Say Anything Blog

While we’re at it, investigate the corn growers for the high prices of tortillas, Corn Chex and ethanol.

Um, the price of gas jumped well above 3 bucks during the Republican years too. This graph is bs.

For the first time in my adult life, I am ashamed of my country.

Kenny: When the Pelosi Congress took over, gas was $2.19/gallon.  The graph is accurate for the Pelosi Congress.  The other price spikes were temporary, and keyed to natural disasters(Katrina, for instance); the only disaster this time is the Pelosi Congress.
Dems are bad for prices.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

BTW, no policy of any administration is going to reduce the price of gasoline; only market forces can do that.  Govt, on the other hand, can(and does) certainly raise prices.  Taxation and regulation.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

That’s what you get when you put dems in charge of anything: Higher costs.

"Can’t I just eat my waffle....”

-BHO

Maybe, just maybe, the voters will elect some logical people who will allow drilling for oil in that tiny part of Alaska, off Florida where others are now drilling and in the newly discovered area of North Dakota!
Here is my Memo for Record when the Democrats took office.
Gasoline was $2.20 per gallon, on average.

Communism is evil

There are many more “reasons” for high gas prices than simple greed - far too many for any in-depth discussion on a forum such as this or in any media blip.  That said, some might find this short article in a respected publication of interest.  http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080512/hertsgaard .  The point is that, while we may bitch and moan about it, there is really not much that an individual can do except deal with the “facts on the ground” so to speak.  Once upon a time, I really didn’t like being shot at, but bitching and moaning about it didn’t make it any better.  I had to actually do something about it.

The sure fire way to raise gas prices has been for Bush or Cheney to power up their megaphones and threaten Iran.
Been quite effective.

Kenny: When the Pelosi Congress took over, gas was $2.19/gallon.  The graph is accurate for the Pelosi Congress. 

So why isn’t the left getting blamed for this? Honestly it is the dems that have prevented us from building more oil refineries. That is the problem right there…

Check out:
Goon’s North Dakota Red Neck
Goon’s World

ChiefRZ, not to put too fine a point on it, but the Bakken formation (part of the Williston basin which goes into Canada also ) is not a “new “ discovery.  They’ve been pumping that for at least 10 years in small amounts because it was way too expensive to squeeze it out of that rock until recently.  Here’s a good technical read about it.  http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3868 . A “bottom line” excerpt:  “The Bakken potential resource, while large by US onshore field standards, will have only a minor effect on US production or imports. Using 2006 US imports and consumption for comparison, the Bakken undiscovered resource of 3,649 million barrels of oil, if subsequently discovered and fully developed, would provide us with the equivalent of six months of oil consumption or 10 months of imports, spread over 20 or more years. In reality, the reserves developed are likely to be many times smaller than this value.”

The sure fire way to raise gas prices has been for Bush or Cheney to power up their megaphones and threaten Iran.

Wrong again.  As has been detailed elsewhere, the direct costs associated with the leftie ethanol mandates total about a dollar a gallon.  Blame the greedy govt, not the strong leader who defends our country from those who would destroy it.

So why isn’t the left getting blamed for this?

The lying MSM.

Fred: As we all know, buying gas(and burning it in your car) is exactly like being shot at.  Not.
As a consumer, you have a choice about how much gasoline you use, your real complaint is about having to change your habits.  Typical inertia.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Robert108, I think you missed the point of my comment which was not about any similarity between gunfire and gas.  It was about exactly what you said.  Doing something, instead of just complaining about it.  For example, if you commute 100miles everyday by yourself, try ride sharing, or moving closer to work, or get a new job, a more efficient car, etc., etc.  Simply bitching about something is pointless.

The Cato Institute’s Jerry Taylor 2002

“The main reason is if you want to be president of the United States, you have to go to through the Iowa caucuses, which means if you don’t bow down and worship ethanol, you’re a dead man politically.”

Taylor points out even that such free market, shrink-the-government stalwarts as former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich have quailed before the ethanol lobby.

“In 1995 there was a serious fear at the time that Republican congressmen looking to cut budgets and cut regulations and increase the scope of free markets would deep-six the ethanol program. At the last minute it was Ginginch of the house Republican leadership who intervened,” Taylor said. “And the reason why was there were a lot of Republican congressmen who were elected in that landslide of 1994 who came from farm districts who argued that if Republicans kill the ethanol program, they’re dead.”

Observers say these days nobody’s even trying to stop this latest ethanol legislation.

Iowa Has Two Senators, and a lot of Corn

Fred.  Thanks for the details.  The same might be said for the shale deposits in the mid/south West.  Any comments on ANWAR or off the Gulf ?

Point being that the Democrats and environmental “waccos” to use a loose term have prevented any new drilling or refinery construction for about the last 30 years.  I think that the voters just may say that we should relax their trump card on this issue.

Communism is evil

Taylor points out even that such free market, shrink-the-government stalwarts as former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich have quailed before the ethanol lobby.

Nice try, leftie, but the ethanol disaster was given to us by Al Gore.  Fact.  You lie by omission.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Simply bitching about something is pointless.

When the lying MSM continues to spread the propaganda blaming the President for the gas prices, telling the truth about who is really responsible isn’t “bitching”, it’s speaking truth to the lying lefties.  Sorry, Fred; you missed it.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

NOW, can we PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE drill for and refine our own oil?  Vote dimocRAT - drive a Yugo and hope you don’t get in a minor fender-bender.

I remain baffled as to WHY, When Bush had a majority in both houses during six years of his presidency, congress failed to approve oil drilling in in ANWAR. 

Any thoughts?

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The times, they are a-changin’...
Bob Dylan

Thank you Pelosi and your criminal cohorts for really fixing the economy.  Would will you do for an encore?

Robot 108

Nice try, leftie, but the ethanol disaster was given to us by Al Gore.  Fact.

President Bush signing the energy bill 2005
Al Gore Must Have Had A Lube Gun to G Moneys head

. The bill includes tax incentives for producers of ethanol and biodiesel. The bill includes a flexible, cost-effective renewable fuel standard that will double the amount of ethanol and biodiesel in our fuel supply over the next seven years. Using ethanol and biodiesel will leave our air cleaner. And every time we use a home-grown fuel, particularly these, we’re going to be helping our farmers, and at the same time, be less dependent on foreign sources of energy. (Applause.)

I used to like to kid, but I really wasn’t kidding when I said, some day a President is going to pick up the crop report—(laughter)—and they’re going to say we’re growing a lot of corn, and—or soybeans—and the first thing that’s going to pop in the President’s mind is, we’re less dependent on foreign sources of energy. It makes sense to promote ethanol and biodiesel. (Applause.)

The new legislations give strong support to alternative fuels like ethanol. The goal is for the US to produce 36 billion gallons a year by 2022

ChiefRZ, there are many small oil/gas resources still in ground, but unless somebody gets real lucky I do believe that the days of cheap energy are behind us for many reasons, not the least of which is the rapid growth in demand world wide, and the increasing difficulty and expense of extraction.  Just as a point of ref. the cost to drill an easy 10” hole 1 mile deep in my neighborhood (for natural gas) is approx. $1,000,000; with no guarantee of success. In Anwar, or off-shore, the costs and risks are far higher.  The information is available to anyone who cares to do the research.

The consensus of many experts in the field is that we have, or will soon reach, a point at which the rate of new discovery and exploitation, plus all alternatives such as electric, bio, etc., lags demand by several million bbls(or equivalent) per day.  The general outlines of the future of energy seems obvious, does it not? I try to keep up, but unlike some fortune tellers, I have no idea what the details might be in terms of mitigation or consequences. I’ve made certain provisions for myself and family that I consider prudent, but I’m not going to advise anyone regarding their personal circumstances or beliefs. 

Robert108, whatever.

Robert108, whatever.

Nice counter-argument, Fred.

Consensus doesn’t make reality, as we are realizing about the “consensus” on global warming.
The consensus in the Seventies was that we were running out of oil then.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

The sure fire way to raise gas prices has been for Bush or Cheney to power up their megaphones and threaten Iran.
Been quite effective.

That may be a minor blip, but you Leftists PLEDGING to turn Iraq and most of the middle east into a blood bath by surrendering and pulling out our troops doesn’t help one bit.

I remain baffled as to WHY, When Bush had a majority in both houses during six years of his presidency, congress failed to approve oil drilling in in ANWAR. 

Any thoughts?

Yes, the Senate
And that included John McCain, I do believe…

President Bush signing the energy bill 2005

Gore cast the deciding vote for the ethanol mandates in the mid Nineties.  Duh.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Not only Dem obstructionism in the Senate against ANWAR, but Dem obstructionism in the Senate against the war on terrorism.  He had to pick one, IMO.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

I remain baffled as to WHY, When Bush had a majority in both houses during six years of his presidency, congress failed to approve oil drilling in in ANWAR. 

Any thoughts?

RINO’s that were scare to vote for the ANWAR because they were affraid they would lose their seats in the election. The Minnesotans keep bringing up issues like this against Norm Coleman. I do believe the Dems messed with the rules in the Senate as well…

Check out:
Goon’s North Dakota Red Neck
Goon’s World

Ethanol is all about it’s greatest beneficiary.
Archer Daniels Midland

Robot 108,

Al Gore mid 90’s

Kenny: When the Pelosi Congress took over, gas was $2.19/gallon.  The graph is accurate for the Pelosi Congress.  The other price spikes were temporary, and keyed to natural disasters(Katrina, for instance); the only disaster this time is the Pelosi Congress.
Dems are bad for prices.

It’s more complicated than that and we both know it. If the graph was honest, it would show and up and down rollercoaster on both colors.

Much of the problems we’re facing now came from the Bush signing of the ethanol bill. Like the policy or not, liberating Iraq has been responsible for shooting the price of gas through the roof.

While it’s easy to blame the Dems...and they have a lot of blame coming...let’s not forget, our Republican President has never had a problem signing liberal legislation into law. And the Republican congress was often times willing to go along for the ride too.

For the first time in my adult life, I am ashamed of my country.

Like the policy or not, liberating Iraq has been responsible for shooting the price of gas through the roof.

Please provide facts and logic to support this ridiculous contention.

Al Gore cast the deciding vote on the ethanol mandate in the mid-Nineties.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

For you reality-challenged lefties, here’s the link:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/04/22/will-media-remember-gores-1994-tie-breaking-vote-mandating-ethanol

1994 qualifies as “mid-Nineties”, doesn’t it?

Nice juvenile namecalling, though; very impressive. /sarcasm

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Please provide facts and logic to support this ridiculous contention.

Um, Saddam was selling dirt cheap oil to the world under Oil for food. That stopped. As did production.

A basic looking at the facts supports my case.

And stop calling everyone who disagrees with you a “reality challenged lefties”.

For the first time in my adult life, I am ashamed of my country.

And stop calling everyone who disagrees with you a “reality challenged lefties”

I don’t do that, except for the reality-challenged lefties; if the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it.

Saddam’s “Oil for Food” scam is hardly an example of a legal market.  I guess we’re also driving up prices by busing criminals for selling stolen goods, as well, at least by your “logic”.

Not a valid example, Kenny.  Bad premise(crime=business), bad conclusion.

Are you sure you’re not a reality-challenged leftie?

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Fred. 

In Anwar, or off-shore, the costs and risks are far higher

Let free enterprise make that decision once permission is given by the congress.

I do hope that this energy supply problem will be an election issue.

Communism is evil

I am really starting to hate America simply for the stupidity that flows from its citizens. And gas was $2.19 when dems took over congress? Where? I live in california and haven’t seen it below $3 in 4 years.
Look, when you guys evolve into free thinkers rather than what you hear on Fox news or Rush Limbaugh’s hypocritical ass, then post something. When will you guys figure it out that its not supposed to be democrat vs republican, but rather, those in power vs. those who put them there. Thats why America started as its own country in the first place as opposed to just being an English colony: The founders understood that power corrupts when unchecked. Instead, you have stupid ass Americans who choose a political party, and then when some lame ass in your party makes a mistake, the supporters, rather than demand action, make excuses for them. Are you people that dumb? I hope Obamama wins and thats my right to choose him, but guess what? I’ll be watching his ass too, not making excuses when he screws up. Wake the fuck up people! We’re losing our country to corruption and greed, and it happens in both parties.

And by the way, there already is plenty of drilling going on here in America. Go to any southern California beach and you see oil rigs all up and down the coast as well as oil pumps on land. Bakersfield California is the 4th largest producer of oil in this country. Guess what they do with all the oil. They export it out to other countries. So what the hell difference would it make to allow more drilling on American soil if they’re just going to sell it off?
When will you guys realize that these guys and gals in power don’t care about your interests? By the way, do you all remember when we had another large price increase in gas like we’re having now in 2008? It was back when everyone was getting their last tax relief rebate of $400 a few years back. Coincidence?

When will you guys figure it out that its not supposed to be democrat vs republican, but rather, those in power vs. those who put them there.

Nice revelation of your Marxist class struggle thinking, Chuck.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Thanks for proving my point about stupidity in America Robert. I never said anything about struggles between rich and poor classes. Rather, my point was addressing those who get elected who end up serving their own interests as well as big donors and friends versus serving the public. If that makes me a Marxist, then that would also make the founders of this Country Marxists. Read the wording of the constitution ( I know this might be a stretch from just watching Fox news) and you’ll see that what they wanted was a series of checks and balances as well as the ability for the people to keep control of those in elected, public office.
They would have never stood for illegal wire tapping, refusal of documents to the public or having them all blacked out, or torture (and if you’re naive enough to think that all we do is water board, then you need serious help.) I know Clinton’s administartion made some blunders too, I’m not here to argue in that manner. However, when your vice-president just flat out declares that the vice-presidency is not part of the executive branch, therefore does not need to be accountable to the same checks and balances and does not owe transparency to the public, well my friend, if you want to defend a government like that, then we are all in trouble.

...what they wanted was a series of checks and balances as well as the ability for the people to keep
control of those in elected, public office.

Thus the two-party system; checks and balances, not class struggle.  You seem very confused, Chuck.

I’m glad you think you have a psychic connection to the Founding Fathers, but they certainly wouldn’t have shared your disdain for a balanced network among a bevy of heavily biased networks, just for starters.
As I said before, you reveal yourself by your feeble attempts at arguing with insult instead of facts.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Rbot’s constant fall back position
is to call Marxism.
As a child he was forced to share his milk by a commissar of the refrigerator.

Hmmm, you’re not getting it. The checks and balances that they spoke of was not referring to a two party system. In fact, the two major parties (I say major because there are many more than just two) as they exhist today, didn’t exhist at the creation of our country’s Constitution. The checks and balances they speak of are between the three branches of government; Executive (the presidency and cabinet), the Legislative (congress and senate) and the Judiciary (Federal Supreme Court). Also, as result of the corruption on both sides, more people are registering and independents and libertarians. All I’m saying is, the system needs some major fixing on both sides. The president is not royalty, he’s basically the mayor of America. And we need to stop choosing political affiliations like we choose sports teams.
I’m a Raiders fan, and this year, they’ll probably suck like they did last year. But guess what? I’ll still be a Raider fan next year. However, we can’t apply that same philosophy to politics. If the repubs are blowing it, they need to go. If the Dems are blowing it, they need to go. Thats it. Very simple.

what ever happened to this guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csKkdKlLUTc&feature=related

However, we can’t apply that same philosophy to politics.

Of course we can; who are you to tell anyone else what to do?

The first two factions in the US, who predated the formal political parties, were the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, and their points of view are still being debated today.  The worst thing for the US would be political unity, like Obama is trying to sell.  This country was founded on an ongoing dialogue, so that no faction gets to railroad it’s beliefs through the legislative process.
You see, Chuck, we have these things called “elections” regularly, where the citizens get to “vote” for the people of their choice.  We also have other political mechanisms to rectify mistakes we might make in the election process.  We are not a monarchy, no matter how your leftie handlers have brainwashed you to believe that.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Rbot’s constant fall back position
is to call Marxism.

Wrong.  I call it as I see it.  If you can’t handle that truth, I could always use “collectivist”.  In a country founded on individual independence, the collectivists, no matter how much they lie about what they really want, stand out like a sore thumb.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

I’m a Raiders fan, and this year, they’ll probably suck like they did last year. But guess what? I’ll still be a Raider fan next year. However, we can’t apply that same philosophy to politics. If the repubs are blowing it, they need to go. If the Dems are blowing it, they need to go. Thats it. Very simple.

Charles,

Simplistic would be a far more accurate description.  Your analogy sucks.  Turn off the TV and the machinations of Al Davis are meaningless.  If the Raiders suck… or the Falcons for that matter… only those who care, their fans, are effected.  For the vast majority, football doesn’t even exist.

Not so government.  Throwing out the Republicans will, in all likelihood, only make things worse by bringing in the Democrats.  And the results will be felt by all of us… regardless of which side we’re fans of.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

The analogy does make sense. If George Bush’s administration does something like, oh I don’t know, misplace $8.8 billion of our tax dollars, the spin machine kicks in to justify it and all the republican supporters begin with their, “Oh yeah! Well Clinton did something too!” arguments. Kind of like when someone trash talks your favorite sports team. Even if they suck, you still defend them. That same ebb and flow can’t exhist in American politics, but it does.
And repubs are so lame with all their Fox news and Rush Limbaugh regergitation. When ever I hear someone use words like,"Leftie, Liberal wacko, Liberal nut, etc”, I know I’m listening to someone who wathces Fox news or listens to Limbaugh. Someone just loves to label and call names without any kind of support.
Repubs love saying false things like,"Democrats are fiscally irresponsible”, yet the largest increases in our country’s deficit always happened during republican years. It took our country 225 years for our deficit to reach over $5 trillion, and only 7.5 years for it to double over $10 with Bush. But I’m sure there’s some rediculous math the Repubs have that puts the blame of Democrats for this.
They say that we’re experiencing one of the worst financial down turns in our country since the recession of 1991. Who was finishing their term oat that time? Oh yeah, papa Bush.
In Republican minds, all democrats are like Cindy Sheehan or the ACLU. Sorry guys, they’re not. I know for your lazy brains, that don’t want to actually think or decifer the differnce, this could be challenging, but give it a shot.
Basically how it works in this country, you don’t turn on the news to be informed, you turn on the news to validate what you already feel, which is why Repubs listen and watch Fox news or Rush Limbaugh or read the Druge report. Its not that its necessarily right, it just gives the news in a manner that is more pleasing to you.
And by the way. I know Rush Limbaugh has been around for years, but how did this guy get to be the voice of the “Morals” party? He’s a former drug addict, he’s been divorced 3 times (cuz the sanctity of marriage means so much to him), and the guy is just a physical slob. Why does his opinion even matter?

Chuck: Are you a refugee from DK?  Your outdated leftie talking points need updating.  All your bullshit has been refuted a long time ago.  Get help.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

By the way, I noticed no one commented on that Cheney clip I posted. Why are we in Iraq again? War on terror? Oh yeah, none of the terrorist in the 9/11 attacks were Iraqi. Well then we’ll just say they have WMD’s and that we’re going to bomb the shit out of their country with our WMD’s while we look for them. Oh, there were no WMD’s? Well then we’ll change it to liberating Iraq. Of course, if someone had said,"After these terrible attacks on 9/11, I have the perfect solution… we liberate Iraq!”, no one would have went for that.
Of course, republican brains don’t want to think this one out either. They give simple minded rebuttals that make no sense like,"Well, if you don’t support this war, then you don’t support our troops.” No, I support the troops, I just don’t support all the old, white elitists who dodged going to Vietnam, but some how feel perfectly fine sending other people’s kids off to war, and then cut veteran benefits and don’t see to it that the veteran Hospitals are in top condition, but then turn around and call the troops heroes after they just shit on them. But I’m sure there’s a good excuse for that too.
Republican supporters also have this subconscious arrogance that feels American lives automatically mean more than the lives of those who live in other countries. They still think we’re fighting terrorists in Iraq.
Let me ask any republican who still supports Bush this question… With the typical American spirit, how would we react to, let’s say, China bombing the crap out of our country and then occupying it because “they have our best interest in mind”. What would we do? And then lets say a few Chinese soldiers drag your Dad out of his home because they needed to look into a tip that he might be a terrorist supporter. Then during that time, your dad is humiliated in front of his neighbors and then later tortured for information that may not exhist. I don’t know about you, but I would want to take some kind of revenge. But then, when you take revenge, you’re simply labeled a terrorist or extremist and the Chinese populous, because they’re too busy being consumers of products and really bad TV, don’t bother to just think for a moment and are apathetic to your plight?
Are there people with bad intentions toward America in the middle east? Absolutely. Have we created more of these types of people because of this bs war? You bet your ass.
Has anyone ever talked to a Muslim and asked them why some Muslims hate America? I’ve talked to quite a few and the reasons are all the same. And no, its not because they’re jealous of our freedom. That’s lazy thinking. The main reason they hate America is because we were one of the main players in the facilitating of moving Palestinians out of their home to give the Jews a country. We moved Muslims out of their country and gave it to people they already hated. Brilliant. But because Americans are kick ass and can do no wrong, and because American lives and interests are always more important than others, these other people should have no right to be angry, right?
And I’ll probably have some lame republican rebuttal typed after all this, but I ask you, what part of what I just said is wrong?

Robert, that’s exactly what I’m talking about when I talk about dumbass rebub rebuttalls. what part of what I said is outdated and refuted? You can’t just say it. (although thats what repubs do and leave you trying to prove them wrong rather than them taking the time to think and prove you wrong). You can’t just say it without any back up. what part was wrong? The deficit part? Cuz that’s accurate. Here’s a website for you to look it up yourself…
http://www.havenworks.com/us/debt/
I know the part I said about Limbaugh wasn’t wrong.
And the part about the $8.8 billion still hasn’t been settled. So what part dude?

Oh yeah, none of the terrorist in the
9/11 attacks were Iraqi.

There’s a really ancient one; it’s time to “move on”, dude. You just don’t understand military strategy, I guess.  Our first offensive in WWII was in North Africa, which didn’t attack us at Pearl Harbor.  Duh.
I’ve spent a lot of time and pixels on this blog refuting all the crap you America-hating lefties spew, and am under no obligation to school you, Chuck.
As far as I’m concerned, you can remain ignorant for as long as you choose.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

The problem with this robert, is that there are a lot of people like you. You feel you don’t need to explain, but rather, simply say as if its truth with no backing. You never answered my question as to what part I said was wrong. The fact that there was no Iraqi involvement in 9/11 is not old news because we’re still paying money for the war that was made based on the decision and false facts that Iraq was responsible for 9/11. And just because its “Ancient” doesn’t make it wrong guy.
And by the way, OUR first offensive was not in Africa. There was fighting in Africa between European countries, but that was before we were even bomber by Japan and had any involvement in the war. We also had a presence in China during the 30’s and early 40’s during the Nanking masacres which was carried out by the Japanese. So I don’t follow your connection there.
Here’s some advice though. Try backing up what you say with some facts. Who knows, I could be wrong. I have been before. But I tend to need facts before I decide whether I’m right or wrong.

Chuck: Our first offensive in the European theater was in North Africa, against Nazi Germany, which did not attack us at Pearl Harbor either, but was an ally of the Japanese who did.  Get it?  The terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan(which didn’t attack us, either) are all joined at the hip, and they all want to destroy our way of life(which is your way of life, as well).
I’m under no obligation to ‘splain anything to you, Chuck.  You may continue to stew in your own ignorance, as far as I’m concerned.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

No one is obligated to do anything. You have the freedom to say what you want, how you want. I just feel freedom should always be counter-balanced by responsibility. Take responsibility for the words that come out of your mouth man, don’t just say it and back away in a selfish arrogance that says,” I owe no explanation to anyone for my thoughts that I’m sharing with others in an open forum”. I want to hear the reasons why you think the way you do. I know what you think, I want to know what it is YOU know that causes you to think the way you do.
And by the way, I thought our involvement in the European theatre was to help our allies. Yeah, the events at Pearl Harbor triggered our involvement into the war overall, but I don’t think anyone was ever under the impression, nor was it ever stated in a political forum to get us to go to war in Europe, that we were fighting Germany because of the bombing at Pearl Harbor. However, we WERE told that we needed to declare war on Iraq because of their connection to 9/11 and because they were stockpiling WMD’s, both claims which were never substantiated. They had weapons, but not WMD’s. Not like the ones we’ve been using on them during this war. Not like the ones we used to sell them in the past. So I’m still not agreeing with your attempt to make a connection.
And by the way… a majority of the people involved in the 9/11 attacks were Saudi, so why the hell are we still selling their country weapons? That’s another issue that transcends party lines and political bias. If a republican administration is doing that, its just as wrong if a democartic administration were doing it. Am I wrong about that too Robert?