The Economic Crisis: What will it take for people to get off the bipartisan high horse? – Guest Post

October 15, 2008 by The Constant Complainer

If you haven’t yet heard the news, The Constant Complainer was recently voted “Best Local Blog” in a “Best of Cleveland 2008” reader’s poll.

Now, let’s get on to some business. If this is your first visit to The Constant Complainer, one service I offer, in addition to my own posts, is the opportunity for readers to submit Guest Posts with complaints or opinions. This Guest Post was submitted by Tristan. Enjoy and remember to leave him your comments…

I’ve always had a problem with bipartisan politics. Something about the pompous attitudes, childish finger pointing, and rampant groupthink just never sat right with me. Within the last few years, I’ve come to a realization beyond this that many people refuse to acknowledge-Democrats and Republicans are essentially the same group. Both are terminally irresponsible, self-serving bureaucracies that poison the mind of any individual that steps within their grasp.

Political parties exploit the basic human desire to belong to a group. They dehumanize the individual for the sake of the greater beast, and individuals willingly accept this because our brains release chemicals that make us happy whenever someone else agrees with us, supports us, and shares our points of view. Combine this with chanting crowds and constant negativity toward an opponent and what you have is a brainwashed populous.

Both parties are obviously equally responsible for the current condition of our nation, yet Democrats blame Bush, instead of their majority Congress who created $850 billion of fuel for the fire, and Republicans blame Clinton, who hasn’t been in office for eight years, while in Iraq a black hole of resources destroys our economy from within.

What do you think about the downfall of our economy during BarJohn McBama’s term?

I found an intriguing paper by Tobin Maginnis, a computer science professor at the University of Mississippi, outlining what appears to be a downward spiral into the second Great Depression.

What’s particularly frightening is that this opinion is not the result of an overactive imagination, but that of an intelligent analysis of history combined with current events. To further enhance this picture of economic crisis, I recommend reading through some of the writings of Ron Paul, in my opinion one of the greatest minds in politics.

As a quick illustration of the desperate state of our economy, look no further than the price of gold relative to the US dollar.

Since the rise of fiat currency, the price of gold has historically been inversely proportional to the strength of the dollar. Though many party followers are quick to praise the strength of the current economy, as their party has intended them to do, gold, unlike politicians, does not lie.

Unfortunately, this chart does not tell us what the future will hold, but let’s continue where it ends. Take the upward slope of the last seven years and add to that a purposeless, endless war, a housing crisis, a nearly-trillion-dollar “bailout” (among other, lesser known bailouts), a massive trade deficit, a bloated, corrupt government, unbelievable interest rate cuts, and now a stock market crash… all with an underlying society not only oblivious to the implications but largely indifferent to all of it. As George W. Bush so eloquently put it, it’s “uniquely-American” to work three jobs just to support your family.

Since a picture is only worth so much, let’s look to history: Did the USSR collapse because they were evil communists overcome by capitalist achievement, or because they made the same foolish mistakes we’re making today, and have made for decades, with a corrupt government too large to sustain itself and excessive, unaffordable military ambition? They say we won the Cold War, but at least communism prepared them for poverty before their collapse, whereas we aren’t even prepared to pay off our credit cards, much less trade filet mignon and cabernet for gruel and boiled water!

All of this is to say that an economic collapse, not socialism, is the greatest equalizer, as all debts go to zero along with all savings, including retirement funds. History teaches us that there’s no doubt it will occur, the question is how soon? I never expected it to be any time in the near future, but with the trends we’re now seeing, it has come into the realm of possibility, to say the least.

Clearly the system is not going to fix itself, and likewise the American people are not looking like good candidates either. If no one does, the result will be undeniable. The bubble will burst, the entire system will fall, and we’ll consequently be thrust into chaos, at which point there will finally be motivation to interrupt prime time and rebuild our economic and political structure.

All Posts / Business / Group Sharing / Guest Posts / Politics


  1. Fred says:

    I’m impressed. Well put. You should have been the one there drilling those two candidates with questions tonight…

  2. Dan S. says:

    Yeah, then McBush would act like the cat that ate the canary all night after explaining the meaning of bipartisanship.

    It’s not enough the verbal stumble bum got a hard on after correcting the moderator when he said ‘climate control’ rather than ‘climate change.’

    THIS coming from the Repubtard who called his opponent Senator Government.

  3. […] To further enhance this picture of economic crisis, I recommend reading through some of the writings of Ron Paul , in my opinion one of the greatest minds in politics. As a quick illustration of the desperate state of our economy, …[Continue Reading] […]

  4. NeoConDon says:

    I don’t think that the “Senator Gov’t” was a mistake; it was clearly on purpose. I would have called Barry “Senator Marx”.

  5. Mike says:

    Yeah I didn’t think the “Senator Gov’t” remark was a mistake either. He talked about Obama and big government all night. This debate made me dislike McCain even more than usual. He kept bringing up the tired old points that have already been disproved by For instance, he still “Wants to see how much the fine will be for Joe the plumber if he does not offer his employees a health care plan”. Obama laid it out very clearly…NO FINE for small businesses.

    I also think McCain hurt his campaign by whining about all the negative things people OUTSIDE of Obama’s campaign were saying about him. Does he really expect Obama to apologize for things people say who Obama has nothing to do with? Not to mention that Obama DID say his campaign came out with a statement that those certain comments were inappropriate.

    Get off the Bill Ayers topic already McCain, and ACORN too. They’re not doing your campaign any good and they’re lies. It is really sad when that’s all he has left to resort to. The straight-talk express has been derailed and now he’s blindly throwing punches trying to land one.

    I wish there was another debate because it was certainly enjoyable seeing how completely uncomfortable McCain was for 90 minutes last night. Is this seriously the guy some of you want running this country? His health care plan is laughable, his across the board freeze is stupid, BUT he’ll cut out a few billion dollars eliminating “Earmarks”. HAHA laughable at best. When our deficit is over 10 trillion, he wants to eliminate a few billion. That’s really really small on the grand scheme of things and won’t help a thing.

    Offshore drilling…sure it’s not a bad idea. I’m all for it. But it’s not going to help anything. We don’t have enough of the worlds oil supply to make a significant dent in the amount of oil we import from other countries. DOESN’T ANYONE ELSE NOTICE THAT??? Drilling drilling and more drilling IS NOT THE ANSWER.

    I loved the question about which VP is more qualified to be President should anything happen to either candidate. Think about that one people. Would you want Palin, or Biden? I’d take Biden any day of the week over the good-looking moron. Wake up Republicans and smell the stench that’s coming from your side of the aisle.

    Vote Obama!!! He gets it. and if something comes along that he doesn’t get, guess what, he’ll have a whole freaking team of advisers who will get it.

    Sidenote: How many times did McCain mention 9/11 last night? I counted two but I thought it was more.

  6. NeoConDon says:

    The Ayers and Acorn issue are certainly important. Who our President hangs out with, and who shaped his ideas matters.

    I learned that Obama is a flat out socialist, and McCain is a Clinton liberal. Both are bad candidates, and out of the 4, the best candidate is Sarah Palin. I have a new column being posted discussing the implementation of B. Hussein Obama’s socialist agenda. If you think what he’s saying sounds good, I feel very sad for you.

  7. Tristan says:

    Fred, thanks for your response. I’d love nothing more than for anyone with a level head connected to a spine to be involved in these debates. I enjoyed the 3 minutes that Ron Paul was gifted during the Republican primary debates, though his consequently-dumbfounded opponents certainly didn’t…

    As for the other comments here, I appreciate that many of you need a venue for the endless bickering of bipartisan politics, but did any of you actually read my submission? What I’m seeing is accomplishing very little, other than validating my statements that we’re running very low on hope for our dwindling nation.

  8. NeoConDon says:

    While I don’t accept a couple of your premises, that doesn’t change my agreement with the conclusion that there is very little hope (with these candidates) for our dwindling economy.

    This economy will eventually collapse on every social program that is trying to save it. It will simply be dragged on just like the New Deal dragged on the Great Depression. The federal gov’t does not have the authority to use taxpayer dollars to bail out businesses, but they keep doing it. This is sort of like giving a drunk a drink. Eventually, you have to tell him “NO.” The question is, how long will it take us to get there.

  9. Tristan says:

    Don, it’s most likely already too late to say “no” without killing the drunk from withdrawal. The Federal Reserve uses fear to keep Congress in line and will do whatever it takes to prevent the first Great Depression from repeating without regard to the consequences. Republicans and Democrats have both had their chances for 95 years and neither have done a thing to stop this cancer from destroying us.

    Thanks to this policy of denying natural deflation, we’re now in economic checkmate: Save the banks, the mortgage industry, the auto industry, etc., or save the dollar. The Fed cares nothing for the dollar, so long as we don’t have deflation, but if you destroy the dollar, the foreign investors, who have the vast majority of stake in our treasury bills, will pull out en masse and expose our enormous debt. The only way to cover that debt is to then print more money, and the downward spiral continues.

    The bailouts are nothing more than a scam, engineered to give the impression of a solution to restore stability. It’s a desperate attempt to restore faith in our economy, but it only makes the inevitable worse.

    I doubt I’m saying anything you don’t already know, which makes me wonder why in the world you would associate yourself with neo-conservatives, whose deceit and aggressive interventionism is arguably even more damaging than the deceit and socialist tendency of modern liberals?

  10. NeoConDon says:

    My association with the conservative base is because I’m a conservative. I’m proud to be associated with the party that defeated slavery, communism, and is defeating terrorism. I completely disagree with your comparision of the war on terror to the war on drugs. That concept sounds absurd to me. I am a proud supporter of our troops and their mission. There was never a single day during the Afghan or Iraq war that I thought we weren’t doing the right thing. I believe, just like Reagan, that we have a duty to spread Freedom to the rest of the world through capitalism and example, and the obligation to use our military to destroy the dictatorships of those nations that threaten our national security or the national security of our allies. The Libertarians, unfortunately, do not beleive that way, and that’s a deal breaker for me. Luckily, the very liberal John McCain picked a conservative as his VP. As I said in an earlier column, that is the only way for him to win.

    But, on the economic side, I do not think that the bailouts are constitutional, and even if they were, I don’t think they will work. Add to that the reality of having a liberal in the White House and a liberal congress, it almost doesn’t matter who gets elected from an economic standpoint. But, with obvious opportunities to spread conservatism to the Supreme Court and to allow our troops to complete the rest of their missions,(and handle Iran if necessary), I view voting anything but McCain would be go against my core beliefs.

  11. Tristan says:

    Don, I’m a conservative person. Preemptive war is an extremely radical concept and is nothing more than a propaganda term to hide the fact that we are aggressively attacking another nation. Also, deceit is not traditionally a value that a person should have, thus it is also not a conservative concept. Look at the reasons behind our current wars:

    Afghanistan was retaliation for a terrorist attack, which makes it justifiable. However, is it more likely that “they hate our freedoms” or that our interventionist policy in Israel has created a negative perspective in that region, thus leading to a terrorist attack?

    Iraq is nothing but constant deception. Many US citizens to this day believe that we are in Iraq because of 9/11, but there is no evidence to suggest that Saddam Hussein harbored terrorists. Others believe we are there because they have weapons of mass destruction and threaten our well being, but there is also no evidence to support that accusation. You believe we are there liberating the Iraqi people, but I have three questions for you. First, why is it appropriate to spread democracy, by force, to sovereign nations while it is inappropriate to spread communism? Second, why is it appropriate to spread democracy when the United States, in fact, is not a democracy? And finally, how is it appropriate to be spreading ideals of freedom and capitalism, while here in the United States our liberties are being systematically removed both individually through legislation such as the PATRIOT Act and corporately through excessive government intervention in the free market? Government intervention is essentially the sole cause for the state of our housing market, given that in a free market no bank or broker would have ever issued such loans.

    All of this brings me to the real reason for the Iraq War, and although I am no fan of Alan Greenspan, he said it best:

    “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.”

    There is nothing humanitarian about what has likely amounted to over 1 million people losing their lives. Our nation was founded on the notion that we must fight and die to gain and preserve our freedom. It disgusts me that our government now uses that very notion as a mask to have us slaughter hundreds of thousands of people while denying us our own freedom in the process.

  12. NeoConDon says:

    You’re premise is off.

    I don’t believe in pre-emptive war, that is for the dictators and Imperialists, and lately the Russians. The war in Iraq was not pre-emptive. This war in Iraq was building up for decades. September 11, 2001 is what put the icing on the decision cake. At the time, there was no doubt that Saddam had WMD’s, since he had already used them. There were several U.N. resolutions that he had violated, and he was a known supporter of terrorism as determined by the 9/11 commission. There was no question that an all out war with Saddam was coming, the question was when. With 33 named multi-national allies engaged in Iraq, the decision to liberate the people was widely supported by the countries that matter.

    None of that matters now since we are there, and we are near the point of exclaiming a decisive victory. We knew it was going to be a long war. We are fortunate that the casualty level is so low considering the type of enemy we are fighting, and the length of time we’ve been there.

    I respect your opinion, but you are absolutely dead wrong that you think the Iraq war is about oil. The idea is laughable. The United States produces four times as much oil as Iraq. If Iraq was about oil, why has the price gone up instead of down? Why hasn’t the United States annoucned a deal of guaranteed oil supply from the country we saved? Because it had nothing to do with oil.

    The United States is a nation of liberators. We do not invade countries, we defend and expand freedom. When we go to war and win, we return the land and culture to the people and walk next to them as they grow their democracy.

    The reason it is okay to expand freedom is because it saves lives, and freedom is the basic ingredient in the human spirit, and the only guarantee given to us by God at birth. Every creature on this planet has a natural yearning to breath free.

    Communism goes hand in hand with murder and death. There is nothing right about communism. Reagan was able to defeat it because he was the first one to ever stand up to it.

    Your final paragraph in your last comment is sad and disturbing. I hope that when you pray, you ask God for the ability to seek the truth and to understand. Clearly he has not answered that prayer yet.

  13. Tristan says:

    Don, I’m not sure where you get this information, so I’ll do quick searches to verify mine and include it with my response. I don’t argue that Saddam Hussein was a terrible dictator, but he had nothing to do with 9/11, so your cake (yellow cake? see below…) is missing icing. It’s also highly likely that Kennedy helped put him in power in the Cold War:

    Interesting what our fight against communism would have caused there.

    You say there was no doubt he had weapons of mass destruction, yet in spite of your lack of doubt, he didn’t:

    Not only that, but we lied to make it look like he did:

    In the end, we were even the source of some of these weapons, if nothing else naive to believe the agents were for medical research:,0,4635016.story?coll=bal-home-headlines

    The fact that you believe outright that it doesn’t matter how we got there since “victory is imminent”, as it has been for 5 years, just shows complete hypocrisy. Would you say the same about Barrack Obama and his past?

    I have no idea where you get your oil numbers. We don’t produce that much oil, and we have very little remaining. Maybe you meant we consume four times more than someone?

    The point is that Iraq is a strategic location in the middle east, the region that contains half of the world’s oil. As for oil prices, why don’t you answer these questions yourself? If it doesn’t have anything to do with oil, why would the average price for oil quadruple in the past 5 years?

    They aren’t giving us good deals on the oil because we didn’t save them–you can’t use your argument as a weapon against mine when I don’t subscribe to it.

    Lastly, please do not bring God into your discussions of death and war. The first Commandment is “Thou shalt not kill”. Remember also that God has left us, with the death of Christ, until he returns again, therefore he does not instruct us to murder the people of other nations. Also, please do not dare imply that God has chosen you as an infallible beacon of truth. I work very hard to uncover the truth in this world, and I’m sorry to say that I’ll need more than your good word on anything for me to remotely accept it as truth.

  14. The incumbent governor of Ohio, Ted Strickland, is currently trying to get popular support for House Bill 545. This bill, passed unethically, without the voice of the people, would effectively cap the interest rate of no fax payday loans in Ohio to 36%. That would basically mean that any interest would only amount to a few dollars and change for any amount of money taken out, and effectively, kill the industry, and deprive citizens of the state of Ohio of this resource. Obama wants to do one better, and install this cap at the national level. What this means is that not only would the American public be deprived of an alternative to bank loans, credit cards, overdraft, or even worse, loan sharks, it would also eliminate multiple thousands of jobs in the US, put even more people out of work. Make sure to have your voice heard on this issue, whatever your particular opinion may be. Vote!
    Post Courtesy of Personal Money Store
    Professional Blogging Team
    Feed Back: 1-866-641-3406

  15. sun valey idaho…

    I found your site on bookmarking site.. I like it ..gave it a fave for you..ill be checking back later…

  16. NeoConDon says:

    You have to dump wikipedia out of any argument you might have. Not a reliable source for truth, since any kool aid drinker (like you) can update it. I’ll give you a little flexibilty on CNN…

    You’re using hindsight as an argument against WMD’s. First off, we know he had them becuase he used them against his own people in 1988. All other reasonable people believed he had them prior to the start of the war. Either everyone was wrong or lying. Or, perhaps people should be asking “where are they???”

    Saddam has been linked to terrorism countless times.
    Whether or not he had involvement in 9/11 is not important since we did not decide to invade because of 9/11. That has been the biggest hole in the argument of you people. Iraq was part of the second phase of the war on terror to keep it isolated in the middle east and to prevent Saddam from taking advantage of our vulnerabliltiy. In order to prevent another 9/11 from happening, we must treat those countrie that would engage in or harbor terrorism identical. All of that was detailed by the 9/11 commission.

    Lastly, if you study history at all, you just need to look at a map to figure out what is really going on. Both countries border Iran on either side. Can you guess where phase 3 of the war on terror will be?

    The oil numbers are accurate. The U.S. is the third largest producer of oil. I wasn’t talking about reserves, I was talking about actual production. It is absurd to think we went to war over oil. That doesn’t pass the smell test…and not a single intelligent person can make the argument, nor have they. If we had gone there for oil, prices would be down, not up…Since we did save that country, I’m assuming there is some kind of back door deal if we found ourselves in an oil crisis. It’s probably one of those things that goes unreported. Here’s the link to the production numbers:

    Victory IS imminent in Iraq. We are almost entirely pulled out of Falluja (sp), and have performed brilliantly. We knew it would be a long war, and we’ll be there for years to come in training and security roles…just like in Japan, Germany, Korea, etc. Iraq will likely serve as our operations base in the war against Iran. There is nothing new here (except an ignorant and uneducated group of citizens, like you). It has been our most successful war in our history. We have had 1 million soldiers deployed, and lost just over 4,000 in a 5 year period, and are nearing the end of operations. In the process, we have created another democracy in the middle of the most evil part of the planet. People like you were saying we’d lose 50,000 in a war against Iraq, and would throw the region into chaos. You were wrong. Today it is safer for an unarmed american to walk down the street in Bagdad than it is in East L.A. or Detroit.

    I keep praying for people like you. It blows my mind that you’ve been so indoctrinated by the loons on the left that you think we’ve murdered anyone. Our soldiers have liberated a nation that was dictated by a thug that WAS murdering them with WMD’s and guns. The fact that you think we’ve been on a murdering spree defines your ignorance and stupidity.

    I am a very proud supporter of our troop…AND THEIR MISSION

  17. Dan S. says:

    **I keep praying for people like you. It blows my mind that you’ve been so indoctrinated by the loons on the left that you think we’ve murdered anyone.**

    Are you saying those charged with murder in Iraq, are not responsible, and are only convenient scapegoats?

    And Bush may not have been charged with murder, but it can be argued that when you bomb the hell out of a country, for no good reason at all, other than you were able to get people to swallow your outright lies, and in the process you kill innocent people just trying to live in peace, you just might be a murderer.

  18. Tristan says:

    Don, I ask you to keep the insults to yourself. I won’t ask again. If you are incapable of having a dignified discussion, then we won’t have one at all.

    The beauty of wikipedia, in spite of the occasional claim that it is useless, is that every bit of information has a source. In the case of oil, the source is the Department of Energy. I have no interest in arguing whether the DoE or CIA is correct. What should be noted is that they are both federal agencies and seem to have conflicting information.

    Ideally, government would not be the source of any information. I consider it less reliable than Wikipedia. The community aspect of Wikipedia weeds out lies and deceit and is indicative of true freedom and democracy, whereas the federal government, entrenched in politics, will publish whatever the boss (Republican, Democrat, or otherwise) says to publish, without question. This is inherently contrary to freedom and democracy. To back up my claim, look no further than the state of our economy. The official report is that we’re just now, maybe, possibly, entering the beginnings of what could in some manner be something like a recession in limited areas of the country. The reality is that we are in dire straits and if we continue on our current path our economy will be entirely destroyed. Numbers are a means to an end for politicians. If they don’t fit, they make them fit. Likewise for other such facts. Saddam didn’t buy yellow cake? Generate some proof that he did. The truth is very much an inconvenience to politicians because it is either a hindrance to their agendas, as is the case with Iraq, or it will hurt their popularity ratings, as is the case with the economy.

    If every single one of the people you consider to be reasonable was wrong about WMDs in Iraq, maybe they’re reasoning skills aren’t all that strong. Yes, it made sense to suspect that Saddam had weapons due to his history, but it is decidedly unreasonable to assume that nothing had changed in 15 years, particularly after all of the disarmament, UN weapon inspector reports that Iraq had no WMDs, and the fact that the agents used in these weapons become inactive after as little as 3 years. (see references as necessary)

    Your insults show me that you clearly have no interest in enlightening the “uneducated” among us and also that you have no interest in the truth should it contradict your views. You again reference the spread of democracy, in spite of the fact that democracy is not our form of government. You’re a proponent of a holy war, citing good vs. evil, but our interventionism created much of this evil and our current role is likely making the future threat worse. Anytime I’ve talked to a soldier, he claims to be protecting my freedoms, yet here at home our federal government is grabbing power over us and setting up a camp of socialism our founding fathers could not even imagine.

    Pray for me all you wish, but before you do, please read the Word of God and find any indication that “Turn the other cheek”, “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s”, and “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” provide justification for what we continue to do to people 10,000 miles from our home. A million people have died and you consider this to be our most successful war. I have no interest in seeing your scorecard.

  19. NeoConDon says:

    You’ve been drinking some of Dan and Zig’s kool aid, haven’t you Tristan?

  20. Tristan says:

    The truth is rarely so sweet, but I prefer holding my own spoon.

  21. Otis says:

    You should be slamming this Tristan moron. A million people dead? Yeah, maybe one million per year when Saddam was busy murdering his own with WMD’s and burying citizens in mass graves. This Tristan person is an idiot and a liar. I didn’t think there were one million members of AlQueda in Iraq, but if we killed that many of them, isn’t that what war is all about…blowing up more stuff and killing more people than the enemy is killing? One Million? Where does that made up number come from? There certainly hasn’t been that many civilians killed, and we have only sent in around 1 million troops (some two and three times)

    Not to mention that the majority of the civilias killed are because of the terrorists blowing themselves up, and have nothing to do with Allied Forces.

    What the hell is this idiot talking about conflicting information? Everyone knows that we are the third largest producer of oil…common knowledge if you follow the news, or have any type of education. The moron is talking about reserves, and you’re talking about production. Typical liberal moron…doesn’t listen and can’t read.

    Part of me wants Obama to win so idiots like Dan S, Zig and now Tristan can live in their perfect little socialist world. They’re probably all a bunch of “government workers”. Typical hate filled losers.

  22. Dan S. says:

    ***Part of me wants Obama to win so idiots like Dan S, Zig and now Tristan can live in their perfect little socialist world. ***
    Even if we did go totally and literally Socialist, that would be an improvement over a fascist regime where a man can go to war to avenge a murder plot on his father, and the corporations are allowed to write the government policies governing them, and when citizens ask “what’s going on,” are then told to go chase their own tails.

  23. Otis says:

    If you’re going to call anyone a facist, it would be today’s liberals. Obama is going to be the king of the facists. Bush is far from a facist…not even near the same level…but he is kinda liberal, I’ll admit that.

  24. Fred says:

    Tristan, you should know by now, at least from what I’ve read, that NeoConDon would rather toss insults around and force opinions as opposed to truly debating the facts. He’s secretly in love with Brian Moore, who is running for President under the Socialist Party USA.

  25. NeoConDon says:

    Debate facts, Fred?

    Tristan thinks we’ve killed one million people in Iraq. Which “fact” should be debated? The fact that we’ve killed one million people in Iraq, or that he thinks?

  26. Dan S. says:

    The number might be as high as one million Don…

    …if you count the numbers killed with the WMD’s we gave Saddam when he was on our side.

    Yeah, but we weren’t complaining then, were we?

  27. NeoConDon says:

    You have a point there, Dan. Both the U.S. and Britain were supporting with money and equipment the Iraqi’s during the Iran/Iraq war. It was prior to us knowing the level of Evil Saddam had aspired to, and it was against Iran, a terrorist country that had kidnapped Americans. It’s similar to the way we supported the Afghans during the Soviet invasion. It proved that the post WWII policy “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” doesn’t really work.

    That’s what made The Bush Doctrine so effective. You are either with us or your against us. Kind of similar to the Reagan Doctrine on communism…”we win, they lose.”

    I wonder if we’d ever get lucky enough for Iran and Russia to go to war. Maybe we could get the next president to make up some lies he heard in the cafeteria at the U.N. and turn them against eachother. I’d support sending money and equipment to both countries…kind of like killing two birds with one stone. That would be tax dollars well spent.

  28. Dan S. says:

    ***It was prior to us knowing the level of Evil Saddam had aspired to, and it was against Iran, a terrorist country that had kidnapped Americans.***

    Right, we should have done a background check on Saddam…

    As far as Iran being evil, weren’t Reagan and Bush making dirty deals with them, while they still held U.S. Citizens hostage, just so they could throw the presidential race by making Carter look bad?

    Answer: yes, Reagan and Bush should have been sent to prison, tried and shot for treason.

  29. NeoConDon says:


  30. Otis says:

    Carter made himself look bad. He didn’t need any help from Reagan or Bush 41.

  31. Dan S. says:

    I’m glad we’re in agreement Don.

    Reagan and Bush were, quite possibly bigger pieces of shit than Bush the Dunce.

  32. Tristan says:

    Otis, if you have a foot to stand on you don’t need to belittle anyone. The one million number is based on a survey of Iraqi households. The fact that you berate me in one breath and admit the possibility that I’m correct in the next makes me question your motives.,1,1207545.story

    I never once said that U.S. soldiers killed a million people, I said a million people have likely been killed in Iraq since the beginning of this invasion in 2003. This is similar to the concept of criminally-negligent homicide–you don’t have to pull the trigger to share responsibility for the end results. I’m sure there still would have been violence and killing without our assistance, but that isn’t how we played our hand, so the blood is now ours. There’s no saying how many terrorists have been created by our invasion. This is how responsibility works, though its virtues are long lost on our society of handouts and self-entitlement.

    As for myself, it’s absurd that you call me a liberal who “doesn’t listen and can’t read”. This is the epitome of irony, not only because I am clearly not a “liberal”, but because you obviously did not read the original post. How can there be any hope for individual liberty in the face of blind party loyalty? Rather than using facts and reason to prove your case, you’re ridiculing opposing views in an attempt to garner support for your team. I’m hate-filled? You really should consider evaluating yourself more carefully before making such statements. What benefit can ever come from insults and generalizations of people?

    If you can do what Don could not and remain civil and rational, I’m interested in why you feel that war is beneficial to our nation, or anyone else, for that matter.

  33. Dan S. says:


    Deal with Otis and Don as though they’re rational and respond to reasoning and logic!

    Why didn’t *I* think of that?!

    …umm, good luck with that Tristan

  34. Otis says:

    Let me guess, you read that Iraqi poll on wikipedia…??? LOL…

    C’mon, that’s like believing that Obama is going to cut taxes on anyone…

    Oh yeah, we’ve created terrorists. That’s almost the dumbest statement I’ve ever heard.

    Get over yourself…Killing terrorists is good. Keeping the war where the terrorists are is good. Not having a terrorist attack on American soil in over 7 years is good. Would you rather Americans are dying in airplanes and buildings in American cities, or terrorists are dying in a sand box in the middle east? You nut jobs are crying babies now, what’s going to happen when we get into a real war with Iran? Let’s just hope that war starts on our terms and on our schedule.

  35. Dan S. says:

    “Let’s just hope that war starts on our terms and on our schedule.”

    Good lord you’re stupid…

    …I mean even for a Republican’t!

  36. Tristan says:

    Thankfully, our economy won’t allow a war with Iran. Neither will Obama, when he likely takes office.

    The PNAC is over, its purpose has failed. We need to accept that the greatest nation in the world is going to have to lead by example of liberty and economic freedom, not by military force, or we can say goodbye to all three. Unfortunately, Obama shares the neoconservative principle that liberty and economic freedom take a back seat to other issues, so while this may be the end of our military crusades, it won’t be the end of the downward spiral.

    If only someone would read the original topic and either refute it or acknowledge the implications…I tried to word it such that no Republican or Democrat could possibly agree with my statement without contradicting his or her own principles. I almost got Don to comment, but then we quickly got sidetracked by the war-good/war-bad discussion and left the economics out of it. Have I failed in my original attempt or is no one particularly concerned one way or the other?

  37. NeoConDon says:

    “Have I failed in my original attempt or is no one particularly concerned one way or the other?”

    Both. You really didn’t say anything. I like partisan politics because it forces the politicans to take a stand. For example, I believe that B. Hussein Obama is a socialist, and socialism is evil. But, we know where he stands and that is particularly refreshing when you consider the stupid democrats in office in Northern Ohio. If you want a perfect reason to not vote democrat, look at Cuyahoga county.

    The bottom line is that the economy is in a downward spiral and there isn’t much the gov’t can do, except cut taxes and make sure companies aren’t taking advantage of their customers. I’m still wondering why Barney Frank and Chris Dodd have not been arrested for destroying Fannie and Freddie and essentially causing this credit crisis. I will agree that the liberal George Bush had something to do with it as well, so it’s likely they made a deal with eachother.

    When I read your post, I concluded that you don’t like the idea of political parties, and think that the economy is going to collapse and there is nothing we can do about it. So what?….50% of the nation thinks the same way. I just wanted to tap into how wrong you are on the fall of the USSR, the good works of our military, and the fact that Iran is next, regardless of our economy and who is president. I would just rather we were the first to attack, because that is much better than being attacked first.

    Regardless of whether the economy is good or bad, national security is still number one. The decision to protect our national security is not influenced by the economy and neither will war with Iran.

  38. Dan S. says:

    ***The decision to protect our national security is not influenced by the economy and neither will war with Iran.***

    Bull Shit!

    If the economy wasn’t in the crapper, AND if we had a spare soldier with two of everything and willing to fight, Bush would have invaded Iran by now.

    He still might before leaving office.

    Well not invade them, just bomb the hell out of them, then leave it up to Obama to clean up the mess… along with all the other messes the piece of shit, low life idiot, left behind for someone else to deal with.

  39. NeoConDon says:

    Dan, once again, you’re a moron…

    According to everyone on the left, our economy was in shambles in 2001 and in 2003, and we began the Afghan and Iraqi wars. They were about national security. Our economy was in shambles from the depression when we declared war on Japan, and then on Germany, but it was about national security.

    When we go to war with Iran, it will be about national security, and the economy will play no role. The question is whether we’ll go to war on offense or defense. We all know from Sunday School that it is much better to give than to receive.

  40. Dan S. says:

    ***They were about national security.***

    Right, and *I’m* a moron…

  41. NeoConDon says:

    I’m glad to see that we both agree on something for once, Dan.

  42. Dan S. says:

    Yep, you’re as quick as a whip Don…

    …and a credit to your cell.

  43. Tristan says:

    When I think of shambles, I think of 1931, not 2001. Iran will not be invaded if the economy implodes and people are concentrating their efforts on feeding their families. It sure won’t be the upper crust of society on the front.

  44. NeoConDon says:

    There is no historical evidence or precident that supports the decision to refuse to defend our country from evil doers would be based on a bad economic status. In fact, the inverse might be true as it was during WWII. After FDR turned the recession into a depression and dragged it on so he could slam the new deal into my grandparent’s throat, the war was probably the only event that saved the economy.

  45. Dan S. says:

    “There is no historical evidence or precident that supports the decision to refuse to defend our country from evil doers would be based on a bad economic status.”

    Then why did Reagan run away from Lebanon with his tail between his legs, like a scared little bitch AFTER they killed hundreds of our soldiers?

    The cowardly piece of shit…

  46. Dan S. says:

    …ya’ know I felt bad after writing that last sentence.

    I did a grave disservice to cowardly pieces of shit out there, by comparing them to Ronnie ‘I Made Poopie’ Reagan.

  47. NeoConDon says:

    Your conclusions of the withdrawal are incorrect, but even if they were, what connection do they have to the economic status in 1983. It actually proves my point.

  48. Dan S. says:

    ***It actually proves my point.***

    Sure, if you accept the premise that Reagan was a cowardly piece of shit.

    The economy sucked under Reagan.

    Either that or he liked kicking people out of hospitals and onto the street, while launching the ‘Trickle Down’ or pissed on system of governing, because he was an *evil* piece of shit.

    Speaking of evil pieces of shit, has Mommy Reagan died yet?

  49. NeoConDon says:

    The economy sucked under Reagan? Maybe before he fixed Carter’s mistakes. You are so stupid.

  50. Dan S. says:

    If there really was a god who gave a crap about our lives and that thing called justice, Reagan and Bush would both have died from butt rape in jail for their involvement in making sure our hostages in Iran stayed there as long as possible, for their own selfish political, and quite typically Republican ways.

  51. NeoConDon says:

    Moron…the hostages were realeased when Reagan took office.

  52. Dan S. says:

    Right, you dumb fuck, almost to the minute, thanks to the deal he and Bush worked out in secret to the point of being treason, with those who were holding the hostages.

  53. Dan S. says:

    Since Nixon and Reagan, the Republican’ts treat laws as something that only applies to others…

  54. Dan S. says:

    Iran released the hostages DURING Reagan’s swearing in ceremony…

    Tell me that dead lizard son of a bitch didn’t have some friends in low places…

  55. NeoConDon says:

    You are a blind liberal sheep…

  56. Dan S. says:

    And the Religious Nuts running Iran, let the hostages go during Reagan’s swearing in ceremony, because they felt he was a kindred spirit?

    As far as your other argument goes…

    The Nazis and Japs were slaughtering our friends around the world at will, and we did nothing about it, that we made public.

    If it weren’t for Pearl Harbor, they’d be speaking German in the U.K. and Japanese in Australia.

  57. Tristan says:

    Defense is defense. Offense is offense.

    WWII really was a horrible thing for us. There was absolutely no doubt that we were good soldiers fighting evil. The reason this is horrible is because we now have the sense that we can do no wrong.

    I’m not of the opinion that we should be complete isolationists and not use our strength for good, but I think that good needs to be very carefully verified. Also, it should not come at the expense of our well being. Our current war is going to cost $20,000 for every family in the nation. If you think payday loans are bad, at least they’re ultimately the responsibility of the individual.

    For what it’s worth, here are some pictures of those on the receiving end of some of the toys purchased by our $20,000 loans. Evil as you or me, I guess:

  58. NeoConDon says:


    Perhaps you’d like to see pictures of 4 year old girls squeezing their stuffed animals and their mommies just before Saddam ordered the bullet to go through the back of their heads. There are scores of mass graves that our soldiers dug up with the images of 4 year old corpses and the reminders of how evil that guy was and how righteous we are for delivering them from his wrath.

    “Look at how hard it is for our girls going to school…” girls didn’t go to school before we came along and liberated that country.

    “Look at our old T.V. just so we can get the news…” They didn’t have ANY news before we came along and liberated that country.

    Stop with your lies. You should be proud to be part of a country that made such great sacrifices for the Iraqi people.

  59. Dan S. says:

    ***Stop with your lies.***


    You’re an idiotic Rube!

    Why not cry over all the babies thrown from their incubators onto the hospital floors, so Saddam could make hot pockets.

  60. NeoConDon says:

    I like hot pockets.

  61. Dan S. says:

    Yeah so what…

    …you like trolling public toilets too

  62. NeoConDon says:

    You have this strange infatuation for sheep, Rush Limbaugh, liberal fascism, and public toilets.

  63. Dan S. says:

    That’s the best you got?

    Damn you’re stupid!

  64. Tristan says:

    Don, neither I nor the pictures themselves gave any such opinions. Apparently you saw something in them that I did not. They’re just pictures of people. A shrink would probably have a field day at this point.

    I am not proud of a country that cares little for its own people. As I’ve said, lending a hand to another nation is noble, but not at the expense of our liberty. Everyone in office took an oath to uphold the Constitution:

    “I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

    How many have broken that oath? These are the leaders of our nation. Why should I have any pride in the wake of such disgrace?

  65. NeoConDon says:

    There were captions next to the photos…

    Everything you’re saying is absurd.

  66. Dan S. says:

    The captions do nothing to back up your delusional claims, you fruit cake.

  67. NeoConDon says:

    do you need to go back to school to learn how to read, moron man…

  68. Dan S. says:

    True, I do tend to just skim parts of your posts without reading the entire things, much of the time.

    One delusional rant is just the same as the next.

  69. Tatiana says:

    Searched economy crisis in msn but for some reason found this page.great info

  70. Tristan says:

    Tatiana, this post just highlights my personal views on our political and economic systems. I don’t consider myself an expert in either, but I’m glad you appreciate the information.

    Don, how is upholding the Constitution absurd? The principles of our nation should not be uprooted for any reason, whether it’s the warm (yet false) sense of security, or the ridiculous, socialist bailout of large banks and corporations. Constitutionally, there is no difference between the two.

    The captions on the pictures really didn’t say anything like what you said in your post–they need a TV so they know what’s happening in their country, I don’t see how that is a big deal. The point of the pictures is to get an Iraqi perspective. They really don’t support my views beyond showing that Iraqis are people not so different from us. I just want people to see that so they aren’t so disconnected.

  71. NeoConDon says:

    The Iraqi’s used to be a lot different from us. The girls couldn’t attend school. They didn’t get news from the west. They were forced to vote and there was only one candidate to vote for.

    Today…after we have liberated them and saved their lives…they can enjoy all of those things. Thanks to the United States and the 32 other countries that helped in what the liars on the left call “going it alone.”

  72. Tristan says:

    Women fought for and won their rights in the United States. Women in other countries need to do the same if they wish. If people are not free, they need to fight for their freedom. It is not our fight to win freedom for other people. If freedom is granted without effort then it will be lost just as easily.

    Being forced to vote for one candidate is not so different from our system. We have two candidates, but both are largely the same. Sure, we have third party candidates, but they are isolated from the mainstream by the media. What’s ironic is that both Republicans and Democrats alike accuse the media of favoring the other, but the only place I’ve seen Ron Paul is C-SPAN and the Daily Show. So, realistically, we also have only one candidate to vote for–big government. Other candidates cannot gain favor because they do not have a voice.

    This is why I continue to urge that we must take care of our own problems and correct our own mistakes. You view George W. Bush and John McCain as “liberals”. You have to see that our system is broken, so I don’t understand why you would push this system onto another nation. Even if it is better than what they had, it isn’t the right solution. God help them if we push our economic system.

  73. NeoConDon says:

    Both Ron Paul and Bob Barr have good solid economic ideas. They would never be able to get put into play with the congress and senate that it looks like we’ll have. But, before we focus on our economy, we need to look at our National Security. Both Paul and Barr are absolute failures when it comes to their opinions on our National Security and the spread of democracy. So even if they won, they couldn’t put their economic policies into play, and they’d isolate freedom.

  74. Hi there , I must say that you have a great information on your blog. Even I could not understand the whole article it is nice to know that people are writing also for guaranteed no fax payday loans as that is how i found you on Google , anyway just i stop it to say hello and posted my thought on your blog comment section. Cheers and keep growing your blog.

Leave a Reply