Our Daily Choices

[ClayBarham]

Tony Blair said each of us makes a choice, every morning when we get up, of what our nation and world should be like. Do we want a nation where individuals are free to pursue their own interests, skills, talents and aspirations, so long as no one else in injured? Do we want a nation where the prosperity of many individuals increases the prosperity of many communities? Do we want a nation led by a caring dictator who makes our important choices for us? Do we want a nation where the community interests, however those in charge define them, are superior to individual interests? Do we want everyone equal in the eyes of community, rather than simply created equal by God? In short, do we want freedom or tyranny? It looks like more and more Americans today are choosing the comforts of benevolent tyranny promised by the Democratic Party.

[NortheastCynic]

"Benevolent tyranny promised by the Democratic Party"

Oy vey. Clay, both the two major parties in this country are big government, socially authoritarian and fiscally irresponsible. Broad and general attacks against the Dems accomplishes nothing.

-NC

[micfranklin]

Do we want a nation where individuals are free to pursue their own interests, skills, talents and aspirations, so long as no one else in injured?

Yes.

Do we want a nation where the prosperity of many individuals increases the prosperity of many communities?

Yes.

Do we want a nation led by a caring dictator who makes our important choices for us?

No.

[Elrathin]

And yet the fact that Clay refuses to acknowledge is that under Republicans, the government has grown larger and more powerful over people in the past 7 years.

[Drocket]

Hey, at least the Republicans will only throw you in a top-secret prison for years on end, deny you your Constitutional right to a trial, send you overseas to the tortured, then say that your claim of being tortured can't be trusted because you're now mentally incompetent because of all the torture. The Democrats will tax your estate after you're dead. Assuming you're a multi-millionaire, at least.

[ClayBarham]

One of the biggest reasons for the GOP losing last year is because they have been reading the Democrat play book on building bigger government, and the rank and file turned their backs on them. Insofar as going into the dungeons and never being heard from again, I'd have to say good for the administrtaion for doing it....to those who war on us. No one ever ran to the defense of prisoners of war in the middle of the last century. They were held until hostilities ceased, not released into American cities with an attorney paid for by their intended victims, us.

[lily]

Tony Blair said each of us makes a choice, every morning when we get up, of what our nation and world should be like. Do we want a nation where individuals are free to pursue their own interests, skills, talents and aspirations, so long as no one else in injured? Do we want a nation where the prosperity of many individuals increases the prosperity of many communities? Do we want a nation led by a caring dictator who makes our important choices for us? Do we want a nation where the community interests, however those in charge define them, are superior to individual interests? Do we want everyone equal in the eyes of community, rather than simply created equal by God? In short, do we want freedom or tyranny? It looks like more and more Americans today are choosing the comforts of benevolent tyranny promised by the Democratic Party.


It's interesting Clay that you chose Tony Blair to quote. I'm not familiar with all his speeches. Is this what he said on his final trip to the White House before stepping down for the good of his people, because they no longer trust his judgement, or the one where he was convincing the people of England to blindy follow him as he blindly followed Bush?

[BoogyMan]

Tony Blair said each of us makes a choice, every morning when we get up, of what our nation and world should be like. Do we want a nation where individuals are free to pursue their own interests, skills, talents and aspirations, so long as no one else in injured? Do we want a nation where the prosperity of many individuals increases the prosperity of many communities? Do we want a nation led by a caring dictator who makes our important choices for us? Do we want a nation where the community interests, however those in charge define them, are superior to individual interests? Do we want everyone equal in the eyes of community, rather than simply created equal by God? In short, do we want freedom or tyranny? It looks like more and more Americans today are choosing the comforts of benevolent tyranny promised by the Democratic Party.


It's interesting Clay that you chose Tony Blair to quote. I'm not familiar with all his speeches. Is this what he said on his final trip to the White House before stepping down for the good of his people, because they no longer trust his judgement, or the one where he was convincing the people of England to blindy follow him as he blindly followed Bush?


It is doubly interesting that you choose to post the liberal projection of why Mr. Blair stepped down as if it were fact Lily.

[lily]

Yeah you're right Boogie, he wanted to spend more time with his family. It's also why Brown isn't too keen on keeping the same friendship. (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/05/10/blair.announcement/index.html)

Blair: My political journey is over


LONDON, England (CNN) -- Tony Blair announced Thursday he would step down as
Labour Party leader and British prime minister, defending his record during
his decade in power, but adding "my apologies to you for the times I've
fallen short."

Blair spoke at his parliamentary constituency in northeast England and said
he would tender his resignation to Queen Elizabeth on June 27. He later
returned to London.

"I've come back here to Sedgefield, to my constituency, where my political
journey began and where it's fitting that it ends," Blair said.

"I've been prime minister of this country for just over 10 years ... I think
that's long enough for me, but more especially, for the country.

"And sometimes the only way you conquer the pull of power is to set it
down."

At times, the PM appeared choked with emotion, thanking the nation for
supporting him during his time in office and apologizing for his
shortcomings -- but not his actions.

"I give my thanks to you, the British people, for the times that I've
succeeded and my apologies to you for the times I've fallen short," Blair
said.

After announcing his departure, Blair defended his record.

"I ask you to accept one thing," he said. "Hand on heart, I did what I
thought was right. I may have been wrong -- that's your call.

"But believe one thing if nothing else. I did what I thought was right for
our country and I came into office with high hopes for Britain's future and
you know I leave it with even higher hopes for Britain's future."

Blair arrived to a cheering crowd of local activists. Earlier, in London,
Labour's longest-serving PM told his Cabinet of his decision.

His departure is expected to trigger a leadership election in the ruling
Labour Party that will mean a new PM by the end of June. John Prescott,
Blair's deputy prime minister since 1997, also resigned Thursday.

Speaking in Washington, U.S. President George W. Bush praised Blair as "a
man who's kept his word, which sometimes is rare in the political circles I
run in.

"I'll miss Tony Blair," Bush said. "He is a political figure who is capable
of thinking over the horizon. He's a long-term thinker."

Blair's close alliance with the U.S. leader has been roundly criticized by
Britons, who overwhelmingly oppose the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

Before his announcement, Blair showcased the charisma that helped get him
elected in 1997, joking with one of his supporters: "When I was coming in
(she was saying) 'Four more years!' ... and I was saying 'Maureen, that's
not on message for today.'"

Moving forward
But in his 20-minute speech to a crowd of enthusiastic supporters in his
northeastern constituency of Sedgefield, Blair defended his record, both
domestically and internationally. (More on his legacy)

"There is only one government since 1945 that can say all of the following:
more jobs, fewer unemployed, better health and education results, lower
crime and economic growth in every quarter," Blair said. "Only one
government, this one."

He touted his decision to make Britain a country "that intervened, that did
not pass by or keep out of the thick of it" when it came to human rights
abuses in Sierra Leone and Kosovo.

But it was Blair's decision to support Bush and the U.S.-led war in Iraq
that has caused his popularity among Britons to plummet.

The British leader acknowledged that in his speech, saying, "I may have been
wrong, that's your call, but believe one thing if nothing else: I did what I
thought was right for the country."

One prominent opponent of the war, Respect MP George Galloway acknowledged
there were solid achievements during Blair's years in power, such as the
power-sharing deal in Northern Ireland.

But, Galloway added, those gains were "drowned in the blood of the hundreds
of thousands of people who have been killed in the war in Iraq, some of them
our own soldiers. Far more of them, the soldiers of the United States Armed
Forces."

[BoogyMan]

Bwahahahaha. That article certainly doesn't uphold your stated view Lily, but thanks for sharing. :)

Falling popularity numbers does not now nor will it ever equate to his "stepping down for the good of his people" or the allusion to the "blindly following Bush" assertions of the left.

[Buck Laser]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I want a government that exercises enough oversight over private enterprises to find, catch and prosecute enterprises that make a habit of defrauding others, whether it be kids, old people, workers, or even investors. From Enron to the two-bit swindler, every citizen ought to know that his personal rights are as secure as the country is. I do not want a country without rules and regulations that protect the weak from the powerful.

But I acknowledge that rules and regulations can grow onerous and ridiculously complicated--they must constantly be reviewed and evaluated by the citizens of the country, and kept secure as well from the corporate interests that would abolish them to secure unfair advantages over consumers.[/u]

[lily]

Bwahahahaha. That article certainly doesn't uphold your stated view Lily, but thanks for sharing. :)

The British leader acknowledged that in his speech, saying, "I may have been
wrong, that's your call, but believe one thing if nothing else: I did what I
thought was right for the country."
Sure sounds like it to me.

Falling popularity numbers does not now nor will it ever equate to his "stepping down for the good of his people" or the allusion to the "blindly following Bush" assertions of the left.



Boogy, so exactly what does it mean when you step down? He wants to spend more time with his family?

........I'm glad I can amuse you. Now if you would be so kind as to post an article and a link as to why Blair is stepping down, you might also amuse me.

[BoogyMan]

[quote]The British leader acknowledged that in his speech, saying, "I may have been wrong, that's your call, but believe one thing if nothing else: I did what I thought was right for the country."
Sure sounds like it to me.


Lily, this sounds like a guy who understands that he isn't perfect but doesn't paint the picture you tried to make it paint. The guy has humility, it is admirable.

[quote=lily]Boogy, so exactly what does it mean when you step down? He wants to spend more time with his family?

........I'm glad I can amuse you. Now if you would be so kind as to post an article and a link as to why Blair is stepping down, you might also amuse me.

I don't any more know why he stepped down than you do, I do know however, that you cannot garner the "stepping down in disgrace" tenor of your commentary from what he has said.

[lily]

I don't any more know why he stepped down than you do, I do know however, that you cannot garner the "stepping down in disgrace" tenor of your commentary from what he has said.


Well.......actually I do know more why he's stepping down than you do. Sorry, you're just saying I'm wrong just don't cut it, especially when you have no back up.


http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10118231

Speaking before an adoring audience in his home region in northern England,
Blair outlined some of his successes and admitted some of his faults with
the usual mixture of humor and earnestness, frankness and optimism for which
he has come to be loved - or loathed - in Britain.

Blair made no mention of his likely successor, Finance Minister Gordon
Brown. Together, the two men made the Labor Party electable, and then
presided over a decade of unprecedented economic boom.

Blair has become very unpopular with the British public, who blame him for
their country's prolonged mission in Iraq. The Labor Party was defeated in
several crucial regional elections earlier this month.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18573547/

Blair, President Bush's closest ally over Iraq, leaves office out of favor
among voters for sending British forces to join the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

A Labour Party rebellion in September forced him to say he would quit within
a year to allow Treasury chief Gordon Brown, his long-time heir apparent, to
take over.

Short speech
Surveying his time in power, Blair, 54, told supporters: "Hand on heart, I
did what I thought was right."

Following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the U.S., it was right,
Blair said, to "stand shoulder to shoulder with our oldest ally, and I did
so out of belief."

"And so Afghanistan, and then Iraq-the latter bitterly controversial.

"And removing Saddam and his sons from power, as with removing the Taliban,
was over with relative ease. But the blowback since, with global terrorism
and those elements that support it, has been fierce and unrelenting and
costly.

"And for many it simply isn't and can't be worth it. For me, I think we must
see it through."

In a short, almost apologetic speech, Blair added: "I may have been wrong.
That's your call."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14712210/

Britain’s Blair says he will quit within a year
Prime minister doesn't give a precise date for his resignation


Updated: 10:10 p.m. ET Sept 7, 2006
LONDON - Prime Minister Tony Blair reluctantly promised Thursday to resign
within a year, hoping that revealing a general timeframe for his departure
will appease critics who are calling for him to step down.

“I would have preferred to do this in my own way,” Blair said. He refused to
set a specific departure date, but said the annual Labour Party conference
this month would be his last. The next conference is scheduled for September
2007.

“The precise timetable has to be left to me and has to be done in the proper
way,” he said. "I will do that at a future date and I’ll do it in the
interests of the country and depending on the circumstances of the time."



Blair, who took office in 1997 and once commanded Labour with an
unassailable authority, now appears to be at the mercy of demands from its
restive lawmakers. It was not immediately clear whether his new exit
strategy will be detailed and speedy enough to satisfy them.

Intense pressure
Labour loyalists urging Blair to leave office soon — or at least announce a
departure date — have grown more vocal in recent weeks. Their protests have
been fueled by widespread anger at his handling of the recent fighting in
the Middle East and anxiety over Labour’s slide in the polls.

Eight junior officials quit Wednesday to insist on Blair’s resignation, and
news reports said Blair and Treasury chief Gordon Brown, who is considered
likely to be the next prime minister, had a shouting argument in Blair’s
office about a handover date. The two may have ultimately reached an
understanding.




Brown, opening a children’s sports tournament in Glasgow, Scotland, said
shortly before the prime minister’s announcement that while he like others
had had questions about Blair’s plans, he would support his decisions.

“When I met the prime minister yesterday I said to him ... it is for him to
make the decision,” said Brown, looking relaxed and cheerful. “I will
support him in the decisions he makes.”

“This cannot and should not be about private arrangements but of what is in
the best interests of our party ... and the best interests of our country,”
Brown said.

Many within Labour were furious at Blair’s refusal to break ranks with
President Bush and call for an early cease-fire in Lebanon last month. It
revived bitter memories of Blair’s decision to join the Iraq war despite
intense opposition in Britain.

[Anti-Racism]

Do we want a nation led by a caring dictator who makes our important choices for us?

Couldn't do any worse than democracy has.

[BoogyMan]

Well.......actually I do know more why he's stepping down than you do. Sorry, you're just saying I'm wrong just don't cut it, especially when you have no back up.

Actually no, Lily, you don't. Nothing you have posted so far has proven your "he stepped down for the good of his country" and your "for blindly following Bush" commentary.

All you have done is post commentary that points out that he wasn't a very popular PM and was told by his party to move aside within a year.

As I said before Blair seems a humble sort and stepped aside because of the request of his party, not for the failure that your commentary would paint him to be.

[lily]

What a hoot! I bring 4 linked sources, stating why he is stepping down..... one saying he was forced to step down because of his stance on Iraq, which he wouldn't have if not for Bush and you bring nothing but "You're wrong".

Thanks for the honest and intellectual debate that I've come to expect, Boogy. You never disappoint!:D

[BoogyMan]

What a hoot! I bring 4 linked sources, stating why he is stepping down..... one saying he was forced to step down because of his stance on Iraq, which he wouldn't have if not for Bush and you bring nothing but "You're wrong".

Thanks for the honest and intellectual debate that I've come to expect, Boogy. You never disappoint!:D


Try an honest read of my commentary without the inbuilt hatred Lily. You have not proven your "for the good of the country" or your "for his blind following of Bush" assertions.

You linked to four sources that don't support the original ridiculous assertions you made and for which I questioned you in the first place, and then punctuate the whole thing with childish cheap shots.

You lose...................again.

[ClayBarham]

So, because Tony Blair asked those questions of what do you want, they are meaningless? Assume Hillary asked them. Would they qualify then to be answered? You leftists avoid the answers because you are too busy attacking the one asking them. What is it you would prefer for the world? Is individual freedom of no value? Is the herd the standard now? What would you prefer?

[lily]

So, because Tony Blair asked those questions of what do you want, they are meaningless? Assume Hillary asked them. Would they qualify then to be answered? You leftists avoid the answers because you are too busy attacking the one asking them. What is it you would prefer for the world? Is individual freedom of no value? Is the herd the standard now? What would you prefer?



??????

[BoogyMan]

So, because Tony Blair asked those questions of what do you want, they are meaningless? Assume Hillary asked them. Would they qualify then to be answered? You leftists avoid the answers because you are too busy attacking the one asking them. What is it you would prefer for the world? Is individual freedom of no value? Is the herd the standard now? What would you prefer?


Well thought out questions Clay. A point that would bring some clarity is the acknowledgement that there are agents of both major parties today that refuse to see the good done by an individual, be he left or right, because they disagree with one tenet of his belief system.

I would have to say that the herd truly IS the standard now, sad but true.

[lily]

Try an honest read of my commentary without the inbuilt hatred Lily. You have not proven your "for the good of the country" or your "for his blind following of Bush" assertions.

You linked to four sources that don't support the original ridiculous assertions you made and for which I questioned you in the first place, and then punctuate the whole thing with childish cheap shots.

You lose...................again.


I'll tell you what Boogy.....I'll try an honest read of your commentary if you read my articles. They stated what I have claimed. As of yet I have seen nothing from you.........oh and those weren't cheap childish shots, they were an honest depiction of what these last two pages have been.........but then it's an improvement, we're not on the legandary page 4.

......so in keeping with tradtion, I will allow you the final post because in your imagination, you win........again.










............still waiting for links to back up your claims.

[BoogyMan]

Try an honest read of my commentary without the inbuilt hatred Lily. You have not proven your "for the good of the country" or your "for his blind following of Bush" assertions.

You linked to four sources that don't support the original ridiculous assertions you made and for which I questioned you in the first place, and then punctuate the whole thing with childish cheap shots.

You lose...................again.


I'll tell you what Boogy.....I'll try an honest read of your commentary if you read my articles. They stated what I have claimed. As of yet I have seen nothing from you.........oh and those weren't cheap childish shots, they were an honest depiction of what these last two pages have been.........but then it's an improvement, we're not on the legandary page 4.

......so in keeping with tradtion, I will allow you the final post because in your imagination, you win........again.

............still waiting for links to back up your claims.


Your commentary above simply enhances and firms up the point I made. Nowhere in those articles does Blair claim to have stepped down for the good of his country, it does claim that he stepped down at the request of his party as I have already ceded.

You keep talking about the 4 page discussions, yet you continually take part in them while obfuscating a point you have failed to make and trying to wedge your argument into articles that don't aid you in making your point.

Blair showed humility in the commentary stating that he did what he thought best and that he could have been wrong. Low poll numbers over policy do not equate to stepping down "for the good of his country," nor do they equate to Blair "blindly following Bush." That is nothing more than a recitation of the talking points of a portion of the left-wing populace.

I never claimed to have links and had you actually read the replies I posted you would know that.

[ClayBarham]

I like your Buckley quote, as it is right on. The main opposition to just about all my posts are based on my not being capable of having a view, not that what I express has merit or no merit and why. There seems to be only one view, and that is what is left...after all reason and thought are lost. And, let's not forget the name-calling and insults that stand as the great intellectual position taken by the left. Too few have even taken the time to answer the post on what are the best choices. Is it too hard to actually think, and far easier to assail?