Conservatism and libertarianism are political view points. I don't support Bush's rubber stamping of spending. However I did agree with the US enforcing UN mandates and putting teeth to empty threats made over 15 years to the Iraq government. In that sense I supported him. I'm not happy about many other liberal aspects of his presidency. He was not a conservative president. That is my point. Having an extremely liberal ruling class shows how bad it can get however. I long for the Bush spending over the Obama bankrupting. Neither is idea and should a viable libertarian third option exist I'll vote that way.

Proof please.

I don't believe I've read anything anywhere suggesting our troops ignored the Geneva convention. How many Iraq citizens are or were in Gitmo? How do you classify a terrorist fighting in a country he isn't a citizen of?

Please cite one success outside of Iraq? Iran is enriching Uranium. Bombs still blow up in Israel. The Taliban is still in power in some places. Hell a terrorist group was elected into power in Palestine. How has Obama made one difference to any of this? Oh right he failed to get the Summer games in Chicago and delayed a surge of troops to Afghanistan despite the requests of his general. I'm sure those helped.

Yes I feel we were successful in regime change in Iraq. The war on terror in Afghanistan and "IRAN" ( I don't know of any US troops in Iran ), I think we are better off engaging the Taliban and Al-Qaeda than to ignore the problem but it is really a maintenance issue and not quickly resolved. If you know of the US doing anything except letting Iran enrich Uranium and a delayed troop surge please post it here.

Well thank you kindly for replying then.

I'd like to point out as a conservative and a Bush supporter that he was far from conservative. He fought an unpopular war and won. For that he was attacked daily. When it came to spending he never once vetoed a bill and signed into law some very expensive measures. I supported Iraq. I saw the details. Never felt lied to. Its a shame he was wrong but really I don't have one moment of doubt that the right thing was done in regards to Sadam.

I never agreed with the spending and never will. Bush was bad. Obama is terrible.

We "conservatives" and libertarians didn't agree with expansion of government when forming the TSA and we don't agree with its continued funding and existence now. It has more to do with expansion of government and lack of common sense.

Bottom line is please don't associate "conservatism" with Republican support. Republicans were anything but conservative when they were in control of the house and the senate with a republican president. It is what made John McCain so unpalatable in the election. He really just appeared to be Obama light.

As for what is in place now I don't know the history but before Bush left office the Dems took full control of the house and senate. The use has a separation of power for a reason. Bush can not sign something into law without the house and senate voting yes. The Dems even without Obama had plenty of time to correct the problems with the TSA. Its still a laughing stock. Blame bush if you want but the republicans haven't controlled congress in 3 years and the Dems had a year of a super majority and really showed their purpose in that time. Bush was bad Obama / Pelosi / Reid is terrible. Freedom is an afterthought.

Why aren't more people talking about this issue? The irony is I think hulu desktop is using flash but I'm not sure of that. It works ok but really its a bit confusing to navigate and dog slow.

You aren't allowed to listen to Beck and comment on this post. If you read above he is a hate filled idealist republican who picks mercilessly on Obama and gets his jollies off by lying to a group of idiots who hang on his every word. If you listen to the show and point out that isn't who he is well you will be ridiculed for being small minded and the forum won't understand at all how you can tie your shoes much less walk and talk at the same time.

At what point was he free from consequences? If anything I think he is much more exposed to consequences than any network news organization. I'd describe them exactly as you describe Beck. I've never said they must be destroyed. But I guess when the Bill of Rights gets in the way we'll lets just ignore it.

Yes when I listen to someone who brings in different ideas and viewpoints I'm willing to consider them against my own philosophies and put them into perspective. I'm not closed minded but I know myself and don't fear the words and ideas of others.
I've been listening to beck for 8 years now. Not religiously just when I get a chance. He is inflammatory on purpose. He does things to make his audience uncomfortable. It really is a brilliant mix and highly entertaining. He is a flawed human and happy to tell you so. He doesn't hold himself up as a model of perfection or anything else just an entertainer who likes to comment on politics with a "conservative" slant. He isn't a Republican booster despite others claiming such. But really you'd have to listen to understand any of that. I enjoy his show even when I disagree with his views.
I've never drank coffee so I have no idea what affect it would have.

What? Someone modded you INSIGHTFUL? Ok its slashdot but still. Glenn Beck is evil? He must be destroyed? I think your post highlights an absolute fear of free speech. And for that you are modded insightful. Yes I'm in the wrong forum when talking about freedom and yes slashdot users have a bias which ruins its credibility. I don't fault the poster as much as the modders. Just a joke. Oh and on topic glad that freedoms were up-held and I love Beck's stuff. He cracks me up and makes me think.

Not to mention the second amendment. Its kind of part of the bill of rights.

The same international community that can now operate with out any fear of retribution? So how did Iraq turn out anyway?

Figures no one will mod you up. It sucks to get hit with facts when discussing politics. I have yet to hear a convincing argument about how the democratic platform is even slightly constitutional. But why worry about that when you control the courts? I'm always hit with a cruel sense of irony when I hear the term liberty. I feel as though we have completely given up liberty and forgone a large number of individual, much less state rights granted in the constitution. When I discuss this with anyone who is in favour of restricted property rights or laws that seem obviously in conflict with the bill of rights or a health care plan that takes away individual rights to choose how we live our life I find the basic consensus is the constitution has no value any more. It is very disturbing yet both parties march to this drum too much of the time. I often wonder if anyone anywhere in the US could actually run on a platform of individual liberty and get elected. How sad is it that a basic tenant of the constitution like liberty, an inalienable human right, would not be able to win an election? I'm shocked that the promise of health care reform can only be done by taxing the very system they want to make more affordable. Where is the sense in that? Oh well we will get what we vote for.

cpus