Election Results/Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter chicago
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The WTC attack in 1993 was INTENDED to produce 50,000 dead. it didn’t work out that way. The plan was to topple the North tower into the South tower. They actually came closer than you’d think. Because … although the two towers weren’t structurally damaged, the next door 22-story Vista Hotel had its structure severely damaged and it could have buckled and fallen into the North tower.

The WTC attack in 2001 was more successful. Still short of the 50,000 number. But the crater (16 square blocks and 70 feet deep after five years) is still there.
I understand that. I also know that aside from the time of the Civil War, there has never been an attack on American soil that has claimed so many lives as that of 9/11/2001. So why aren’t we concentrating our forces here and making America safer? We have terrorists entering the country that no one knows about. I sometimes think our troops would be better utilized here protecting our freedom on our OWN soil.
If the U.N. would come together and work, we could be a great ali to all the democratic nations. Now we just swoop in and try and play the hero all by ourselves. Obviously that’s getting us NOWHERE!!!
 
What precisely might the UN do? How would the UN stop the Jihad?
The U.N. could collaborate together and join their forces to fight the Jihad as ONE!!!
You know the saying, “united we stand, divided we fall”?
Well? I think we’ve definitely had our legs cut off from underneath us lately because we’ve tried to fix things solo without the aid of other countries. Why do you think people hate the United States so much? We try and play the hero alone and therefore it looks like we’re, in a way, a dictatorship trying to conform everyone to what works for us, even though it might not necessarily work for them.
 
The U.N. could collaborate together and join their forces to fight the Jihad as ONE!!!
You know the saying, “united we stand, divided we fall”?
Well? I think we’ve definitely had our legs cut off from underneath us lately because we’ve tried to fix things solo without the aid of other countries. Why do you think people hate the United States so much? We try and play the hero alone and therefore it looks like we’re, in a way, a dictatorship trying to conform everyone to what works for us, even though it might not necessarily work for them.
With all due respect, we did not start this alone. There were a few countries who thought the terrorism was significant enough to join us. Spain left when the Islamic terrorists bombed a train there. France never finishes anything it starts, Italians ousted their president who believed the Islamists were a threat also.

It would be wonderful if the UN would do as you suggest but that does not seem to be in their plan. Yes, some countries may hate the U.S. but you will notice that they come with their hands out when they have a natural disaster of some kind and we always respond magnificently.

I know there are many that say we should not fight Islamic terrorism. I am not one of them. They have made their intentions very clear and that is to have us DEAD. One just today has said he will not rest until they bomb the White House. I don’t think we can negotiate with people like this, try as we might.
 
I know there are many that say we should not fight Islamic terrorism. I am not one of them. They have made their intentions very clear and that is to have us DEAD. One just today has said he will not rest until they bomb the White House. I don’t think we can negotiate with people like this, try as we might.
I believe we should fight them since they fired on us first. Maybe it’s time we “stepped it up” a notch though and actively search for them and their leaders.
Getting “hung up” in rebuilding Iraq has hurt our forces since there is much resistance to our efforts.
 
  1. The U.N. could collaborate together and join their forces to fight the Jihad as ONE!!!
    You know the saying, “united we stand, divided we fall”?
    Well? I think we’ve definitely had our legs cut off from underneath us lately because we’ve tried to fix things solo without the aid of other countries.
  2. Why do you think people hate the United States so much? We try and play the hero alone and therefore it looks like we’re, in a way, a dictatorship trying to conform everyone to what works for us, even though it might not necessarily work for them.
I took the liberty of numbering your principal points.
  1. The UN has a TERRIBLE reputation for corruption and inaction. The UN simply doesn’t actually DO anything. (Actually they did do a couple of things, but not in the last few decades.)
  2. ENVY. Plain and simple. We “rescued” the French from the Germans in WW2 and they have never forgiven us. The French hate us for that.
Socialists/Liberals [however defined… worth a discussion separately] operate in the Marxist/Stalinist mode. They do not debate their opposition; they destroy their opposition or their suspected opposition … and their families and friends. As Lenin said, “it is better to liquidate one hundred innocent people than to allow one guilty person to escape.” [paraphrase]

It’s just the way they operate and think.

Long topic for discussion. But the examples abound.
 
What was with Tony? I saw it on TV early on Wed. morning but when I woke up in the light of day on Wed. I was half concerned it had all been a surreal dream brought on by too much beer and pizza. Only to read Brown’s column in the Sun Times and laugh uproariously.

Honest to goodness all they needed were a couple of gardening implements.
Ross Perot’s “people with pitchforks” statement was mere rhetoric. A bunch of angry, drunk blue collar Chicago area Republicans… NOW WE"RE TALKING!

Poor Todd Stroger. He went to sleep and missed out on all of the fun.

Really, I thought that the best way to resolve it all would have been to put Tony’s best man up against Todd’s best man and let them go at it in Daley Plaza. Whoever comes out standing gets his guy to be County Board President.

BTW, speaking of drunks, who else caught that guy at Rod’s victory party who kept saying, “Nice! That’s Nice. You’re a Nice Man. You have a very nice family! You’re a nice governor.” It was absolutely cracking up. To hell with polite white collar values, these are my kind of people talking (and I LOVE it!)
 
I took the liberty of numbering your principal points.
  1. The UN has a TERRIBLE reputation for corruption and inaction. The UN simply doesn’t actually DO anything. (Actually they did do a couple of things, but not in the last few decades.)
  2. ENVY. Plain and simple. We “rescued” the French from the Germans in WW2 and they have never forgiven us. The French hate us for that.
The UN needs some serious revitalizing then, especially in this time of terrorism. It’s almost too late but it needs to be utilized for what it was created for: uniting the nations. Terrorists know that the U.S. is the only country in this war and they are trying to turn everyone against us. We all need to collaborate with other countries and end this war.
We just need to leave the French alone apparently and never help them again, if that’s all the thanks we get.
 
and the pro-life movement suffers another unfortunate setback
Yes, the pro-life movement has suffered many setbacks but we must not give up hope and pray that we succed in future elections, not just in America but also Spain, Italy and South Africa.

Its indeed sad that a pious Christian like Rick Santorum was defeated, however, I would like to point out that Spanish Prime Minister Aznar also lost to a pro-gay, pro-abortion Prime Minister Zapastero, while Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi also lost by a slim margin to pro-abortion Prodi.

Spain’s Zapastero refused to discuss his religion in public, which means he is playing a game called Takiya and I strongly believe he is a Muslim.

Speaking about Muslims, I am shocked that a person like Keith Elisson should be elected when we all know he is an Islamist who uses a Christian-sounding name to fool many gullible Americans. Keith has also refused to condemn Arab apartheid towards Copts, Assyrians, Kurds, Berbers, and Jews.
 
I’m wondering why, as a Catholic, you didn’t support Santorum. Solid on life issues, good family man. Perhaps you thought ‘Islamic Fascism’ was a little strongly-worded, but why waste a vote on a third party candidate (or not vote at all…) and remove such a solid pro-life leader from office?

Also-- how is the term ‘Islamic fascism’ nonsensical?

We’re talking about terrorists who ignore the value of reason in any sort of religious or political dialogue, following the violent commands of whatever version of God they are following.
There are those so-called “scholars” in political science and Middle Eastern studies who insist the term “Islamic Fascism” is nonsense. However, Robert Spencer of JihadWatch thinks that such “scholars” like Carl Ernst ave a hidden agenda and are not honest to declare their conflict of interest.

The basic dispute about the term “Islamic fascism” is Islam and nationalism are incompatible, but if you study usage of the English word “nation” is any English text of the Bible, and compare to a Hebrew text of the Bible and an Arabic text of the Bible, we will notice that “nation” = “goy” = “ummah” = religious community.

So, according to the Bible, “nations” are historically religious organisations such as Chinese, Greeks, Armenians, Copts, Assyrians, and Jews. This includes newer nations as well, such as Arabs, Kurds and Turks that simply forced Copts, Assyrians and Greeks to assimilate into Muslim culture.

The USA, Canada, and Australia are not really “nations” at all but “States” according to Wikipedia. That’s because they do not have a common cultural identity and are multi-cultural. On the other hand, most Arab States force Arab imperialism down the throat of the non-Arab majority, thus are considered nations because they are not only having a common cultural identity but also an authorarian government to force Arabism down the throats of non-Arabs.

Arab imperialism is the core principle of Islamic Syariah. Islamism is fundamentally Muslim nationalism and therefore is compatible with Wikipedia definition of fascism.

Its sad that the usage of the term “Islamic fascism” is deliberately made offensive by the political left, such Arab American Institute and other Islamic leaning organisations. Many Middle Christians, particularly Copts and Assyrians refuse to call themselves “Arab American” but fight for multi-culturalism in the Middle East, such as the New Iraq, where Christians defied the pro-Islam Middle Eastern Council of Churches (MECC) by declaring SYRIAC, as an official language. Many right-wing Christian churches in Iraq have began using a 100% Aramaic liturgy with no Arabic. Others use a 100% Kurdish liturgy as to help promote Kurdish culture.

We do this as part of our resistance to every attempt at Arab imperialism because it is closely related to Islam’s quest for a Pan-Arab world order. The Middle Eastern Council of Churches (MECC) is a body that is dominated by Monophysites led by Shenouda III, whose ancestor Benjamin I was responsible for colloborating with the Arab Islamic armies to bring down the Catholic Byzantine Empire.
 
if anyone wants to know the real deal of the middle east and christians, i suggest this excellent site, Al-bushra, ran by a palestinean catholic priest who now lives in the US

al-bushra.org/
 
There are those so-called “scholars” in political science and Middle Eastern studies who insist the term “Islamic Fascism” is nonsense.
I’m not a ‘scholar’, but I agree that it is nonsensical as a term. It’s a transparent attempt at trying to make these guys seem as bad as the really bad guys in the past, the Fascists. I very seriously doubt OBL is looking at a book of Mussolini in his cave and going ‘yes! that was the right way to do things! I want to be the next Mussolini!’
However, Robert Spencer of JihadWatch thinks that such “scholars” like Carl Ernst ave a hidden agenda and are not honest to declare their conflict of interest.
I’m sure he’s objective, pointing on ‘JihadWatch’ :rolleyes:
Its sad that the usage of the term “Islamic fascism” is deliberately made offensive by the political left,
It’s certainly offensive to language, irrespective of whether it offends people. On a similar note, I think it’s a bit sad that usage of the term ‘neo-conservative’ has been made offensive by the political right (it’s got nothing at all to do with anti-Semitism, but that idea has got some traction now). You try and find someone who calls him or herself an ‘Islamic fascist’ - you won’t. That’s quite a good reason to suspect those using it are doing it to offend.

In any event, the term is banned on this forum. I don’t think you’ll find most on this forum are exactly politically ‘left’. A term can be offensive wherever you sit politically.

Mike
 
I wasn’t crazy about Barr-Topinka,
She takes her dog to the same veterinarian as I do, and she has the fattest beagle I’ve ever seen! Now, how does this relate to the elections? She had that commercial about how her dog was disgusted by the negative commercials by “Blago…Blago…Smith” and it ran out of the room. All I can say is that her dog must have lost a ton of weight or she is using a stunt double for her dog!
but I absolutely loathe Blago.
Did you see this on “Daily Show”?

comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=58791

Word is that at first he thought that it was a legitimate news interview!

Now you understand why I refer to him as “Blago…Blago…Smith”
 
The worst thing about the Republicans losing the House is that we will no longer have the Speaker from the State of Illinois to bring home bacon.

Too bad Bill Lipinski ain’t still around now that the Dems control things. He’d be sitting on a very nice perch right about this time.

Well, at least Durbin’s in the power structure.
From what I understand, Rahm Emanuel :eek: is poised to be #4 man in the House, if he doesn’t challenge Hoyer for the #3 spot as majority whip…plus he is on the Ways and Means committee.
 
Pretty good article in the NY Sun:

The Bush Factor In the Victory By Democrats

Also, most Americans don’t want politicians to tell them how to live their lives. They have their rabbis, priests, and ministers to help guide them. Republicans need to get back to the core principles of their party. Buy Michael Zak’s book “Back to Basics for the Republican Party” for a clue on how to start. Most blacks today have no idea about the racist origins of the Democratic Party, and that’s our fault for ignoring this community. The GOP is up against the most powerful ally of the Democrats — liberal journalists who engineered this coup to get their left-wingers, Marxists, and socialists back in power. Their influence will wane when the public stops supporting them.

This should be an exciting, not gloomy, time for the Republicans, as the culling of its party has begun. Byebye, Republicans in name only.

Mr. Bush was always able to work with decent Democrats when he was a Texas governor. Hopefully, a rare breed, the conservative Democrat, has been widely elected and we’ll finally see bipartisan legislation.

nysun.com/article/43320?page_no=1
 
Pretty good article in the NY Sun:
Sounds like they favour the ‘corporate/economic’ conservatives over the ‘religious/social’ conservatives. Is the marriage of convenience between the two going to run into problems now?

Mike
 
Sounds like they favour the ‘corporate/economic’ conservatives over the ‘religious/social’ conservatives. Is the marriage of convenience between the two going to run into problems now?

Mike
Mike,
This isn’t the UK, we don’t have coalition governments. We only really have 2 political parties, made up of a lot of different people. We are not as organized as the UK. The US population normally doesn’t like any one political party to be in power for long. There is usually a six year rule for any political party. That rule seems to still be in effect.

The important lesson to bring out of this election is that it wasn’t a win for the anti-war factions or the socialist factions. It was a loss for the Bush faction of the Republican Party. Moderate Democrats and Moderate Republicans were elected into office this go around.

The net effect is to bring the senior Democrats into power in the House and Senate. Unfortunately, those people are VERY old and VERY liberal. Nancy Pelosi has a chance to shine, something she hasn’t done before that I can recall.

Bush has a chance to see if he can be a uniter for the next two years.

Only time will tell what will become of all this. The only thing that is clear is that the American people voted for change and for the most part the change was towards the middle and that both major parties will survive this shuffle.
 
By the way, I guess I should point out that as I mentioned earlier: Since World War II, the parties that controlled the White House for two terms have lost an average of 29 House seats and six Senate seats in their second midterm elections. This election fits that pattern.

This was not an unusual election, but an average one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top