It’s against the rules, and I’m not a Marxist.
That’s a myth. I do recall that one of Bush’s first actions upon taking office was to order the State Department to stop going after Osama.
It is a criminal matter, and Clinton threw the leader in prison for life. As opposed to Bush, who’s not only failed to catch him, but done just about everything Osama wanted.
Trotsky, do you realize that not everyone here is liberal, right?
You might accomplish more by presenting an argument in support of your position instead of slinging insults.
Granted, I suspect that the last thing you really want is intelligent discourse. Just call it a hunch.
Der Trihs, you are a piece of work alright. You really think the first WTC bombing that wanted to bring down both towers, and 9/11 that did, are criminal matters instead of acts of war.
If they nuke NYC, and 10 other top US and europe cities, will that also be a criminal matter to you? I bet you’ll welcome it if/when it comes anyway, and pump your fist in the air.
A: you are a marxist, you support marxism. B: you also support jihadism, and claim that it’s a criminal, not military matter.
Utterly repulsive to all common sense and decency.
Trotsky:
[Moderator Hat ON]
Trotsky, direct personal insults are NOT allowed in this forum. Do not do this again. Also, as noted, you’re really not going to impress anyone with potshots. Try debating.
[Moderator Hat OFF]
We got a live one here.
I could have SWORN my OP concerned the hypocrisy of calling for ‘fiscal conservatism’ and only meaning tax cuts when the true goal is responsible fiscal policy.
Of course. There’s no “People’s Republic of Terror” to be at war with.
It’s still a criminal matter if “they” are not a nation. And where do you get the idea I want to nuke cities ? Sounds like standard right wing “liberals = terrorists” stuff to me.
I don’t support Marxism, and since you say I do I expect that you don’t even know what Marxism is. I certainly don’t support jihadism.
You know what else Trotsky ? Not only am I not a patriot, not only am I a liberal, but I’m an atheist !
Yeah, I get exactly what you are. I said so earlier.
No, you pretty clearly demonstrated that you don’t.
You’re claiming that he thinks jihadism is a criminal matter, but that he supports it? A criminal matter, as in against the law and should be fought against by the normal crime-fighting systems such as police and FBI … but that he supports it?
So … Der Trihs wants jihadism fought against by the criminal justice system and he supports jihadism.
Something just isn’t clicking here. Help me out.
Belittling jihadist war as a criminal matter is, in fact, being supportive of it. You can’t stop jihad with cops… Sorry.
Well, no, no it’s not. It’s clearly anti-jihadist. You may feel that it is not sufficiently anti-jihadist, or that the criminal justice system is simply ineffective against it. It’s simply absurd to say that someone thinks something should be criminalized but that they also support that thing.
A modest proposal: let’s all ignore Trotsky (or Pit him, or something) and get back to the topic of the thread.
So, yeah, um… fiscal conservatism.
I think it’s a great idea.
They aren’t saying it should be criminalized. They’re saying it should not be militarized. That it’s only a criminal matter, and not a warfare matter.
That’s suicidal thinking.
You support corporate embezzlement, because it’s investigated by the cops and prosecuted in court. Where’s all the guys in camoflage, shooting everything that moves? That’s how REAL men show their opposition, sucka!
Hear, hear!
I agree with the OP. A fiscal conservative is one that balances the budget. Just as it would be irresponsible to raise spending and not raise taxes, it is also irresponsible to lower taxes without lowering spending. A lot of politicians have discovered that pledging to never raise taxes no matter what will translate into easy votes, a lot fewer can actually submit a proposed budget that is in balance.
Clinton did; tossed those jihadists in prison to rot. He did this because police methods are what work; they are designed to work against enemies like this. It’s just another form of organized crime, really.
No, treating it as a military matter is the stupid path ( not suicidal; they aren’t strong enough destroy us ). That’s exactly what they want, and it’s given them everything they want. Saddam gone, Iran stronger, secularism in Iraq gone, money and recruits flowing in, America humiliated and crippled. If Osama had gotten elected President he’d have done much the same thing as Bush.
Oh, and I agree with the OP on how fiscal conservatism should be defined.
jihadists shouldn’t be in jail, they should die.
btw, is there an ignore function on this forum? Der Trihs is spewing 5 year old extremist leftwing stuff that is painful to read again.
That might be the meaning of the words, but once the term “fiscal conservative” is sent through the political language grinder, it comes out the other side with a Republican patent, just like other politicized terms. Liberal doesn’t mean the same thing in politics that it does in the real world, and fiscal conservative has its own set of political implications, which are “low taxes, small government, fewer social programs” regardless of whether it’s responsible or not.
There is, but I believe you have to be a paid member to access it. Also we’re technically not allowed to talk about who we’re ignoring, just for future reference.