were not in effect during (for some of us) our lifetimes. I have to remind some of my immigrant relatives how things were so they can appreciate some of the aspects of social liberalism (even though I’m essentially a fiscal conservative)

And I look at someone like Justice Brennan, who came out of WWII as a Colonel and was one of the most liberal judges during the last 40 years as someone who got what this country was about (freedom of choice, freedom from oppression, fundamental fairness).

[Dukehorn]

Thanks Allan for the long response. I think the funny thing is that there are a lot of liberals and conservatives that know there is a middle ground which most of the country will be happy with, but we argue at the extremes so it’s very frustrating.

I’m a liberal, but back in 99 I actually wrote a letter to Richard Gephardt demanding that Clinton be impeached for lying under oath. I think it’s consistent to hold the leaders of both parties to the same standard (which, of course, means I’m unhappy with the Iraq War and the lack of plans for reconstruction).

Today’s ruling on the DC handgun law is very interesting. I haven’t followed it super closely but when I lived in DC I had a rifle in the home. I don’t know in oral arguments how alternatives to handguns were argued, but I would imagine that for home defence, a shotgun would be more effective than a handgun or for militia purposes, a rifle with its range would be better than a handgun. Guess that the SCOTUS didn’t want to delve into the specifics of each type of firearm. Sort of disappointed in the decision.

As for Obama and McCain, if either of them perform poorly, they’re out in 4 years, I can live with that. I don’t know if this country would be best serve with a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court (nor a 6-3 liberal majority). For our laws not to swing back and forth, I think I’ll be fairly happy with a 4-4 and Kennedy as a swing vote. That alone would dictate a vote for Obama.

Please remember that it was liberal judicial activism that destroyed the “separate but equal” doctrine.

For all the hue and cry, can you imagine living in a country where colored folks have separate bathrooms. [Hmm, I’ve always wondered what Asians did in the South, did they go to the colored restrooms or the white restrooms or did they just go outside).

Let’s not pretend that separate but equal, mandatory school prayer, mandatory Bible readings were not in effect during (for some of us) our lifetimes. I have to remind some of my immigrant relatives how things were so they can appreciate some of the aspects of social liberalism (even though I’m essentially a fiscal conservative)

And I look at someone like Justice Brennan, who came out of WWII as a Colonel and was one of the most liberal judges during the last 40 years as someone who got what this country was about (freedom of choice, freedom from oppression, fundamental fairness).

[Dukehorn]

Thanks Allan for the long response. I think the funny thing is that there are a lot of liberals and conservatives that know there is a middle ground which most of the country will be happy with, but we argue at the extremes so it’s very frustrating.

I’m a liberal, but back in 99 I actually wrote a letter to Richard Gephardt demanding that Clinton be impeached for lying under oath. I think it’s consistent to hold the leaders of both parties to the same standard (which, of course, means I’m unhappy with the Iraq War and the lack of plans for reconstruction).

Today’s ruling on the DC handgun law is very interesting. I haven’t followed it super closely but when I lived in DC I had a rifle in the home. I don’t know in oral arguments how alternatives to handguns were argued, but I would imagine that for home defence, a shotgun would be more effective than a handgun or for militia purposes, a rifle with its range would be better than a handgun. Guess that the SCOTUS didn’t want to delve into the specifics of each type of firearm. Sort of disappointed in the decision.

As for Obama and McCain, if either of them perform poorly, they’re out in 4 years, I can live with that. I don’t know if this country would be best serve with a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court (nor a 6-3 liberal majority). For our laws not to swing back and forth, I think I’ll be fairly happy with a 4-4 and Kennedy as a swing vote. That alone would dictate a vote for Obama.

Please remember that it was liberal judicial activism that destroyed the “separate but equal” doctrine.

For all the hue and cry, can you imagine living in a country where colored folks have separate bathrooms. [Hmm, I’ve always wondered what Asians did in the South, did they go to the colored restrooms or the white restrooms or did they just go outside).

Let’s not pretend that separate but equal, mandatory school prayer, mandatory Bible readings were not in effect during (for some of us) our lifetimes. I have to remind some of my immigrant relatives how things were so they can appreciate some of the aspects of social liberalism (even though I’m essentially a fiscal conservative)

And I look at someone like Justice Brennan, who came out of WWII as a Colonel and was one of the most liberal judges during the last 40 years as someone who got what this country was about (freedom of choice, freedom from oppression, fundamental fairness).

[Dukehorn]

Thanks Allan for the long response. I think the funny thing is that there are a lot of liberals and conservatives that know there is a middle ground which most of the country will be happy with, but we argue at the extremes so it’s very frustrating.

I’m a liberal, but back in 99 I actually wrote a letter to Richard Gephardt demanding that Clinton be impeached for lying under oath. I think it’s consistent to hold the leaders of both parties to the same standard (which, of course, means I’m unhappy with the Iraq War and the lack of plans for reconstruction).

Today’s ruling on the DC handgun law is very interesting. I haven’t followed it super closely but when I lived in DC I had a rifle in the home. I don’t know in oral arguments how alternatives to handguns were argued, but I would imagine that for home defence, a shotgun would be more effective than a handgun or for militia purposes, a rifle with its range would be better than a handgun. Guess that the SCOTUS didn’t want to delve into the specifics of each type of firearm. Sort of disappointed in the decision.

As for Obama and McCain, if either of them perform poorly, they’re out in 4 years, I can live with that. I don’t know if this country would be best serve with a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court (nor a 6-3 liberal majority). For our laws not to swing back and forth, I think I’ll be fairly happy with a 4-4 and Kennedy as a swing vote. That alone would dictate a vote for Obama.

Please remember that it was liberal judicial activism that destroyed the “separate but equal” doctrine.

For all the hue and cry, can you imagine living in a country where colored folks have separate bathrooms. [Hmm, I’ve always wondered what Asians did in the South, did they go to the colored restrooms or the white restrooms or did they just go outside).

Let’s not pretend that separate but equal, mandatory school prayer, mandatory Bible readings were not in effect during (for some of us) our lifetimes. I have to remind some of my immigrant relatives how things were so they can appreciate some of the aspects of social liberalism (even though I’m essentially a fiscal conservative)

And I look at someone like Justice Brennan, who came out of WWII as a Colonel and was one of the most liberal judges during the last 40 years as someone who got what this country was about (freedom of choice, freedom from oppression, fundamental fairness).

[Dukehorn]

Allan,

I’ll try to be polite.

I’m intrigued to see (as ex-military) what your thoughts are on the the torture memos and the recent Supreme Court decision on habeas corpus.

Let’s toss out the econ BS because we have no clue on how McCain and Obama will impact the economy. It’s in the tank.

Let’s toss out the stupidity about off-shore drilling since it’s pretty clear that whatever we will be able to pull up will have a marginal impact since global demand is way up.

As for nuclear energy, I’m pro-nuclear, but after Chernobyl and 3 Mile Island, let’s just face the facts that it’s a hard sell.

I’ll ask your views on what I deem are pretty critical social justice issues.

a) Is there a right to privacy even though it’s not explicitly outlined in the Constitution or Bill of Rights

b) Is there separation of church and state? Should intelligent design be taught as “Science” (and if you’re an engineer, I’m hoping that your answer is pretty basic as it relates to how even engineers are taugh re: scientific theory (and “facts”).)

c) Should there be political “officers” that dictate what NIH and NASA scientists/engineers should be stating to the public?

d) Is habeas corpus only available to American citizens?

Seriously, would be interested in your thoughts (esp. after the recently disclosed “screening” at the DOJ for political leanings).

As for expensive social programs, you have any opinions on what’s been more expensive to this country: all those liberal programs versus (a) military program cost overruns (oh yeah, I reviewed a bit of the bidding process), (b) Savings and loan bail-out, (c) Enron and Sarbanes-Oxley, and (d) this mortgage mess.

Somehow, it’s disingenuous to criticize social programs when the military can’t rein its military spending (how effective was the Sergeant York or the Patriot missile system? How much did we spend on the Osprey?) and then complain about the government trying to help the poor when the penalty for white collar crimes that actually impact the economy is so limited.

[Dukehorn]

Allan,

I’ll try to be polite.

I’m intrigued to see (as ex-military) what your thoughts are on the the torture memos and the recent Supreme Court decision on habeas corpus.

Let’s toss out the econ BS because we have no clue on how McCain and Obama will impact the economy. It’s in the tank.

Let’s toss out the stupidity about off-shore drilling since it’s pretty clear that whatever we will be able to pull up will have a marginal impact since global demand is way up.

As for nuclear energy, I’m pro-nuclear, but after Chernobyl and 3 Mile Island, let’s just face the facts that it’s a hard sell.

I’ll ask your views on what I deem are pretty critical social justice issues.

a) Is there a right to privacy even though it’s not explicitly outlined in the Constitution or Bill of Rights

b) Is there separation of church and state? Should intelligent design be taught as “Science” (and if you’re an engineer, I’m hoping that your answer is pretty basic as it relates to how even engineers are taugh re: scientific theory (and “facts”).)

c) Should there be political “officers” that dictate what NIH and NASA scientists/engineers should be stating to the public?

d) Is habeas corpus only available to American citizens?

Seriously, would be interested in your thoughts (esp. after the recently disclosed “screening” at the DOJ for political leanings).

As for expensive social programs, you have any opinions on what’s been more expensive to this country: all those liberal programs versus (a) military program cost overruns (oh yeah, I reviewed a bit of the bidding process), (b) Savings and loan bail-out, (c) Enron and Sarbanes-Oxley, and (d) this mortgage mess.

Somehow, it’s disingenuous to criticize social programs when the military can’t rein its military spending (how effective was the Sergeant York or the Patriot missile system? How much did we spend on the Osprey?) and then complain about the government trying to help the poor when the penalty for white collar crimes that actually impact the economy is so limited.

[Dukehorn]

Allan,

I’ll try to be polite.

I’m intrigued to see (as ex-military) what your thoughts are on the the torture memos and the recent Supreme Court decision on habeas corpus.

Let’s toss out the econ BS because we have no clue on how McCain and Obama will impact the economy. It’s in the tank.

Let’s toss out the stupidity about off-shore drilling since it’s pretty clear that whatever we will be able to pull up will have a marginal impact since global demand is way up.

As for nuclear energy, I’m pro-nuclear, but after Chernobyl and 3 Mile Island, let’s just face the facts that it’s a hard sell.

I’ll ask your views on what I deem are pretty critical social justice issues.

a) Is there a right to privacy even though it’s not explicitly outlined in the Constitution or Bill of Rights

b) Is there separation of church and state? Should intelligent design be taught as “Science” (and if you’re an engineer, I’m hoping that your answer is pretty basic as it relates to how even engineers are taugh re: scientific theory (and “facts”).)

c) Should there be political “officers” that dictate what NIH and NASA scientists/engineers should be stating to the public?

d) Is habeas corpus only available to American citizens?

Seriously, would be interested in your thoughts (esp. after the recently disclosed “screening” at the DOJ for political leanings).

As for expensive social programs, you have any opinions on what’s been more expensive to this country: all those liberal programs versus (a) military program cost overruns (oh yeah, I reviewed a bit of the bidding process), (b) Savings and loan bail-out, (c) Enron and Sarbanes-Oxley, and (d) this mortgage mess.

Somehow, it’s disingenuous to criticize social programs when the military can’t rein its military spending (how effective was the Sergeant York or the Patriot missile system? How much did we spend on the Osprey?) and then complain about the government trying to help the poor when the penalty for white collar crimes that actually impact the economy is so limited.

[Dukehorn]

Allan,

I’ll try to be polite.

I’m intrigued to see (as ex-military) what your thoughts are on the the torture memos and the recent Supreme Court decision on habeas corpus.

Let’s toss out the econ BS because we have no clue on how McCain and Obama will impact the economy. It’s in the tank.

Let’s toss out the stupidity about off-shore drilling since it’s pretty clear that whatever we will be able to pull up will have a marginal impact since global demand is way up.

As for nuclear energy, I’m pro-nuclear, but after Chernobyl and 3 Mile Island, let’s just face the facts that it’s a hard sell.

I’ll ask your views on what I deem are pretty critical social justice issues.

a) Is there a right to privacy even though it’s not explicitly outlined in the Constitution or Bill of Rights

b) Is there separation of church and state? Should intelligent design be taught as “Science” (and if you’re an engineer, I’m hoping that your answer is pretty basic as it relates to how even engineers are taugh re: scientific theory (and “facts”).)

c) Should there be political “officers” that dictate what NIH and NASA scientists/engineers should be stating to the public?

d) Is habeas corpus only available to American citizens?

Seriously, would be interested in your thoughts (esp. after the recently disclosed “screening” at the DOJ for political leanings).

As for expensive social programs, you have any opinions on what’s been more expensive to this country: all those liberal programs versus (a) military program cost overruns (oh yeah, I reviewed a bit of the bidding process), (b) Savings and loan bail-out, (c) Enron and Sarbanes-Oxley, and (d) this mortgage mess.

Somehow, it’s disingenuous to criticize social programs when the military can’t rein its military spending (how effective was the Sergeant York or the Patriot missile system? How much did we spend on the Osprey?) and then complain about the government trying to help the poor when the penalty for white collar crimes that actually impact the economy is so limited.

[Author]

Posts