Scouts reference in Ann Coulter Commentary

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Gonzo1,

Merlyn is the forum's resident atheist and all around BSA critic. He never has claimed to be anything else

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Gonzo1, disagreeing with the Bush administration's disasterous policies is hardly siding with terrorists, and it's rather pointless to try to argue with those who make such simplistic and antidemocratic statements.

[Gonzo1 10]

Thanks OGE, now it's makes some sense.

 

Merlyn, Here are some more questions for you:

What is your role in scouting?

 

Are you registered with BSA or are you a parent?

 

Are you an atheist?

 

If you critizise BSA so much, why are you here?

 

Do you not think we are safer today because of the Bush Doctrine and the war on terror?

 

 

 

[DanKroh 11]

"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive." --Thomas Jefferson

 

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." --Theodore Roosevelt

 

What does it gain us to have our young men and women die abroad to secure our freedom if we willingly sacrifice our freedom, including our freedom to dissent, at home?

 

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" --Benjamin Franklin

[mmhardy 10]

My list of top lies the Bush Administation has said right to our face...

 

1) The invasion of Iraq was based on a reasonable belief that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction that posed a threat to the U.S., a belief supported by available intelligence evidence. - 'Nuf Said

 

2)Saddam was involved with bin Laden and al Qaeda in the plotting of 9/11 - Saddam saw al Qaeda as a threat to his dictatorship.

 

3) The U.S. wants democracy in Iraq and the Middle East. - This whole thing has taken a turn for the worst they need a "U.S. Friendly" strongman.

 

4) The United States is waging a war on terror. - We are involved in a secular civil war.

 

5) The Bush administation and the GOP is the party of the religious right - The Evangelicals and other Christian groups are being USED by the Neo Cons. One you have voted your cast aside.

 

This administration will be deemed an historical study of how quickly a great country can falter. Will it continue?

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Gonzo1 writes:

What is your role in scouting?

 

None, though I was a Cub Scout about 40 years ago. I'm also director of the midwest region of Scouting For All, a group advocating that the BSA should change its admission policies.

 

Are you registered with BSA or are you a parent?

 

No (well, I *am* a parent, but that has no connection to the BSA)

 

Are you an atheist?

 

Yes. I was an atheist when I was a Cub Scout, too. So was my mom, who was a den mother.

 

If you critizise BSA so much, why are you here?

 

Well, this is a forum to discuss scouting issues.

 

For example, in the very first post I made here, I raised the problem of the BSA's discrimination against atheists vs. public schools chartering BSA packs and troops. A lot of people here didn't think that public schools discriminating against atheists was even illegal, much less a looming problem for the BSA.

 

Do you not think we are safer today because of the Bush Doctrine and the war on terror?

 

No, I agree with the recent National Intelligence Estimate that the Iraq war has increased the threat of terrorism. I also consider the Bush administration dangerously inconpetent.

 

For example, on 9/11, Bush was informed of the second airplane hitting the second WTC tower during a photo-op in a grade school reading "The Pet Goat". At that time, the ONLY person who had the authority to order a civilian airliner shot down was the president. So, did Bush leave the classroom and get in touch with NORAD? No, he spent the NEXT SEVEN MINUTES in the classroom. During this time another hijacking notification came into NORAD. Too bad the only person who could issue an order to shoot it down was too busy.

 

Also, this photo-op was known ahead of time - there was no way of knowing at the time if the hijackers were ALSO targeting the president, and would crash an airplane into the school. But was the school evacuated? No. Dangerously incompetent.

[Trevorum 24]

"Do you not think we are safer today because of the Bush Doctrine and the war on terror?"

 

I wasn't asked, but I'll give my opinion.

 

No. I think the world is a far more dangerous place today because of the Bush administration's foriegn policy. Bush's actions have whipped anti-American sentiment to fever pitch world-wide and have created breeding grounds for future terrorists. And The National Intelligence Estimate agrees.

 

[Gonzo1 10]

Merlyn,

It's too bad that you and your mom were in cub scouts under false pretenses. She knew what the rules were at the time and apparently chose to not abide by them.

 

I disagree with absolutely everything you have posted here.

 

The USA is safer today because of Bush Administration policies, we haven't been attacked, and we have prevented other attacks from happening. It's a shame you like Saddam so much and his terrorist buddies, I suggest you join Saddam. Remember, Saddam supported terrorists. Iraq was a state sponsor of terror.

 

So, the President is in a classroom, one plane hits a tower, then a second. If he jumped right up and started micro-managing everything, you and your pals) wouldn't be happy with that either, you can't have it both ways. Their is a Chief of Staff, Pentagon and a bunch of people who had to collect information FIRST before any response could ever take place. If President Bush had shot down an airliner, you libs would be up in arms over that too.

 

Merlyn, I grant you only this: If people who want a scouting program that is inconsistent with the Boy Scouts of America's rules and policies, I suggest that you start (or continue) your own organization. Good luck.

 

mmhardy, my comments in CAPS

each of your points is wrong and unfounded:

) The invasion of Iraq was based on a reasonable belief that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction that posed a threat to the U.S., a belief supported by available intelligence evidence. - 'Nuf Said NOT ENOUGH SAID, IRAQ HAD WMD, B. CLINTON, T KENNEDY, h CLINTON, J. KERRY, A. GORE AND OTHERS HAVE SAID THAT IRAQ HAD WMD AND SADDAM MUST GO BECAUSE SADDAM AND IRAQ WERE A THREAT TO THE USA.

 

2)Saddam was involved with bin Laden and al Qaeda in the plotting of 9/11 - Saddam saw al Qaeda as a threat to his dictatorship.

SADDAM SUPPORTED AL-QAIDA TRAINING CAMPS, SO HE MUST NOT HAVE BEEN THREATENED.

 

3) The U.S. wants democracy in Iraq and the Middle East. - This whole thing has taken a turn for the worst they need a "U.S. Friendly" strongman. THE PEOPLE OF IRAQ WANT DEMOCRACY, THE REGION NEEDS DEMOCRACY, FREEDOM WILL PREVAIL. THE EVERYDAY IRAQI LOVES US, IT'S TOO BAD YOU DON'T ACCESS BETTER NEWS OTHER THAN KATIE COURIC AND MAINSTREAM MEDIA OUTLETS.

 

4) The United States is waging a war on terror. - We are involved in a secular civil war. WHAT????? WE ARE GUARANTEED FREEDOM OF RELIGION, BUT WE'RE BEING FORCED TO BECOME FREE FROM RELIGION HERE.

 

5) The Bush administation and the GOP is the party of the religious right - The Evangelicals and other Christian groups are being USED by the Neo Cons. One you have voted your cast aside. RELIGOUS CHRISTIANS TEND TO BE CONSERVATIVE, THEREFORE THEY TEND TO VOTE REPUBLICAN. JEWISH PEOPLE IN USA TEND TO VOTE DEMOCRAT. I THINK UNITARIANS DO AS WELL.

 

Trevorum,

I haven't seen the Natinal Intel Estimate, but I know that the troops on the ground know more about what's going on over there than either you, mmhardy or Merlyn. I have been there, I know people there now, and I know we are doing the right thing.

 

 

 

 

[SR540Beaver 116]

Gonzo,

 

I am not a forum moderator, but like you I am a Scouter. I would respectfully remind you to keep the Scout Oath and Law in mind when responding to other posters.

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Gonzo1, as I've said, "you're either with us or with the terrorists" is the worst sort of antidemocratic jingoism, but you seem proud of that. And you also seem proud that Bush did nothing during a terrorist attack (when he was the ONLY person who could order a shootdown), and that no one on his incompetent staff even thought of evacuating a school where it was known long in advance that the president would be attending.

[packsaddle 753]

Wow, I'm surprised the moderators let that one stay. Oh well, anyway Brent, if you plot the national debt for roughly the period you mention, your rose-colored glasses are removed. You can get the data from:

http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm

It ends in 2005 but this year's debt number is $8,506,973,899,215.23. This includes approximately 1.5 trillion owed to the American people in the form of 'borrowed' Social Security and Medicare funds.

Another way the deficit has been 'spun' by the administration and many others is that it is a small fraction of the the total national income. To be fair, and to put the entire debt into that same perspective, the national debt can also be plotted against each respective year's GDP (aka GNP in past years). Here is one such plot, again starting in 1950:

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

The base numbers are, however, those from the first web site, divided by the GDP (GNP) for each respective year. The point is that, claims to the contrary notwithstanding, the numbers show that, compared with the Reps, the Dems are the party of fiscal responsibility.

 

In maybe three months, more of our good men and women will have died in Iraq than were killed on 9/11. The body count is about 200 shy as I write this. For a war of choice. We can debate the lie if you want but the estimate that troop levels will be maintained until 2010 is just astounding. And we now have no choice but to do just that possibly for years longer, and to know that during that time, thousands more of our good men and women may die there in the future. And probably many thousands more of innocents.

And the guy who really was the enemy, assuming he's still alive, is still out there thumbing his nose. His organization is still there. The Taliban is coming back. We could have focused on the real enemy. We didn't. We created the conditions that will spawn many more.

 

Don't get me wrong. I'm with you. I want the Republicans to keep the whole thing. I want it to be abundantly clear who has been responsible for this wreck. I want the people to take it as deeply as the Republicans can push it - so they'll never forget. Ever.

 

Edited part: oops, typo. Here are the data in pdf.:

http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/OMB-Historical-Table-7-1.pdf(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[Gonzo1 10]

I'll try to tone it down.

 

[BrentAllen 10]

Gonzo,

You haven't been around long enough yet to realize we have some diehard liberals here. packsaddle, Trevorum, Merlyn, mmhardy to name just a few. Don't waste too much time trying to convert them - it is wasted energy.

Speaking of the National Intelligence Estimate, I'm glad to read you guys agree with it. Because the part you didn't mention, the part you can't spin, says if we pull out now, if we pull out without a victory, we will only embolden the terrorists and give them the momentum and ability to recruit far more terrorist members than they have now. So, since you guys agree with the NIE, you must agree that we must to stay and win. Thanks for your support.

 

"The Iraq conflict has become the cause celebre for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight."

 

Merlyn,

Your hatred of Bush has destroyed your brain cells. Even if Bush had left the classroom the moment he heard the news, and ordered the airliner shot down, there were not any fighter jets armed and in the air to do the dirty deed. There is nothing he, or anyone else could have done to change the course of events from the time the first jet crashed at 8:46 am and when the third jet hit the Pentagon at 9:37 am. Your hindsight is as good as mine - 20/20, but your understanding of the day's events is corrupted by your hatred.

[mmhardy 10]

BrentAllen et al. Im a recovering conservative. As one who has to work for a living with three teenage Scouts Im come to realize that the Bush Administration hails not from the Republican/Conservative philosophy of Goldwater and Reagan that I cut my teeth on. This administration has bastardized a great party and pundits like Coulter, Hannity and Limbaugh are proof that this party and its agenda is more sizzle then steak.

 

Consider the following irrefutable facts:

 

This Administration has gutted the ability for the US to defend itself. Stories abound about how of our armor is in Iraq and the other is out of commission and used for spare parts. Our national guard cannot respond in force to national disasters. Our recruiters have problems recruiting. Do you think that if this administration wins these midterms that we will not have a draft? I hope not but I am not willing to bet my sons lives on it. Are you?

 

This Administration has not advanced the conservative agenda Other then eliminating funding for stem cell research no conservative plank has been pushed forward. Despite having control of the House, Senate and the White House they have not eliminated abortion, allowed prayer in schools or legislated the sanity of marriage. All core conservative values. What a total failure!!

 

Shrinking middle class If you have a paycheck then this Administration has no use for you. The Brookings Institute reported that in 1970, the heyday for the Liberals, that 28% of the population was considered middle class. Today in many metro areas that number has shrunk into the mid teens. This Administrations policies have only helped those who have their money work for them. (Something I am working on accomplishing!)

 

So yes, I am a Liberal. Not beholden to a party but to my savior Jesus Christ who gave all Liberals instructions on how to live and treat one another with the Sermon on the Mount. (Matthew 5-7) It is worth reading repeatedly.

 

[mmhardy 10]

Gonzo1 just a couple of pointsno time to go further.

 

1) The invasion of Iraq was based on a reasonable belief that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction that posed a threat to the U.S., a belief supported by available intelligence evidence. NOT ENOUGH SAID, IRAQ HAD WMD, B. CLINTON, T KENNEDY, h CLINTON, J. KERRY, A. GORE AND OTHERS HAVE SAID THAT IRAQ HAD WMD AND SADDAM MUST GO BECAUSE SADDAM AND IRAQ WERE A THREAT TO THE USA.

 

Sorry finger pointing to a prior administration doesnt impress me nor most current heads of state. Furthermore if Bush looked to Clinton and Gore for guidance on any subject I would be truly amused. It didnt impress the UK and Blair was warned Please see the Downing Street Memo at

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607_2,00.html

 

2)Saddam was involved with bin Laden and al Qaeda in the plotting of 9/11 - Saddam saw al Qaeda as a threat to his dictatorship.

SADDAM SUPPORTED AL-QAIDA TRAINING CAMPS, SO HE MUST NOT HAVE BEEN THREATENED.

 

The CIA retracted much of the intelligence that linked Saddam and al Qaeda. There are numerous articles if you care to research. See

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9991919/site/newsweek/

 

as the Drudgereport would say..Developing.