Saturday, March 8, 2008

Republicans: The Party of Lincoln

Item One: Bush vetoes torture ban. But remember, we don't torture.

Item Two: Rep. Steve King (R-IA) says if we elect Obama then The Terrorists have won. His middle name matters, says King, because The Terrorists "read a meaning into that". Because of Obama's race, ethnicity, and his father's religion, The Terrorists will be "dancing in the streets" and will "declare victory".

Abe Lincoln would be so proud of what his party has become.


Denney Crane said...

When Abe Lincoln was POTUS, most people in the south hated him and the Republican party so much, they started a war and many Americans died. He was definitely not popular...even in the North after Yank soldiers died by the thousands.

Today, many people hate George Bush and the Republican party; but do know, history will judge them much differently than you do.

One can only negotiate with terrorism in a position of strength and power. If they have nothing to fear from their enemy, they have no motivation to stop.

Screw right and wrong, especially in war...we should be thinking in terms of "it works" or "it doesn't work let's try something else".

Watch your children be hanged, beheaded or raped and tell me what you think then...

Personally, I think we should spray the prisoners in pigs blood and let everyone in the towns and villages see it...take away their Mecca and they have lost their eternal reward...but I'm sure the ACLU would have a fit!

Denney Crane said...

Now this is torture

HHL said...

1. The idea that Lincoln was not popular is a myth perpetuated by GWBush and Karl Rove to excuse the fact that they are so unpopular.

2. You cannot "negotiate with terrorism" from any position; terrorism is an abstraction. Only people are capable of negotiating.

3. Screw right or wrong? Under that theory, you can't say it is "wrong" when people fly planes into our buildings. In fact, it is the same view that al Qaeda had when it planned the 9/11 attacks. Those aren't people you should want to emulate.

4. Who is being hanged, beheaded, and raped around here? There are laws against that. When it happens, the police track down the person responsible and they are prosecuted. Just like it has been done for centuries now in countries, like this one, that have laws and mechanisms for enforcing them.

5. When you talk about spraying people with pigs blood, it makes you sound like a crazy person. I'm pretty sure you have to be insane to spray a person with any kind of blood.

It is a sad comment on the state of the world we live in when I have to get on here and explain to someone why torture is wrong. Here, today, in America. What is wrong with you people? You are doing far more damage to this country than terrorists ever did.

Denney Crane said...

For an educated person, you sir seem to be very naive and rather ignorant of historical facts. You need to read up on Lincoln... preferably books written before Bush and Rove!

Then, educate yourself on the Muslim religion. Start with Abraham and the promise land. You seem to want us to fight with our hands tied behind our backs...We were thought to fight as barbarians when we fought for our independence from England.

We can be "right" and still lose the war! They can be "wrong" and still defeat us.

I want to live in the same Utopian society that you do. Unfortunately, it will not exist during this generation.

What I find sad is Americans unwilling to do whatever it takes to win this was done in WWII. Right, wrong, good or bad...we need to finish it! They think Americans are weak and I agree with them. Most Americans don't have the stomach to utterly annihilate our enemy.

Uncivilized behavior is a small price to pay to save millions of lives and insure the future of infidel generations to come.

Thousands agree with can read them on the Daily Kos.

Kingfish said...

First, Lincoln called for 100,000 troops to crush the rebellion...(after South Carolina seceded...but before Fort Sumter.) Lincoln's declaration led to the other states bolting (there is documented proof that some states like Virginia and North Carolina were on the fence until Lincoln's call for troops), but many historians believe Lincoln provoked an escalation by his call.

Caveat to this, I have noticed recent text REVISING these series of events in American History to slant the overall opinion of Lincoln's actions to a more favorable standing. Nevertheless, this is how it went down. Hard to say if the Civil War could have been avoided without a call for troops anyway. Carry on.

I'm sure W's actions will find more scrutiny in centuries to come.

As far as fighting a war to win. We cant live this standard of living, have a Navy on all oceans, print money, keep all of our commitments elsewhere, not have a draft, stop-loss our veterans, fight simultaneously in two countries from fixed positions, and win this war. Its simple, the enemy knows where we are and how to hit us. They aren't in it to simply win a battle. They know that under our current mode of battle they will eventually get us to leave.
BUT...we will have to go back if they dont sell us oil....Get that price of gasoline to $6 or $7 and you'll see a country get motivated to take something over for good...