Since terror is in the Bible-do we expect 3000 yrs of Bush war on terror?

[papau]

Perhaps we should plan to balance the budget before then.

Perhaps restore civil rights before another 3000 years have past.

Perhaps provide for the health, welfare, and common good before then

Perhaps 911 does not mean we hunker down for 3000 years.

or do the terrorists - and the rich/corporate and friends of Bush win?

[LimpingLib]

1. Excellent point my good man.

I prefer to call it the 1000 year kingdom of the right wing ( corperate profits , treasury drainning policys , escatic religous extremists enjoying a modern day series of crusades , tightropes on social progress worldwide , politicaly correct racism, and the list is endless). Vietnam was described as the 30,000 day war or something . The Cold War finally ended. Now we have this petty "terror war" or whatever empty slogan or catch phraise the right wing will think of.

I actualy got away with saying on a conservative web site that the story of September 11 was that a few hundred rich guys got a scab (refering to the cowardly and selfish responce the elite media and other wealthy folk displayed in trying to scare our nation to death and literally trying to erect a fortress mentality around not only their mansions but imposing on all of "fly over Americas" lives) and compared the amount of deaths we have suffered in terrorism to almost every other type of tragic death and showed that terrorism in our country doesnt amount to a hill of beans.

Anyway all we can do as Democrats is down play the phoney terrorism threat and explain that we bring on whatever little terrorism we have "suffered" from . Kind of heard when we have the media anointed "voice of the left" the New Republic endorce Liebermann and justifing it by saying that only he understands the true threat ( despite the fact that ALL Democratic canidates bend over backwords in spasims trying to prove they are bigger terror hawks than the other) or put in simple terms...only Liebermann trys to duplicate the right wing verbatium rhetoric wise and policy wise.

Anyway it dissapoints me that there is widespread ridicule (that no "left wing" pundit seems to be able to effectivly counter)from almost every media circle of those who say we arent necessarily safer now that we removed Hussein. Self annointed "terror experts" like Hannity and others just pound us on this. Well I ive Gary Hart and Warren Rudmans comission much more credibility than any half baked incompitent jack off in Bush's administration (like Condi and Rummy and Chenney)in both expertise and predictions of threats (9/11 and using planes as weapons os proof of that , study the Bush admins ignorance on record and compare). Anyway what that comission said was (in addition to other things) that an attack on ANY Arab nation increased our chance of a terrorist attack. Case closed.

Back to your point. The Democrats have swallowed the rhetoric. We have a party that is made up of followers and not leaders in the "top tier" . Dean is the least bad however.

[papau]

2. I agree-a minset that terror is forever and can't be allowed to kill civil

liberty has got to be sold

Our media is sure not about to sell it - they like "terror" for the ratings and for the conservatives it puts in office

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.