Here is a link to read,

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/031006/6venezuela.htm

Probably some of the reasons Robertson called for Huggie's assassination, besides oil and debauchery.

I'm ok with assassination if it serves our National Security.

I'm really glad the Demo's chose Dean as their DNC guy. When Demo's move further from the center, which Dean (the wackjob) is (far left of center), only helps the Republicans. I just wish the Libertarians would get their power base built up. But until then, I will be standing with the Repubs. The far left Demos will never get the Libs, cuz you guys are anti-gun for one, and for another Demos like lots of government.

This must be quite a book, Crashing the Gate, since the signing is at Orca books, not Barnes and Noble, or Borders, or, well you get the picture.

So where did I say that President Bush was for small government. I said Demo's are for big government.

Like has been said before, Bush is spending money like a drunk sailor. But with that said he is the lesser of the two evils we have had to pick from in the last two elections.

I believe this administration much more than the previous, but rarely believe politicians much at all. Slick Willy and his ilk were much more dishonest. Heck, he himself was a flatout liar, caught many times, and probably didn't catch even many more.

Oh no, you mean I messed up giving my account number to that nice Nigerian man??......LOL

Clinton got blowjobs and Bush lied about WMDs isn't really what talking about the netroots is about. Actually, it is what it isn't about because those things are what the typical media fixacted on while the rest of us threw up our hands and wondered when politics will actually start to mean something.

The politics of the netroots isn't really conservative or liberal (while we still see politics through those lenses), but rather what changes on the internet is that discussion and conversation happen and connections are made. As simple as that sounds, it doesn't really happen anywhere else in our political world and I'm very happy that we're doing that here, locally. 

WF says: I'm ok with assassination if it serves our National Security.

Are you ok if other countries also engage in it? You ok with the Venezuelans or Cubans assassinating elected officials in this country? If it's fair for us to assassinate their leaders, is it fair for them to assassinate our leaders?

I think one obvious way to start is to reevaluate our presence in Iraq. Start pulling troops out and sending diplomats in to help form a government, this means admitting to the world that we messed up and asking for help (I know that sounds extremely un-American). Our military is just sitting there at this point. I recently read, (I apologize that I can't remember where I read this so I can't provide a link) that at one US base in Iraq there are 20,000 troops, 18,000 of which never leave the base. This parallels other reports I've read and heard that claim, at this point, we're just standing back and watching them fight. We're not policing or trying to keep the peace. We're still attempting to train them, but there hasn't been much success that I've seen so far.

The point I'm trying to make is that I don't think Clinton was a savior. I honestly believe, based on what I've read, that Clinton gets too much credit for the prosperity in the nineties. Having said that, I will acknowledge, that when he first ran against Bush, his unofficial slogan was "It's the economy, stupid", and he ran on a platform of stimulating growth in our economy. Some good came out of this, some bad came out of it as well.

I'm usually the last person to criticize Bill Clinton. Ask my friends, normally I defend him to the death. I cannot ignore the mistakes he's made, however (welfare reform). I also want to add that I'm incredibly impressed and inspired by the work he's been doing around the world since leaving office.

I am sure some Quakers thought it was necessary and right, but I can't give you names. I believe most thought it was not.

A common Quaker belief is that each of holds some measure of the Light. That each of us is to reflect and listen for the still voice inside with these kind of decisions. We are welcome to bring our concerns to meeting, ask for help to reach clearness on these kind of things. I believe that in most wars, some Quakers have served and carried arms and most quakers have not. And I think that is true for WWII. Here's a website on the subject:

http://www.pbs.org/itvs/thegoodwar/ww2pacifists.html

My father, not Quaker, more Catholic Worker orientation, enlisted, volunteered (not drafted) for WWII service and served the whole war in the front lines as a medic. He was in the Pacific, Africa, China, India, Burma. Like his hero, Mahatma Gandhi in WWI, my father chose to serve war as medic. I think my dad and Mahatma were wrong to support the war machinery in any way, but that is from my measure of the Light, and I respect their decision and service.

Philadelphia Yearly Meeting has put together quite a reading list on the subject. You can review it here: http://www.pym.org/library/lists/quakserv.htm

My take on the September 11th attacks: if the US had declared all-out war on death from dirty water and starvation anywhere in the world, and if we had committed half the money we have committed for war on Afghanistan and Iraq, then our war on death from dirty water and starvation would have disarmed our enemies much better than any military campaign that Rumsfeld could devise on his most diabolical day.

Instead of 100,000 plus dead in Iraq and Afghanistan from our reaction to September 11th, and who knows how many of the dead folks' relatives now committed to inflicting pain and death on us, we could have had numerous countries in the world praying for us and thanking God, Allah, whoever for Americans. But that is not the choice our country made. I don't think options other than attacking someone were even considered. What does that say about us? Do they really hate us for our freedoms? or is there something else at work?

As for protecting my family, I believe that is my responsibility and will do so, at any level of threat. I will meet the threat with reasonable yet decisive action.

I don't know anything about Quakers, so what is this light stuff?? The angel of light is Lucifer, but I'm sure your not talking about that,,,,,right??

As for TFI's situation in regards to war, I have to respond. First in today's military, its all volunteer so there shouldn't be any CO's. But lets say the volunteer, decides mid-enlistment, to become a Quaker. Well then he too would fall under the below.

If you are in the military, and a CO, you need to make it known before any combat engagement. And you are still in, regardless. Like your father you could be a medic, office staff, heck you can scrub pots and pans, I don't care but you WILL serve. If you refuse, you then have consequences to pay. Either a long prison term or death.

If you fail to act during a combat engagement, then you should be executed, particularly if your actions put others in increased danger or caused their injury or death. Knowing me, if you announced you CO status in the heat of battle, I would likely put a bullet in your head myself.

As far as military service, I believe ALL able bodied males need to serve a minimum of 2 years. I'm not decided on how I feel about females serving. I don't want them in combat, unless they can prove themselves that they can cut the mustard with their male counterparts long before any true engagement. And then it would be only volunteer for combat and females.

Mike says, "Again, now, where was your combat service? Do you really know what you are talking about when you advocate military force?

WF says, "what makes you in a position to decide if I'm qualified since you haven't even served?" "And since when does one need to have been there done that to have a qualified opinion. I'm not a doctor, but I advocate not smoking. You obviously have an opinion against the military machine, yet you've never served. Pretty arrogant of you I think."

So Mike, at this point I don't know if I will even honor your arrogance with an answer, I will give it some thought. But trust in the knowledge that I have BEEN THERE DONE THAT.

Rob, yes completely. I told you guys that if you hit one of my hot topics, you would likely be surprised, amazed, disgusted, or who knows what. Well you did hit a hot topic, and now you know.

Rick,

I will answer all your questions, but the questions are a bit involved, so give me some time to respond. So if you don't get an immediate response don't think I'm iggn you.