Liberalism, 2003, just before the invasion of Iraq:

I'm so glad that I'm a liberal, because if I weren't I have enough of a conscience that I'd have to commit seppuku in shame. There's not a nonliberal in the U.S who had a single thing to say about Iraq before it happened that was even vaguely connected to reality. Why is this still a matter of debate today? Are people really that willing to subjugate the national interest and reality to partisan concerns that they can find anything redeemable about the Bush administration's Iraq "policy?" Iraqis hate us, the world hates us, we're caught in a quagmire with no apparent end, we've given up our civil rights at home, and this is exactly what liberals predicted before the war, and exactly what nonliberals condescendingly dismissed before the war. Why is it that nonliberals still exist in the U.S.?

Oh nevermind....now it works.

Is WF crapping the bed again?

Those welfare programs liberals love to create ain't gonna pay for themselves you know.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day; Krugman and Bush are no exceptions.

Not a digital clock, unless it's flashing 12:00.

There's plenty redeemable if you don't have BDS.

But they help us eliminate Al-Qaida anyway. And they don't want us gone just yet.

Not true. I've been abroad several times since the war and I've found the locals friendly, even though I don't hide my politics if asked. And even the leaders of France and Germany are now conciliatory with Bush.

Actually, things are much improved.

Help! Help! I'm being oppressed! Yawn.

Memory? It's true that a conservative got us into the Iraq War. But it was liberals who got us into Korea and Vietnam. And unlike the two latter examples, the former may yet result in a win.

I saw a bumper sticker today.

It read to the effect of:

Sick and tired of it?
Vote Democrat!​

Yes, by all means, change the situation by keeping the two-party system firmly in place as always

Because so many liberals act like condescending pricks?

I think you mean NIE report on Iran not Iraq........

Absolute bullshit. If people had bothered to read and report it on the NIE right, and that includes the media, they would know NIE said outright that Iran is still working towards building nuclear weapons.

Any person, like say you, who thinks the NIE said Iran stopped making advances towards nuclear weapons is a fucking idiot.

Right now as you read these the Iranians have got those centrifuges running and they are working as quickly and as quietly as they can towards a nuclear weapon.

We are not in Iran today for many reasons but that NIE is not one of them. That NIE is a reason we would be in Iran had we actually went in.

Actually they are. If you weren't such a goofball, you'd see that the Blue states are overwhelmingly "donor" states (meaning they pay more to the federal government in taxes than they get in federal spending), and the Red states are overwhelmingly NOT donor states.

A bit ironic that these anti-welfare states are getting a disproportionate amount of federal money, isn't it?

Hey, I've gotta give you guys kudos though. Looking out for number one (your own state) ain't all bad, even if it is a bit hypocritical.

^
Because individuals=states.

But back on topic,

That fucking editorial, whether I'm reading it now, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight or back in 2003--it's so shitty and morally bankrupt that it makes me want to go out and kill a hippie with a rusty claw hammer.

That you posted a morally bankrupt, shitty screed supporting it makes me want to go out and kill two more.

Nope.

But that doesn't really change the validity of the statement.

So it is impossible that someone could be a multimillionaire that lives in say, New York or California, and vote Republican? (While 18 million illegal Mexicans and welfare queens vote Democrat?)

Well of course not. But the majority of people vote one way or the other...

OK. Two points for the record.

1) I'd never kill someone with a claw hammer, rusty or otherwise, how they make me feel notwithstanding.

2) That said, if Paul Krugman was on fire and I had a fire extinguisher and marshmallows, I'd wait for him to stop thrashing about before I started roasting the marshmallows.

Looking back on it, at a critical point in American history we had a president who steered the country in the wrong direction. He's a 21st century James Buchanan creating more problems for his successors than he ever solved (interestingly enough Buchanan also predicted "history will vindicate my memory").

Well duh. If he's thrashing about, he might knock the marshmallow off the stick, and then where would you be?

Five years have passed and Krugman's "The World hates us because of Bush!!!" rhetoric looks even more retarded now then it did then:

Actually that happened when the Senate wiped their collective asses with the worthlessness that was the Kyoto Protocols back in 1997 but thanks for playing.

and at the same time strengthened our ties with many former Soviet Bloc countries.

If spending a fuckload on AIDS drugs for Africa is Bush telling the third world to go fuck itself when it comes to lifesaving drugs then I'd hate to see what him really lending a helping hand would look like.

Jorge Bush, the amnesty president, told Mexico to take a hike on immigration?

and no lasting damage was done

-However, bilateral relations between the two allies soon regained momentum through diplomatic, humanitarian and indirect military support. The vast majority of the military and civilian logistic support to U.S. troops stationed in Iraq goes through Turkey by land, or through Turkish air space.

Bush is to blame for pulling out of the ICC treaty which Slick Willie himself never submitted to the Senate for ratification?

Oh, I agree. Although technically Clinton was in office in the 20th century. And as inept as he was, he was smart enough to stay quiet most of the time. Bubba doesn't hold a candle to Carter.

We're still dealing with the consequences of Carter's foolishness.

Because of statements like this. Because one liberal was (somewhat) right on one subject, you expect everyone should just accept the whole liberal program.

That kind of arrogance, coupled with that kind of ignorance, is why nonliberals still exist in the U.S.

And judging from the sidebars and distractions and "let's talk about anything else - America, fuck yeah!" they still have nothing to say.

Don't swear garamet....it gives you a bad reputation.

I disagree.

We've bounced back from the Clinton clusterfuck quite a bit now.

Oh, and...



I hope you all think that way forever. I really do. You can't buy and gift wrap a better present than that for the GOP.

It's a badly worded question, IMO. "Liberal" is just a label. If the question you're asking is, "Why are there people who will go to their graves convinced that those WMD are there somewhere and 'we' will find them eventually, and 'we' could have won in Iraq if it weren't for the media and them goddamn hippies?" then I refer you to the wisdom of Ron "Tater Salad" White: You can't fix stupid.

Hmm....care to explain exactly what the "Clinton clusterfuck" is in the first place? I never liked the man myself, but he never fucked up anywhere even close to the magnitude that Bush has fucked up over the last eight years.

But enough about Bill Clinton...

And you're a Clinton shill too?

If you have to ask, you've already lost.

Edited for accuracy.