Bernice: I love it when AD is right, too. That's why I have so much love stored up, just waiting...... ;o)

Artful Dodger: "I just start with the obvious one: democrats, and go from there."

I'm still waiting for the last phrase in your statement to kick in. :o)

Artful Dodger: If you recognize someone OUGHT to be blamed, that's a step forward. :o)

Artful Dodger: If you want to know the truth, I think a chance at real democracy (i.e., the republic) died at his death. That was when the Military-Industrial-Complex, that Eisenhower warned us about, asserted its clandestine rule.

Artful Dodger: I knew Jack. Jack was a friend of mine. Etc. lol

Artful Dodger: P.S. I love eating cow but some people have a cow over it.

Artful Dodger: lol Those 2,500 scientists don't agree with you. But what do they know? ;o)

From National Geographic:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12/1206_041206_global_warming.html

Artful Dodger: A Quote from your link to the study:

Swanson thinks the trend could continue for up to 30 years. But he warned that it's just a hiccup, and that humans' penchant for spewing greenhouse gases will certainly come back to haunt us.

"When the climate kicks back out of this state, we'll have explosive warming," Swanson said. "Thirty years of greenhouse gas radiative forcing will still be there and then bang, the warming will return and be very aggressive."

Artful Dodger: Trust me, I'm not defending Clinton. I know how much harm he did to the economy. But the budget was balanced during his administration...and without his cooperation, it couldn't have happened. If you prefer to think the Republican Congress muscled him, that's your prerogative. Again, I refer you to history. They didn't likewise "muscle" Bush. And Bush is as much a part of the point as is Clinton, and Reagan, etc. Narrow political boundaries hardly begin to address our predicament.

ScarletRose: I think she's already gone through it. Something about being gone with the wind...lol But one can sip margaritas and discuss politics! Indeed, it is often required.

"Thinking people sometimes have intellectually honest differences of opinion, and often examine themselves critically. Unthinking people have no intellectual honesty and precious little self-insight."

Artful Dodger: Funny, they had no problem letting Bush spend it. And our economy is in far worse shape now than it was under Carter. Can Obama make it better? Very doubtful, because he won't address the core issues. Fiscal Conservatives should be impressed neither with Obama nor Bush nor Reagan, nor Nixon, nor Johnson, etc. I don't see how anyone can believe we are represented by either party, whether in Congress or in the Oval Office.

Artful Dodger: It goes back to Reagan, who first set the record for government debt, before Bush Jr. broke his record.

But it really goes further than that...to Nixon, who removed the gold standard. Then back further, to Wilson, who signed the Federal Reserve into law.

Roosevelt tooks steps to help the economy. Clinton hurt the economy in the long run with Nafta, but nevertheless he balanced the budget, and provided a surplus...used up by Bush (and more!) to fund an illegal war.

Artful Dodger: You can thank Bush, his illegal war & his oil-sipping buddies, not to mention Wall Street high-rollers...for that.

Artful Dodger: Earth to AD...the America you know no longer exists. It hasn't for some time. I can see that nothing I've said for the past 3 weeks has made a dent. lol Seriously, Americans in general need a new perspective, in my opinion. I'm afraid we're all headed down, down, down...with little hope of escaping from the Matrix (in the short run).

As to Obama's stimulus package, it doesn't seriously address this country's economic problems, I agree, but I'm not sure anything can short of an entire restructuring of how we do business (repealing NAFTA, stopping outsourcing & forcing companies to manufacture in America, reestablishing unions, etc.) And...in spite of its weaknesses, Obama's plan WILL help some people who NEED it! That means it is both more efficient & more ethical than Bush's bailout.

Artful Dodger: Actually, I must confess I wasn't following the argument to which your straw man was a reply. A bit befuddled & off-focus. I was mostly just teasing.....

About MSNBC....you are correct. Likewise, Fox News is the Bush channel.

Tuesday: According to Bon Scott, "hell ain't a bad place to be." (notice quotation marks...lol)

Artful Dodger: "Msnbc.com is a joint venture of Microsoft and NBC Universal, which is a GE company."

Further proof that our media, while "private," is not neutral. A half-dozen groups own ALL the major media in America. It is not possible, with such a consolidation of interests, that we can get the full picture by watching/reading it.

Artful Dodger: Now I'm doubly confused. I'm afraid you'll have to put the two pics side by side and explain more fully. Preferably you'll back up your explanation with evidence & links to the source. I still believe those are Wicker Men!

Just an aside....if the arguments are straw men, in what way are they so? Ought a picture really to be considered a thorough refutation? I mean, I know that works for O'Reilly & Hannity, but come on... :o)

Pedro Martínez: It's not a good word. And you're welcome. lol (j/k)

Artful Dodger: I read your exchange below with (V) so wasn't really confused. But my response just seemed so appropriate...lol

Artful Dodger: I jest seriously. There's a difference. Just don't ask me to explain it.

Artful Dodger: A wicker man? The original flick (1974) is really pretty good. :o)

Czuch: Not non-existent. Simply patsies. In order for the ruse to work, that's what you need. Look up the word "patsy."

(V): Some interesting tidbits...

We know that Israeli secret service was tracking & monitoring the so-called 19 hijackers before 9/11. Might the Israelis have been the "handlers" of these patsies? Either way, it would have been a joint operation with the U.S. Also, a group of Israeli "art students," later discovered to be spies, were seen videotaping the planes striking the WTC from the top of a van on the New Jersey side of the Hudson...taping & cheering. These kinds of things are reported, even by the Mainstream media...then conveniently shelved & forgotten.

(V): Even Fox News gets it right sometimes. It produced a 4-part expose of the Israeli Spy Ring in America. Real investigative reporting. But the series was pulled and even removed from Fox's internet archives. It can still be found online.

(V): "Who runs the USA? Israel or the United States?"

There are many duel Israeli-U.S. citizens at the top of the food chain. So one could make an argument either way. To which country is a duel citizen most loyal? Hmmmmm.... On the other hand, Israel does a lot of spying on U.S. soil, including high intel matters. But a blind is turned. It's an interesting question.

(V): The latest example:

"US to boycott UN racism conference"
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/02/200922855014421433.html

Alas, Obama is no Martin Luther King, Jr. More like a white elitist in black skin. No significant U.S. policies will change during his administration. The ploy worked....America's anger at its criminal government funneled into a false hope. This is how it is designed to work. No matter which rascals you throw out, you're stuck with the same rascals.

(V): "I can't understand why a country would support state terrorism"

They support it because it is profitable. Our leaders are the extremist radicals we accuse Ahmadinejad & all Arabs of being. Death in the Middle East = Money. It is also a lever of world power, the ultimate motive.

--Two nations stand out above all others as notorious serial abusers of UN resolutions - the US and Israel. Over the last half century, the US has used its Security Council veto many dozens of times to prevent any resolutions from passing condemning Israel for its abusive or hostile actions or that were inimical to Israeli interests. It's also voted against dozens of others overwhelmingly supported by the rest of the world in the UN General Assembly. By its actions and with 6% of the world's population, the US has thus arrogantly ignored the will of nearly all the other 94% to support its client state even when Israel had committed war crimes or crimes against humanity the rest of the world demanded it be held to account for. In the words of one UK observer using a baseball analogy: "Only the USA could have a World Series and not invite the rest of the world."--

Full article here:
http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/3460

Artful Dodger: LOL We may both fail miserably. Unfortunately I can't afford to bribe you..... :o)

Artful Dodger: "I do get your point but I'm still right."

That's a good line to end tonight's debate with. lol

Sleep well. Who knows where the P-Board will lead us tomorrow? (eery background music)

Artful Dodger: I've known for some time about the mistranslation. During the current debate, I googled & found the Wikipedia article, so that's what I posted.

I just googled this:

Ahmadinejad mistranslation
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Ahmadinejad+mistranslation&btnG=Search

I don't have the energy to prove it line-by-line. lol But it is something you might research.

Artful Dodger: It certainly doesn't. But it does raise the odds that he is playing funny with the "facts." It is logical to take this into consideration.

Artful Dodger: There is a lot of dubious translation in your posted quote, as is well-documented. Suffice to say, Ahmadinejad
does not like the Zionist regime & properly recognizes it as an enemy. He does not advocate the genocide of the Jewish people. And the fact remains, that Iran has no official policy of military aggression towards Israel or anyone else. The only war they've fought in recent memory is a defensive war against the American-backed invasion of Iran by Iraq under Saddam Hussein.

Artful Dodger: This article (in your link) is written by Barry Rubens, a professor in Herzliya, Israel. He is American in nationality & Jewish in ancestry. Some might consider those affiliations cause for bias, and his sweeping statements therefore to be taken with a grain of salt.

Ahmadinejad would like to see regime change in Israel. So would I, for that matter.

Artful Dodger: That is not true. Iran has no national policy of destroying Israel. In fact, Ahmadinejad's comments were mistranslated. Read here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel

"And asked if he [Ahmadinejad] objected to the government of Israel or Jewish people, he said that "creating an objection against the Zionists doesn't mean that there are objections against the Jewish". He added that Jews lived in Iran and were represented in the country's parliament.[27]"

Iran is one of the most non-agressive nations in modern history. It hasn't attacked anyone. Not so the belligerent U.S.

Artful Dodger: I don't think you can collectivize the attitude, that is too simplistic & results in caricature. That is my point, really.

Artful Dodger: Krushev (sp) said the same about America, but I doubt most Russians felt that way.

Artful Dodger: "Nothing will appease the Arabs except for the complete extermination of Israel."

I think this statement is a mischaracterization of most Islamic people. So I see that as a misunderstanding on your part. I agree there is plenty we both don't know.

No people or religion can be judged by its extremist proponents or leaders, except that we use the same standard for all, and only to the extent that we are all responsible, at least partially, for allowing extremism to take root, whether in America, Israel, Gaza or anywhere else.

There are good Jews, good Christians, good Muslims, etc. Take the infamous "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion," for instance. I think this document is "legitimate," in the sense that it partly describes the means & methods for the rise of world dictatorship. But I do not believe it is a Jewish document, but rather floats under a "false-flag," if you will, thus utilizing the age-old strategy of "divide and conquer." Even if it WERE a Jewish document, it would not be representative of the Jewish people as a whole, but only certain elite radicals. Some elite radicals are certainly Jewish, but some are also Anglo-Saxon & many other nationalities.

Artful Dodger: I believe your understanding of the Middle East mindset is more a caricature of reality, than the truth. Certainly there are some hard right Muslims, just as there are hard right Christians. I don't consider either attitude healthy or conducive to peace. But Islam is smeared in America. Its people are sorely misrepresented. I'd hate to be an American Islamist about now.

"Global apartheid, stated briefly, is an international system of minority rule whose attributes include: differential access to basic human rights; wealth and power structured by race and place; structural racism, embedded in global economic processes, political institutions and cultural assumptions; and the international practice of double standards that assume inferior rights to be appropriate for certain "others," defined by location, origin, race or gender."

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20010709/booker

Statistics indicate that global apartheid is more severe than South African apartheid in its heyday.

Artful Dodger: I agree with you that rocket attacks on civilian targets is as unwise as it is immoral. Both sides appear to be guilty of this...although Israel has a bigger punch and so does more damage. My opinion, in general, is that Israel is practicing apartheid in the Middle East. This is not to excuse other terrorist organizations (Israel's practices "state terrorism") from heinous acts.

Artful Dodger: That is true. Some are more related to facts than others. That's always our goal, isn't it? To align our viewpoints with facts? A high calling, not always easy.....

Tuesday: Thanks. :o)

Artful Dodger: I'll look into it later tonight, and see if I can find an alternate viewpoint with facts to substantiate it. Or else see things in a new light. January 18...that's my birthday. I'm officially old now.

Artful Dodger: That's one way of looking at it. lol