Just a small pile of soc-pol bile that I thought I'd share with you.
I'm sure you'll recognize the phrase that is being re-rendered here. The original pat-phrase may have pissed off some of you too.
A left-wing libertarian is a conservative-isolationist that has a bong, and likes kittens.
A right-wing libertarian is the same, only they enjoy most animals--with fries.
A key point to note with this Western concept of libertarian is that old daemon Patriotism. It should also be noted that it very often is accompanied by tribalism(s) [always,surly!].
Reading Ben Franklin characterized as having a staunch pro state's-rights position and his being a deeply religious man is just as bad as reading another brand of libtard make claims of Ben's life long support for; pot, free-love and trans-statism. [I'm like a shark!, hehe]
The USA is not alone in this error. It has a German and French version too. Not to mention the British variation, now made more popular with the 'V' movie. And error it is, as none of this addresses what the world will look like once success is at hand. The future beyond the moment of victory is a shadowy place filled with [implicitly] empty hopes and very few ideas.
It can be [and all too often is] argued that the solutions will come to mind once you are there, but you know... in most cases in history it only gets filled with the same old shit--yet again. YMMV HTH HAND ETC.
It leads one to think that the 'all politics is local' adage was out of date once armoured limos and international banking came on line.
Sorry folks(et al), but any ideas now *will have to* save the whole fucking world. No longer are our socio-political boundaries set by the distance you can hit something. Keep thinking though, there's bound to be something that'll work better than this mess we've got now. Until then.
QUESTION: Can you bring us up to date on what's happening in Vienna? And would the U.S. accept a resolution that did not contain a trigger?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think it's appropriate for us to speculate from here as to the final outcome. We are -- we have made clear what our view is. The Secretary has made clear that we have pushed the view that this needs to be referred to the Security Council, and that we would see whether there's a consensus. That process is still underway. We're -- how far we will get to, whether we can get it or not, still don't know. But there are consultations going on among Board members in Vienna. We're trying to seek agreement on a text that addresses the Board's concerns about Iran's nuclear activities. The Board, we think, is united in the view that Iran must cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency, must come clean about its program, and suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities.
The Board has called on Iran repeatedly to take those steps since last year. We remain deeply concerned that Iran continues to defy the Board's requests. So those consultations are ongoing, and, at this point, I can't predict exactly where they'll come out.
QUESTION: Yesterday, in an interview, Secretary Powell said that there had been some progress. Can you describe specifically what the progress has been?
MR. BOUCHER: No. Again, the process is underway. We think -- I think Under Secretary Bolton, when he was in Geneva last Friday, and as I said Friday, acknowledged there have been tactical differences between the Europeans and us about how to proceed. We have been making efforts to close those gaps, and thought we were making some progress on that. But whether -- I can't -- it's an ongoing thing. I can't try to define it precisely at this moment.
#45884: Colin Powell "...we have a common goal, a common purpose -- and that is to give sovereignty back to the Iraqi people as fast as possible".
Wax on ruled paper/scan/gif : A child like crayon drawing of a big military airplane flying above a standard green lawn, tree, box house set. Crude text captions the items; house, mom, me, dog, and plane.