Originally Posted by JahB

I didn't mix MY metaphors! LOL

Originally Posted by JahB

Most here defend our RIGHTS...when the fed gov't refuses to...what then...what insight will determine THAT outcome?

The insight that WE THE PEOPLE have the right, no, the obligation, to CHANGE that government. I'm a Jeffersonian in that respect.

Like it or not, the outcome of the last election was an attempt by a majority, however misguided or not, to do just that. Were they right? Most here will say no. Time will tell. If we keep falling through the floor due to past and current indiscretions and stupidity, mere elections won't change ENOUGH, and the Constitution could be re-written, or abandoned.

What was the last administration to fully honor the plain english of the Constitution without self-serving interpretation? None, since the very beginning, I would posit.


back to the OP:

What about Biden's assignment is a suckerpunch to the Iraqis? We have a vested interest in seeing to it that Iraq's government become an effective institution in it's own right, without us when we go.

Is it because he advocated a three state federal system? Because he's Biden? Please, make your point clear in terms of why he is a poor choice. I don't understand the objection. He is, if nothing else, a consummate politician, and Politics is what it's all about in Iraq right now. Who would be a better appointment for Obama to make for the job? I'm just looking for the reasons. I get the opinion. I get the joke. I just don't get the reasoning. I don't see any.

Is it because he's a part of this Democratic administration? Should Biden or anyone in this democratic administration be assigned to the task of furthering our interests? If not Joe Biden, who? Who SHOULD do that? It seems to me that sending the Vice President of the United States, (whoever he is) sends a strong signal of our seriousness - even if only OUTSIDE the country.

Originally Posted by JahB

My "opinion" is that in THIS country, we are permitted to disagree, and to speak our mind without restriction. Even here, even me. Thank you for respecting my right to do so.

I still have not said whether I agree or disagree with the OP, and yet, I have been judged as a "flaming liberal". That I prefer, admire and respect intellectual rigor and knowledge in place of over-wrought, angry, partisan opinion and idealogy means I am a flaming liberal? THAT is laughable on its face.

The point I was making is clear. Opinion clouds observation by filtering information through one's political predisposition. Far too often, popular ideology does not include the thoughts and reason of those who disagree. In fact, it discounts the wisdom and intelligence of others. It is one sided, tending to reinforce rather than challenge one's own thoughts and OPINIONS, reducing the inconvenience of gaining NEW knowledge, understanding and perspective, and as such, lacks wisdom, and is arrogant in the extreme.

I earned my vote. I served this country as a USN submarine sailor, with my shipmates and I in real danger of losing our lives during the Cold War, spying on our enemies, the USSR. I was one who was trained to scuttle the ship by exploding one of several 50# blocks of C4 and kill myself and my shipmates in the event we were caught. I did my job. I was exposed to a nuclear reactor within 10 feet of my workspace, and will likely pay for that with my life. I would do it again. I was lucky. I did that to insure our right to our OPINIONS.

I am not saying that we should not have an opinion, only that we should consider a wider scope of information and ideas than is typical while forming it. What kind of hubris assumes that the facts and opinions we hear from people who agree with us contain all human knowledge, perspective, insight and wisdom? It is far more likely that what we DON'T know or understand is that which comes back to bite us in the ### than that which we "know".

The truth, since you ask, is probably far different from what we THINK we know. I say that because I know what our government is capable of doing in the name of protecting us. Are they wrong, or are they right in doing so? An answer by me, about this, would be mere OPINION, and I have experience that gives me a good deal of insight.

The reality is that your government will do what ever is necessary, whether you or I think it is moral, right, or wrong. Why? Because they have more inside knowledge of the REALITY of the world, and what decisions and actions are best in a given situation, than all of us with our opinions. Lest we forget, THEY are US. Republican OR Democrat, OR Libertarian, or any other flavor of political idealogy. Are they right? Only time will tell. I don't think one is 100% better than any other. I advocate knowledge over opinion. How does that make me a "flaming liberal"? I'm not afraid to have my thinking challenged or changed, are you? At least I KNOW that I don't KNOW what I don't KNOW. It would be stupid not to recognize that.

Of all places indeed, Hamm. I could just go listen and talk to other people who always agree with me, and criticize those who don't. That would make all the difference in the world. NOT.

My ego needs no stroking. Nor do my opinions.

Originally Posted by Working Class Patriot

You can post opposing views anytime you like...to include wacko liberal ones.....Just don't whine when your're asked to back up those wacko claims....
Btw...link for Biden's exoneration of his blatant plagiarism...

He plagiarized because he has proven time and time again.....he is incapable of original thoughts or concepts..... [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Truck Forum Link.