I just saw one reason democrats keep losing.

[Archae]

Here in Sheboygan, our local Democratic party head is Tim Lorenz, he wrote an essay in our local giveaway newspaper (shoppers' weekly,) about the reasons for 9-11.

His essay was nothing but excuses for Bin Laden.

Including the "Imperialist" charge.

Bin Laden was a vicious, theocratic fascist who gloried in violence against the innocent.

There is *NO* real reason for Bin Laden and his goons pulling thier stunts, except to create chaos and murder.

Tim Lorenz needs to realize the 60's and the radicals in the SDS are gone.

[polichick]

1. What would Americans do if other nations installed military bases on our shores?

I'm not excusing bin Laden - but I'm not excusing the U.S. military industrial complex either.

[Archae]

3. It depends on if the US is asked to, or not.

In most countries the US still has military bases in, whenever it's put to a vote, the country wants the US bases to stay.

(I know a couple Asian countries want US bases to leave.)

[polichick]

11. We hear mostly what the mic wants us to hear about that.

[MADem]

17. Germany has a sweet little base (more like a facility) out at Dulles in VA.

They fly their flag, it has a big fence around it, and they have a load of apron space--it's over by cargo.

For the most part, though, foreign military personnel here in the USA are here for either mil-to-mil (assignment exchanges) or training....and there are a LOT of them here at any one time, from all over the world.

And you're quite right--we only go where we're welcomed. We pay plenty for the privilege, too, either with mutual security assurances (where we do all the heavy lifting) or outright cash on the barrel. It's not a free ride by any stretch.

[Exilednight]

78. We only go where we are welcomed? Rummy said the same thing, just before we

invaded Iraq.

Have you ever been to South Korea? I was stationed there in the early 90s, and I'll be the first to tell you that we need to get the hell out of there. If put to the vote of the Korean people, they would kick us out in a heartbeat.

Countries like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and many other middle-eastern countries don't want us there. But they tolerate us because of our money.

Soldiers from foreign countries that come to the US, as you describe above, are not here to protect us from invasion. They're here because we train them, and as long as we train them, we know how to defeat them.

We are an imperialistic country, plain and simple.

[MADem]

104. You don't seem to understand that many nations are not democracies.

And we go where we are welcomed by the assholes in charge, not the ditch-digging bastards at the bottom of the pecking order. You do not have to like this truth, but do acknowledge that it is a truth, and stop trying to paint me with some asinine "Rummy" brush because I have the simple ability to discern facts from wishful thinking.

I have been to SK dozens of times. Seoul, Pusan, Osan, etc.

The "Korean people" may suggest (from your casual polling) they want us out of there, but until "the South Korean government" says "There's the door" or we say "We can't afford to man the line anymore" we'll stay where we're at. Anecdotal evidence ain't shit--if a bunch of people at a noodle shop or a bar gripe about the nastyass misbehaving GIs who make everyone else look bad, that does NOT translate into official government policy. You see, this IS "put to a vote" by the South Korean people every time they go to the polls--they have a choice between candidates who want us out, and those who want us to stay. I don't have to tell you who has been winning thus far.

Frankly, if we got out of there, we'd save a bundle. I don't see it happening until North Korea gets new leadership and is out from under the repressive thumb of the Krazy Kim Klan.

Soldiers from foreign countries are not "here to protect us from invasion" because we do not need any fucking help. We have a sizeable military, friendly neighbors and two oceans to protect us. Those foreign soldiers are over here to LEARN HOW TO PROTECT THEMSELVES. Jesus, why is this so difficult for some people to comprehend?

Go on and wave your imperialistic flag if you'd like. Plainly it gives you some sort of odd comfort.

[Laluchacontinua]

36. Put to a vote of who? Like in Iraq, you're saying, after we overthrew Saddam

we had the government we installed vote? what?

[sabrina 1]

70. You mean the puppet governments want the bases, because

we pay them millions to allow them to stay in all the countries we have them in.

Uzbekistan, eg, ruled by a brutal dictator, one of the worst in the world, is a US ally. Wikileaks cables revealed that the US knows what he does to his people, (like massacring them for protesting eg, or boiling people in oil for daring to criticize his government). The cables show that in discussing him, it was agreed that 'he is not a nice guy, but he allows us to build our bases in his country'.

Do you think the people there want those bases? Do you think they want him being propped up with millions of dollars each year by the US making it impossible for THEM to get rid of him?

I could list fifty countries around the world where the US is building bases or has them, such as Iraq eg, where the puppet governments want them, for the money, but the people do not.

When we are told 'they want us there' they are not talking about the people. The presence of US troops in Mecca was a grave insult to many Muslims. Most would not have done anything about it, but there are always going to be some who will. And if someone put a base in THIS country, without the consent of the PEOPLE, China, eg, I am certain someone would do what Bin Laden did. Timothy McVeigh did it for far less reason. The truth is we are in everyone's countries around the world, without their consent. And we are now viewed as the 'biggest threat to world peace' as a result of our invasions and brutality towards innocent people. I'm surprised there have not been worse attacks, considering eg, how many Iraqis and Afghans and Pakistanis the US has slaughtered, for what?

[aikoaiko]

5. We would take up the issue with our own government.

[polichick]

9. Good luck with that - we've "taken up" these fake wars with "our" gov't for years.

[Selatius]

14. Most of us, but the militants in the militia movement will resort to plane jackings and car bombs.

Like that one fellow Timothy McVeigh.

[polichick]

24. Exactly - that's the American equivalent.

[MADem]

13. You do realize those bases are there with the consent of the governments?

Those governments get paid VERY well for the base leases. The economies of the communities where the bases are located benefit from the influx of personnel.

You can gripe all you want about "imperialism" or what-have-you, but we do not 'base' where we are not wanted, and where the host government says "Get the fuck out."

[SomethingFishy]

18. Oh so the Iraqi's asked for us to come and build a base there?

Really? We don't "base" where we are not wanted? Is that not wanted by the governments or the people?

[polichick]

23. Check out our embassy there - #22

[MADem]

29. Any bases that remain are there with the consent of the government of Iraq.

If you think we were going to ask Saddam for permission to invade his country, you're not thinking clearly.

The Government of Iraq has decided they don't want to play the SOFA game, so we're moving on. Or haven't you read the news lately?

[polichick]

31. Smoke and mirrors - "our" contractors are staying, along with some military personnel.

[TheWraith]

34. No, actually.

160 troops to cover the embassy. The imaginary legions of mercenaries aren't there. There's some civilian employees also who are considered "contractors": cooks, couriers, electricians, that sort of thing. About a thousand of them, mostly Iraqis.

[polichick]

39. "The legions of mercenaries aren't there"...

:rofl:

DREAM ON!

[TheWraith]

42. Right, they're there even though only you can see them.

Even though they're not being paid by the US government, not being supported at our embassy, not being supplied by our bases... but they're still there, somewhere, because you KNOW it and therefore it must be true.

Talk about faith-based information.

[polichick]

48. Actually, it's you who's "faith-based."

[MADem]

35. Without SOFA. What's your point?

Do you actually think everyone at this little "outpost" is a diplomat or a secretary?



Live in the real world, please.

[polichick]

40. The "real world" includes a U.S. military industrial complex that's out of control...

Making excuses for it doesn't help.

[TheWraith]

43. And your imagining things doesn't help either.

Nor does the fact that you have only insults and insinuations to fall back on.

[polichick]

45. Yeah, me and Eisenhower.

[TheWraith]

47. Eisenhower you're not.

He actually based his opinions on facts.

[polichick]

50. Most thinking people realize that the mic is still FACT, even more so...

...after all these years.

[MADem]

53. That's true. However, you're convoluting issues and no one is "making excuses."

That Military-Industrial-CONGRESSIONAL (Ike's original phrase) complex has one leg that We, The People control--and that leg is CONGRESS.

It isn't an "excuse" to say "If you do not vote, YOU are part of the problem, and partly to blame for the excesses of today."

And most people DO NOT VOTE. They don't register, they don't show up, they don't work for their candidates--they don't even TRY. Candidates are grown from the ground up, which is why local and state elections are as important as federal ones.

People who don't vote, or who only vote for the President, are shirking their duty as citizens. Way too many of them, though, are good at whining and complaining after the fact when things don't go their way.


If this does not describe you, don't own it. If it does describe you, you need to fix it.

[polichick]

57. I'm not "convoluting issues" - I'm saying plain and clear that the U.S.

...gov't/mic does NOT serve the people and couldn't care less what the people want concerning foreign bases.

You keep complaining about people not voting, but we don't have verifiable voting in this country - in spite of lofty claims that the U.S. is THE BEST democracy - so it really isn't about people voting. People elected Gore and Kerry, but got Bush. It's about a completely corrupt system.

The real hope is OWS participants, myself included, get that.

[MADem]

61. We don't have verifiable voting because no one is demanding it.

No one is demanding it because no one fucking votes.

They're real good at griping behind a keyboard, though.

Your attitude is "Give up, it can't be done! 'They' control everything, the people are powerless!"

I happen to disagree. You get the government you deserve--that is to say, the one you worked (or failed to work) to get.

It doesn't come on a silver platter.

[polichick]

63. You're a hoot - I never said anything like "give up" or "the people are powerless."

[MADem]

66. You sure did--look at your words--you're defeated before you begin.

Negative, depressing, a total downer. Everything is bad to you. Your glass is half empty and then some.

We The People have the power and we always have--the thing is, we don't use it anymore. We The People have abdicated. Too busy, too lazy, too forgetful--who knows? Maybe if we did voting on Saturday, or over an entire weekend, more people would show up. But facts are facts--you are lucky to get twenty percent to the polls in an off year, and that's only if an election draws a little interest. That's the fault of We The People, and we have to fix it.

[polichick]

74. If you would read more carefully, instead of endlessly preaching...

...perhaps you'd get what other posters are saying.

[MADem]

102. Well,I'm not "endlessly preaching," but whatever. Back your truck up if you'd like.

It makes no difference to me. Perhaps you wouldn't run into so much trouble if you didn't express yourself with such unrelenting negativity.

[Walk away]

95. +1000!

[SomethingFishy]

101. Wow, just wow. Usually I have to go on a neo-con site

to find this kind of defense of the invasion of Iraq. Congratulations.


We are in IRAQ over lies. Lies. Lies. Lies. They didn't ask us to be there and they don't want us there. Nice try though.

[MADem]

103. Learn to read, please before you falsely accuse people of defending anything.

You have a lot of nerve, to make phony accusations about the motives or intents of others while proudly demonstrating your complete inability to comprehend the written word.

When one recites a bit of factual history, that does not make it a "defense" or even an agreement as to the appropriateness of the course of events.

Nice try, indeed--be very pleased with yourself, now. It's all you've got going in this conversation.

[polichick]

22. This little outpost wasn't built with the permission of either country's people...

The governments don't represent the people anymore - looking at it from what the gov't (mic) wants is ridiculous.

[MADem]

26. If they want us gone, we are outta there. And the present government DOES

grant us that land. You may find it excessive, but that's their call to allow it or not allow it--not yours.

You do know that governments build their OWN embassies? Do you not remember the shitfit the US pulled when the Russkies built "Spy Central" not too long ago in DC? Of course, they got pissed at the new one WE built after we found bugs all over the old one in Moscow.

Hate to tell you this, but "We The People" did give permission for that thing to be built--it's called a Congressional appropriation. The people who voted up that appropriation were put there to do that sort of thing by "We, The People."

Those who want to change the priorities of our government need to show up at the polls and vote in EVERY election--not just the pretty shiny ones every four years. By the time you're picking a President, it's too late. The rubber meets the road at the local, state, and congressional races.

[polichick]

27. Who are you kidding? This gov't does not serve "We, the People."

[MADem]

33. If you don't vote, you can't gripe. If you don't work for YOUR candidates at the

local, state and federal level, YOU are part of the problem.

It's way too easy to say "Waaah--it sucks" AFTER the fact. To point at the "others" and say "Nothing can be done." Of course, if you don't DO anything--like most Americans--then how will you know?

Way too many people don't show up but once every four years at the polls. And then they get all bullshit that they can't "make CHANGE" because they're day trippers who aren't involved in political life except when it's The Big Show.

You're kidding ME if you think I have any sympathy for your POV. All you have to do is look at voter turnout at the local, state and federal level in the off-years and you will see that I am right. People do NOT VOTE. When ten percent of the voters are returning people--many of them fatted assholes-- to office, it's plain that there is something wrong--and what's wrong is that people like to gripe behind a keyboard, but they won't get off their asses and work for a candidate, or even haul their ass to the polls in an off year. "Waah, it's too cold, I was too busy, I forgot, no one reminded me!!!" I've heard it all and I don't buy it.

Until I see all of my "We, The People" lined up to vote for local and state races, and Congo runs-off-year ones as well, and NOT just during the fancy Presidential runs, I will discount your complaints. Complaining gets us nowhere when it's not backed up by voter participation. You, me, every single one of us has a responsibility as a citizen to vote.

If you don't vote, you can't gripe--not with any authority, anyway.

[polichick]

37. Well, I've never missed a vote and have worked my ass off for Dem candidates...

...for decades, so I'll "gripe" all I want.

[MADem]

49. Then you, PERSONALLY, are not part of the problem. But a large percentage of

"We, The People" ARE part of the problem--and they don't seem to be able to make the connection between candidate support in those dull, unglamorous, no TV coverage elections, and what the hell happens in the legislatures of local, state and federal government.

Laws don't just appear on the books magically. Someone has to write them, and someone has to PASS them.

The power is in the hands of We The People. We just need to take it.

[msongs]

28. nice to hear we are wanted in afghanistan and pakistan. didnt know that nt

[MADem]

44. No one can possibly be so obtuse.

Afghanistan and Pakistan have embassies and consulates in our countries, too. That's how diplomatic relationships work. The host nation provides the building site, and the guest government builds (or purchases) a building.

Do you really think that the leadership in Pakistan hasn't been happy over the years to take billions from us? See, that's why they put up with our activities--we PAY them. And we pay them WELL. Or Afghanistan? They may fuss and whine for the benefit of their populations, but those governments will crab and whine on the one hand, with their other hand out for the cash, as long as they can get away with it.

You need to develop a realpolitik mindset, if you want to live in the real world. You think the Chinese or the Russians are all into not hurting anyone's feeeeeeelings, holding hands and singing Kumbayah?

[U4ikLefty]

64. stay charming

rah-rah

[MADem]

69. Likewise. nt

[Walk away]

62. We installed the governments. Isn't that the issue? nt

[MADem]

71. We didn't do such a hot job--you think we would have chosen the guy now running Iraq if we had the

Big Stick to put in "our" guy?

Does everyone have short memories here?

No one remembers Georgie's li'l buddy, a fellah name Chalabi who was even a better li'l buddy to McCain? He was the heir apparent...until he wasn't. The unanimous recoil by the citizenry of Iraq made sure of that.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2008/03/09/20153/chalabi-mccain/

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/assessment/2003/04/ahmad_chalabi.html


Old Ahmed is still back home in Iraq, and he was one of the ones stirring the pot to jettison the US-based troops. Hell hath no fury like a politician scorned!

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

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

[county worker]

2. First off, not all Dems keep losing. Second, what the hell does the 60's and SDS

have to do with 9/11 causes?

We do not need to give a shit what the right has to say since they will never say anything good about us anyway. Also they already spread lies about us 24/7 365 days a week. What you are saying is a lot like Obama trying to work with the repukes.

What we need to be doing is care about us!

[Archae]

7. It's what the head of our local Democrats said.

He claims Bin Laden had legitimate reasons for pulling his stunts.

Lorenz ignores Bin Laden's vicious theocratic fascism.

[county worker]

10. Like I said, we can't make things worse then they are. Next time say something better.

[Scuba]

19. Sounds to me like Lorenz is a DINO. Need help outing him?

[Bluenorthwest]

79. Your OP does not contain one single actual quote from him

Just your characterizations of his words. When you wish to hang a man for what he said, you need to tie the rope from his own words, not craft one archly from your own. The tactic stinks, it is lazy, careless, and such avoidance of quotes almost always indicates an agenda.

[Bluenorthwest]

80. He's not the head of your local Party, according to their website

he is in charge of Public Relations for the Sheboygan County Democratic Party. Chairperson is Andrew Bubb.
Why don't you know that? Why are you posting false information? He's not the head of anything. You are, in some posts, identifying the author only as the head of the local Party. This means you are making claims about Mr Bubb that are not true. Why? To what end? What is your objective here?
No quotes and a fake title. Lazy, misdirecting OP....
http://sheboygandemocrats.com/officers-and-board-members/

[TheWraith]

4. Kicked, recced, still at zero.

Unfortunately, a lot of people on the left have adopted a completely knee-jerk attitude about such things: if the US did it (or lately, the entire west), it's therefore evil. Whereas if anyone else did it, it's justified. The US being invited to stage troops in Saudi Arabia is evil; Bin Laden masterminding the death of thousands is somehow justified. Same case with Libya. Using air power to help defend a city against troops ordered to purge it is evil; the guy who ordered them to purge and destroy a city of 300,000 people is justified.

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. Post his essay

I'd like to read it before commenting.

[Rex]

12. Same here.

[Archae]

15. I'd like to, but I can't find it online.

It's only in the dead tree edition.

[Rex]

20. Okay then, I will take your word on it.

I can't stand it when people make excuses for mass murderers.

[Bluenorthwest]

82. Don't do that, Lorenz does not even hold the position claimed

He's not the head of that local Party at all. The chairman is named Andrew Bubb. Lorenz is also not vice chair, nor second vice. So the accuracy of reporting in the OP is weak. The one thing that can be fact checked checks out as not a fact.
http://sheboygandemocrats.com/officers-and-board-members/

[Bluenorthwest]

86. I found out online that the Chairman of the Sheboygan Party is

named Andrew Bubb, not Tim Lorenz.
http://sheboygandemocrats.com/officers-and-board-members/

[Bluenorthwest]

88. It is still possible to qutoe his words from the paper...

the fact that it is not online did not hinder centuries of people from quoting what they read in exact words. Yet suddenly you claim that it has to be online or you can not quote it, only characterize it and pass along your hearsay.
How do you think people quoted others prior to the internet, kid? Weak excuse.

[Cerebral Assassin]

8. Thumbs up

You make a good point and one that is worth paying attention to. So does The Wraith.

[libinnyandia]

16. There is a difference between expaining why behavior happens

and excusing that behavior. We would never have been there if we did't need their oil. We are still buddies with the Saudis whose extreme interpretations of Islam are responsible for much of the terrorism in the Middle East. Most supporters of the GOP don't know this.

[MannyGoldstein]

21. Most Democrats disagree with Lorenz

Most have taken a very tough stance against al Qaida.

[OrwellwasRight]

106. Trying to understand why they do what they do is not inconsistent

with "taking a very tough stance against" something. In fact, one might argue that those who are the toughest on Al Qaeda are the ones working hardest to make sure we quit giving them reasons to do what they do.

[Angry Dragon]

25. Then let's look at more of the picture

In 1953 the CIA overthrows democratic government of Iran for the British government so they can get cheap oil.
Install Shah of Iran.
The Shah has his Savak kill and torture how many people.
The CIA has offices in the Savak offices.
Bin Laden is a CIA operative fighting Russians in Afghanstan
US supplies Iraq with weapons to fight Iran.
Reagan trades arms to Iran.
Most of the 9/11 hijackers are Saudis.
The US supports the Saudis with arms.

It looks to me that the CIA is running around in the Middle-East causing a lot of problems.
Perhaps these people are just fed up with the US poking their nose into other countries.

[newspeak]

54. fingers are in the ears and they go 'LALALALA"

they don't want to know how we've meddled in other countrie's elections and affairs for corporate interests' own business. I'd say for our country's interest, but I'm afraid it's for business interest over country most of the time.

[EC]

30. Why would he do that now?

It was 10 years ago.

[On the Road]

32. I Agree That This Kind of Sentiment Does Not Go Over Well

However, you really do not hear this kind of thing from Democrats on a national level. The Obama and Clinton administrations, along with almost all prominent Democrats, bend over backwards to avoid to avoid sounding like they sympathize with terrorists. It has a lot to do with Clinton's handling of the Iraq sanctions and Obama's escalation in Afghanistan.

I do think that it would be wise for the US, wherever possible, to refrain from foreign policy which is likely to trigger this kind of a response. But to make that case, it has to be presented very, very carefully. Otherwise, as you point out, any politician who expresses views like this is going to be killed in a general election.

[TheWraith]

38. But it is present heavily in a certain fraction of the left.

And the right knows this, and uses it against us, which is WHY national Dems have to go out of their way to be "tough."

[Fumesucker]

41. Leftists just lack the gene for jingoism..

Or at least some of us do.

[TheWraith]

46. Quite the contrary.

It's just as much "jingoism" under a different brand to respond to any action anywhere--from being third country in line to help prevent mass slaughter in Libya to contributing a few intelligence guys to hunt down the Lord's Resistance Army--with screams of "imperial warmonger oil imperialism military industrial complex!"

[Fumesucker]

58. Well, if you subscribe to the "black=white" theory I suppose it does..

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

Jingoism is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as extreme patriotism in the form of aggressive foreign policy.<1> In practice, it is a country's advocation of the use of threats or actual force against other countries in order to safeguard what it perceives as its national interests. Colloquially, it refers to excessive bias in judging one's own country as superior to others – an extreme type of nationalism.

[On the Road]

60. Well, Those Two Examples I Agree With You On

I just don't think it's applicable to a very large or visible portion of the Democratic party. You can tell people to be wise, but not tell them to change their view of the world. Even if all left-leaning people abandoned this sort of thing, the Republicans would still be flogging it forty years from now regardless of the reality.

[Anatos]

51. Somebody

got bit by the denial bug. I won't vouch for a random badly-written (?) essay, but your problem is obviously bigger than that. Do you think that if we admit the US has had a long history of moral failings that it excuses 9/11? Do you believe that the only way to condemn terrorism is to pretend it is entirely irrational?

[bluestate10]

72. Terror IS irrational. Terrorists are mad dogs. There is only one way to deal with them. nt

[RegieRocker]

94. Then deal with your goverment.

[Odin2005]

52. Sounds like he's buddies with Ward "Little Eichmanns" Churchill.

:puke:

[coalition_unwilling]

55. Bin laden was many things but a "fascist" he most assuredly was not. You might

want to look up the meaning of the term before deploying it.

OTOH, you win the Godwin's Law Award for the day.

[Douglas Carpenter]

56. of course Bin Laden and al Qaeda are pure evil. But does ANYONE seriously believe that if the U.S.

did not have its military might positioned all over the Arab and Islamic world and if the U.S. was not the power that decided which governments in the Middle East are legitimate and which are not and if the U.S. was not the overwhelming supporter of the Israeli state no matter what they do - is there ANYONE who can claim with a straight face that Al Qaeda would have still existed as we know it today and would have still carried out the attacks on September 11? ANYONE BELIEVE THAT??

Yes bin Lade and Al Qaeda are pure evil - but evil like bacteria needs certain conditions go grow.

[Angry Dragon]

59. +1000

:thumbsup:

[Walk away]

96. That just about sums it up for me.

God forbid you say it out loud in a crowd outside of a college setting. Most Americans will turn on you like mad dogs if you dare to tell them the truth!

[apocalypsehow]

65. Rec, but your OP is going to have some rough sailing here: "yeah, but..but...but...but"

That's a refrain I can see from a glance-over of the replies you're already familiar with.

What always brings a cynical smile to my lips is when I see some earnest post telling us that a winning electoral strategy for Democrats is point the finger at the United States for what occurred on 9/11 - which has been done in this very thread, several times. And then are astonished and outraged that anyone would actually disagree with their snarling analysis that perhaps telling the American people that their country is a force for evil in the world is not a real vote-getter in the vast majority of American political precincts...

[eridani]

67. The problem is persistently confusing "America" with the 1%

The 1% create the excuses for imperial power--and imperialism is evil by definition, no matter who does it The 99% who are the real "America" have no hand in making htese policies.

[bluestate10]

68. Did you put on your flame retardant underwear before you wrote your OP?

Don't get me wrong, you are dead right. Bin laden was a human maggot that glorified killing and grotesque abuse of women. But there are many, too many on DU that weep about the killing of that useless, murderous piece of shit. Yes, idiots like Lorenz is the very reason why every day is a fucking fight against republican extremism, because assholes like Lorenz give away elections.

[Bluenorthwest]

84. Dead right? Lorenz is not the Chair of that local Party...

The OP falsely claims that he is the head of the local Party, Andrew Bubb is Chairman there. So the OP misstates the only fact we can check, and gives no quotes at all. So this guy Lorenz, according to the OP has a position he does not have, and said stuff that can not be quoted, only passed along second hand gossip style. Lie to me about a fact I can check, I no longer believe you. Not the head of that Party.

[donheld]

73. Do you deny the Imperialist charge?

Just wondering.

[Fumesucker]

75. If you don't believe that they hate us for our freedoms then your are just a dirty fucking hippie..

[RegieRocker]

92. They hate us because we are killing them and supressing their freedoms.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[datasuspect]

77. one of the most successful corporatist history edits concerns the marginalization of "movement"

politics and the cultural change that happened during the 60s and 70s.

the ownership class saw the very real prospect of violent revolution in the streets unfold before them and they expended a tremendous amount of effort broadcasting propaganda to make the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the black power movement, the antiwar movement, and women's liberation seem like laughable, naive attempts.

this marginalization, along with the insertion of various mythologies concerning the various movements of the era, is still in effect today. in fact, there is no shortage of little "governor reagans" floating around to keep everyone on message.

[Bluenorthwest]

81. He is not the head of your local Party according to them.

He's Press Sec. for the Sheboygan Democratic Party, not the 'head'. The Chairman is named Andrew Bubb. Why don't you know the names and positions of those you wish to criticize? Why are you making false claims and using no quotes?
Stinking tactics.
http://sheboygandemocrats.com/officers-and-board-members/

[Name removed]

83. Deleted message

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

[Bluenorthwest]

85. The OP usues a lexicon that is reactionary

That is why I instantly checked the facts that can be checked, note there are no quotes in the OP, just characterizations. The OP falsely claims Lorenz is the 'head' of the local Party to enhance the OP's rhetoric.
The rest of the OP is characterizations, gossip, second hand hearsay. From a person who gets the simplest facts wrong.

[xchrom]

87. +1

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

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

[Douglas Carpenter]

90. can you please copy and paste or quote in full the offensive remarks Mr. Tim Lorenz actually said?

- of course within the confines of copyright rules while keeping it in complete context. I tried to look it up but discovered that I would have to become a paid subscriber to the Plymouth Review in order to read any article less than four weeks old.

This caricature of Mr. Lorenz's remarks is simply not fair to Mr. Lorenz or the Sheboygan Democratic Party or the Democratic Party in general if no one has any possible way of knowing what Mr. Lorenz even said.

[RegieRocker]

91. I just saw proof republicans don't have even the slightest clue.

We created bin laden to kill Russians and that was ok because they were invading Afghanistan. So Osama liked getting rid of infiltrators and after being screwed over by the U.S. and wanting the U.S. infiltrators also out of Muslim countries decided to also kill Americans. So what repugs need to focus on is to end occupation of countries and the end to coercion in countries affairs. Get the f*ck out of other peoples business. We are not the worlds police and we don't need a world police state. We shall see how Iraq and Libya turn out. If anything we go in and then get out. Quickly. This would be only to end genocide and proof that it works. If it doesn't work then it is a problem of the people that only they can resolve. My hope is that the consciousness of the worlds people are waking up to the fact we have all the power and we don't have to take it anymore.

[Walk away]

98. If we are in other people's business then you can bet...

it's because big business needs it's interests protected around the world. Let's face it, our soldiers are actually a private army at the beck and call of big oil, arms manufacturers, and companies mining all kinds of elements needed to fuel our technology and weapons production for big profits. If we aren't trying to control the countries that have what the world's 1% wants, then we are screwing the countries that the product has to travel through to get here.

[RegieRocker]

99. it's not just oil but it is the big one.

[marmar]

97. Sorry, but American imperialism in the Middle East was/is very real.

Ignore it if you want, but it prevents you from seeing the Big Picture.

[RegieRocker]

100. You don't need to apologize for the truth about this subject, ever.

[TheKentuckian]

105. I find your pursuit of a false worldview for political gain to be ultimately self defeating

A complete abdication of responsibility for creating conditions that not only encourage but forcing the abhorrent behavior and a blind refusal to even examine cause and effect is a road to nowhere.

The reality is that our financial sector is at the very root of most of the world's problems and is growing more exploitative and destructive by the day.

Considering resources, influence, potential for organization, applicable connections, citizen status, and the damage that only spreads, such attacks should not be surprising.
By what other methods should such folks expect to move the scenario?
I'm surprised matters aren't far worse.