j_b

Whether PP is genuinely a troll isn't relevant since he has been spewing the same GOP/libertarian propaganda for years.

here comes the neo-fascist thugs.

Huh? You talkin' conservative like the New York Times and the Detroit Free Press....it's pretty much a liberal media world once you get off AM radio my friend. Since you think the NYT is liberal, it shouldn't be too difficult to cite their editorial positions on economic and foreign policy issues that would support you assertion. Why don't you also do the same for TV news that most people watch.

Precisely! So you agree with me that D'Souza is a liar when he claims that liberals say they want "big government". No, I do not agree with you at all. D'Sousa is spot on the money. Please see my second post re: Barak. He didn't ever SAY he was a big tax and spend liberal. Conservatives said he was big tax and spend liberal. D'Souza is a liar for the reasons I mentionned because liberals never said they were for big government, they say they are for government and not for anarcho-capitalism. I never claimed he was a tax and spend liberal. Conservatives did however do just that when they knew it was a lie. D'Souza still supports Bush on invading Iraq and corporate welfare for the militari-industrial complexe. He has no credibity on the issue of government spendings.

This is indeed the level of your discourse. YOU and other conservatives, supposedly "small government types", own this unprecedented economic fiasco fair and square. YOU supported all of Bush's "big" government policies, so don't come whining now about spendings. Which points to the propaganda you have been spewing about Obama. I never said Obama wanted to redistribute wealth, you and your pals did. Opportunist jackass who says everything and its opposite without missing a beat. If anyhting that was a counter-revolution and Reagan, the GE spokeperson, senile B-movie actor, certainly didn't have a hand in formulating the propaganda he spewed, conservative think-tanks did. Get off whatever you are smoking.

Isn't focussing on this deluded victim of the desease itself without commenting on the bible thumpers who preach abstinence and burn condoms in Africa, somewhat odd?

After 30 years of rhetoric against "big" government by conservatives in control of all key institutions including the media, corporate welfare (which has always been huge) has reached unprecedented levels, and has bankrupted the nation. The same people certainly have no credibility on that topic today.

More disinformation. US pols are never indifferent about the progress of the EU toward common policy and the euro currency.

That is disinformation. Euros never were in the street to denounce the "essence" of the US but to protest US militarism.

"Small" government according to the demagogues: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JJ02Ak01.html

To my knowledge, there is no evidence that warrant asking whether there is a teleology of life. Might as well ponder the role of the little green men in evolution.

Precisely! So you agree with me that D'Souza is a liar when he claims that liberals say they want "big government". Anyway, who cares what pols say, just watch what they do. When you do that you realize that republicans always commit to huge public expenditure in order to benefit crony capitalism, intrusion into private lives, etc .. Facts don't lie but pols lie routinely.

What insipid tripe! Seeking a military solution in Afghanistan isn't a change in "style and content" (Moisi clapped with both hands in support of attacking Iraq).

Dinesh D'Souza is a liar. Liberals never said “Big government is necessary to counter the influence of big business.” Liberals say that government by the people and for the people is necessary to prevent the take over of government by big business. There is no bigger government than that of Georges Bush (in term of expenditures but also intrusion in private lives), yet the demagogues keep insisting that "government is the problem" when the problem is a corporatist government. An appropriate analogy would be to put the wolf in charge of the flock of sheep, then claiming that guard dogs are not necessary and bad because they eat sheep.

A must read 2-page summary of the Israel-Palestine conflict in the Guardian. How Israel brought Gaza to the brink of humanitarian catastrophe Oxford professor of international relations Avi Shlaim served in the Israeli army and has never questioned the state's legitimacy. But its merciless assault on Gaza has led him to devastating conclusions. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine

You are confusing 'cooperation' with 'altruism'. Every member of a community gains from cooperating; cooperation isn't altruistic.

A 01/06 press release by Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) discusses the corporate media propaganda on the israeli attack on Gaza ("Israel is only retaliating"): http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3667

For the same reason that one cannot question inequalities in economic welfare without being labeled a commie or a terrorist. Demonizing differing point of views is standard practice for the heirs of McCarthysim.

It is symptomatic of your ideologic tunnel vision that you chose a "great leap forward" analogy instead of "marshall plan", "new deal" or "manhattan project". I have already said I woudn't discuss the details of a carbon tax without also reconsidering the entire imposition scheme including tax havens.

I don't understand how the observation that folks would eat shit instead of starving means that we shouldn't stimulate the economy while retooling it to avoid the dead-end of plundering resources and the environment as if there were no tomorrow.

These one-sided lists of palestinian violence are pathetic and again shouldn't convince anyone that Israel only retaliates to the extremists on the other side. Here is the valuable perspective of israelis in Sderot (the community near Gaza that reveived 1000's of rockets since 2001): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-horowitz/even-in-sderot-israelis-s_b_154771.html Isn't it revealing how rightwing blowhards always can justify their own advocacy of violence but the little brown people should content themselves with placing flowers in the guns of occupying armies (the guns are courtesy of the US taxpayer in this case)? As usual Greenwald is right on target: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/01/04/terrorism/index.html I don't understand how Egyptian policy making represent evidence of palestinian wrong-doing. There is in turn plenty of evidence showing that arab governments have sold palestinians down the river. Finally, your own lack of skepticism toward Israeli propaganda is the problem JayB not the opposite. It took me about 30 seconds to find numerous links that document israeli collaboration with Iran during the Iran-Iraq war. Here is one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Iran_during_the_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_war

I didn't miss it. I have consistantly talked about Israel and not about jews, until my last post when I mentionned demographics. I also note that nowhere in your post do you mention Israel's expansionist policies.

Well, I am for everyone to live in peace but for peace to be made the parties have to be honest and rhetoric has to be matched by actual behavior. A return to the 48 borders would be quite unexpected since israeli colonists continue with new illegal settlements on palestinian territory today. Avnery's letter to Obama which I posted above briefly discusses this dichotomy between discourse and practice and how Israel hasn't shown they wanted a neighboring palestinian state. To be honest, I don't know what is the solution, especially since israeli law makes non-jews de-facto second-class citizens, and that demographics in Palestine and in Israel aren't favorable to israeli jews.

For the 3rd time: the only person here advocating violence against semitic people is you Fairweather. Quit parsing my words to change their meaning. Jackass.

Which borders? Israel is occupying much territory beyond the 48 and beyond the 67 borders. What's a pre-emptive attack? If you followed attentively events, you'd see there isn't one side starting violence and the other only reacting to it. That version is pure propaganda. Here is letter to Obama on Israel by Uri Avnery, former member of the Knesset and founder of the israeli peace movement: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090112/avnery?rel=hp_currently