Steyn on Palin

[crocat]

It is pretty clear that there will be a greater than 45% turnout this year.


mores the pity..... one thing wrong with freedom, even the idiots get to partake

====================================================================
Why do you assume that those who vote most of the time are less idiotic than those who refrain from voting?
It seems to me that there is a mix of idiots and non-idiots in both groups.
General Petraeus says he does not vote, because his job is to follow orders. I can respect that, but I dont agree with it. But it';s a free country, so I won't say he has no right to his opinion.

I have observed that not one election in which I have voted was ever lost or won by one vote, so if I never voted, the results in 48 years of elections would have been unchanged. Some who have noticed this with regard to their own voting say that there is no reason to vote. That is hard to argue with.

It is pretty clear that at least SOME idiots vote, and others do not. The same is true for non-idiots.

Actually I was counting my blessing on those that don't and thinking it is a pity that some that do ....oops, make that many that should not, do.

Regarding being wrong 48 times out of 48 times, I would suspect that a. you agree with me; and b. that maybe you should be one of those that does not (vote).

Just following the natural conclusion of your own progression.

[Xavier_Onassis]

You misunderstood me. I did not say that I was "wrong" ie, voted for the loser, 48 of 48 times. I said that not once in 48 elections did my vote decide the election, that is, if I had not voted, it would have been a tie, and if I had voted for the other side, the othr guy would have won.

I always vote. I believe in democracy.

I might agree with you.

[hnumpah]

You're fella's got it down.......change.

Doesn't make sense.

How much more detail do you need H?

More than just 'the other guy plans to raise taxes/wants to surrender in Iraq/associates with terrorists/blather/blather/blather'. I want mcCain to tell us what he is going to do, how he plans to do it, how he plans to fund it. I'm tired of hearing bullshit; I want to hear ideas. From both sides, actually, but Obama has already made a start. Will McCain? Or will he spend the rest of the campaign trying to trash Obama rather than address the issues?

[sirs]

Asked and answered already.  Even was done in this thread.  Did you not check out Ami's link??

[richpo64]

>>WE can look forward to fewer maimed, blind, crippled and insane troops coming home and a reduced number of troops with PTSD.<<

This might be true for American military, but I'll bet civilians will be the ones suffering these calamities once we've got a ultra liberal in the WH.

[Xavier_Onassis]

This might be true for American military, but I'll bet civilians will be the ones suffering these calamities once we've got a ultra liberal in the WH.

Explain how this could happen.

[richpo64]

>>Explain how this could happen.<<

What? No please?

[Xavier_Onassis]

You never say please, why should I?

I suggest that you are full of it as usual and cannot justify the rot you spew.

I dare you to try.

[richpo64]

>>You never say please, why should I? I suggest that you are full of it as usual and cannot justify the rot you spew. I dare you to try.<<

You just don't seem to be able to help yourself do you.

<chuckle>

The list is already 2 pages long.

[richpo64]

>>This might be true for American military, but I'll bet civilians will be the ones suffering these calamities once we've got a ultra liberal in the WH.<<

Okay, since BT isn't around the explain it, here goes.

I suggest that if Barry wins and implement's his agenda we will be more likely to be attacked again on America soil. I believe this because liberals/Barry will make it easier for our enemies to attack us by gutting the Patriot Act or doing away with it completely. Liberals/Barry have stated they will not be proactive in the war against terror so the likelyhood of an attack will grow exponentially because of their lack of vigilance. All that being said it makes it more likely that civilians will be victims of terrorist attack than the military because under Barry the military will not be in harms way.

[Xavier_Onassis]

No one has been made safer by being "proactive" and conquering, or tried to conquer, Iraq.

In fact there are nearly 4000 Americans that are now dead because of the invasion, and thousands more crippled and blind, legless, armless and insane.

Every war brings tragedy. The first Iraq War produced Tim McVeigh. Every month or so, we hear of some nut or another whose PTSD or other disorder causes him to shoot people, murder a wife, or die of "suicide by cop".

When there is no war, these things do not happen.

[richpo64]

>>When there is no war, these things do not happen.<<

So obviously wrong I don't think I need to try and depute it.

[Xavier_Onassis]

What Iraqis were responsible for 9-11?
None.

YOur photo is irrelevant.

[richpo64]

I didn't bring up Iraq, you did. I referenced the war on terror and the liberal/Barry's unwillingness to prosecute said war. I gave my reasons. You claimed without the war in Iraq terrorist attacks would not happen. I then pointed out how obviously wrong that was by using a photo of the attack on 9-11. If you didn't understand the reference I'll explain. We weren't at war with ANYONE when we where attacked on 9-11 so it is as clear an an unmuddied lake that your comment was clearly wrong as to be not worth comment.

Try again.

[crocat]

I didn't bring up Iraq, you did. I referenced the war on terror and the liberal/Barry's unwillingness to prosecute said war. I gave my reasons. You claimed without the war in Iraq terrorist attacks would not happen. I then pointed out how obviously wrong that was by using a photo of the attack on 9-11. If you didn't understand the reference I'll explain. We weren't at war with ANYONE when we where attacked on 9-11 so it is as clear an an unmuddied lake that your comment was clearly wrong as to be not worth comment.

Try again.

The wonder is whether any Dem would do more than prosecute (in a court of law) any act of terror.  Let's not forget that one of the biggest errors in the US in response to terrorist acts was when Clinton turned to the court room to prosecute those involved in the first attack on the World Trade Center.  That fiasco gave Bin Laden all the tools to succeed on his second attack.  Thanks to the press boosting about the WTT redundant design that it would be impossible to bring down from the ground up and that it could withstand a plane flying into it.... well, let's just say the we were hoisted on our own petard.