<$BlogRSDURL$> abbr, acronym { cursor: help; font-style: normal; font-weight:bold; color: #2a548d; /*border-bottom: 1px solid; */ }

Eminent Domain Stuff

New London Update (2/24/06)
Coverage of the Rally at New London's City Hall (w/ pics)

Thursday, December 02, 2004


Homespun Symposium

Just a quick comment on this week's Homespun Symposium (my thoughts). There have been some outstanding answers. I am constantly amazed (and humbled) by the depth of thought that some of my fellow Homespuners put into their posts. Go here for a full list of responses.

Unfortunately, tonight I have found the first Symposium answer that has truly disappointed me. David and I rarely agree on anything aside from the direction in which one might look to find the sky, but I have generally found him to be well reasoned and, in fact, quite reasonable. So it was quite shocking to see his post for the Symposium this week. Here it is:

Homespun Question of the Week

The Question

What, in your mind, represents the single greatest long-term threat to the United States of America, and what should be done about it?

My Answer:

George W. Bush
*National Deficit
*Reckless Foreign Policy
*Threats to Civil Liberties and the Judicial System
*Plain Stupidity

Too Late to do anything....
This, my friends, is a terribly telling example of what is wrong with the Left (sorry, David, but it's true). Here we have threats (read: Terror) that endanger us in the most fundamental ways both morally and physically. And...terror does not have an expiration date (until the Marines show up, that is). George Bush, on the other hand, will be in office for another 4 years, period. Whether you see that as a good thing or bad, it is a simple fact. So, apparently David sees George W. Bush's next 4 years in office as the single greatest long-term threat currently facing this country. Amazing.

David, after this response all I can say is that I expect to never see you accuse anyone (Left or Right) of being too partisan.


I was going to put this in the Comments, but it got kind of long so here is my response to David’s comment:


I think you know where I stand, so I'll keep it short.

National Deficit

Not Bush's fault. The 90's saw the tech bubble burst, leading to declining economic numbers that started before Bush took office. Then we lost over 3,000 Americans in NYC, the Pentagon and a field in PA...not to mention two very large buildings that housed many large companies. That will tend to put a dent in productivity and lead to decreased tax revenue --> increased deficit. Oh, and it is not Bush who controls the allocation of tax dollars. Sure he can have an effect, but (as you obviously know) it is in the House that spending bills originate.

Reckless Foreign Policy

That's a perfectly fine opinion to have...but the question we've each got to ask ourselves is which hurt more, Clinton's inactivity against Terror or Bush's activity? Answer however you will but either way I don't see how Bush's FP contributes to the most grave danger to this country. After all, we were attacked many times before Bush took office and before he took any international action against Terror.

Civil Liberties and the Judicial System

I suppose you're referring to the PATRIOT Act? We could go around and around on this and I’m sure you would make some good points. However, let's ask ourselves another question: Which hurt more, the Bush Administration working to remove the "Wall of Separation" between domestic law enforcement and foreign intel or the Clinton Admin's erecting of that wall?

Plain Stupidity

I know you said it was “a little harsh” but I’ll address it quickly nonetheless. Bush went to Yale (as did John Kerry, btw). A lot of people say that his father bought him admission as well as a diploma. But there are a few things that people ignore. 1) Bush flew fighter jets. They don’t let stupid people do that. 2) Bush got an MBA from Harvard. Unless you’re going to question that program's academic integrity, you’ve got to admit that there’s at least the possibility that he earned it. 3) Bush successfully ran a large business and owned a major league baseball team. Do you figure that someone who is plainly stupid would have been successful at all those things?

Anyway, there you have it.

A Bit More:

David also challenged me to counter his answer at his blog.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?