<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pakistan Never Attacked Us</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/</link>
	<description>Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:00:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ruminator</title>
		<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/comment-page-1/#comment-78203</link>
		<dc:creator>ruminator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 19:59:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=5967#comment-78203</guid>
		<description>Then you take position two. Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Then you take position two. Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jb</title>
		<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/comment-page-1/#comment-78201</link>
		<dc:creator>jb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 14:15:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=5967#comment-78201</guid>
		<description>Ruminator, while I appreciate the distinction that you phrased your assumption as a question, your question still implies that you had drawn a conclusion about all of us. Whether you are right or wrong in your &quot;questioning&quot; conclusion, I had said nothing to make such a &quot;questioning&quot; conclusion warranted.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ruminator, while I appreciate the distinction that you phrased your assumption as a question, your question still implies that you had drawn a conclusion about all of us. Whether you are right or wrong in your &#8220;questioning&#8221; conclusion, I had said nothing to make such a &#8220;questioning&#8221; conclusion warranted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ruminator</title>
		<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/comment-page-1/#comment-78200</link>
		<dc:creator>ruminator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 13:58:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=5967#comment-78200</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t presume to have any mind reading skills whatsoever. That&#039;s why I asked a question.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t presume to have any mind reading skills whatsoever. That&#8217;s why I asked a question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jb</title>
		<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/comment-page-1/#comment-78199</link>
		<dc:creator>jb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 13:24:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=5967#comment-78199</guid>
		<description>Is it fair to say that you are all taking position 3, asks Ruminator?

NOTHING I have said even alludes to the question of whether the president would have been negligent not to have invaded Iraq at the time. While I am not surprised that your mind  reading skills are inadequate, I would simply point out IF you are one of those who pride yourself on being high context, as liberals are wont to do.....DON&#039;t.

Most of the comments I read were making a simple low-context point that the left - BO hollered the loudest about principles - crucified Bush for preemptive war while supporting BO for contemplating preemptive war against Pakistan.

IF their objection was a matter of principle, it should withstand the test of time. IF their objection was simply one of logistics or opinion about the scenario, then the ying-yanging about principle is/was nothing more than a load of politicized crap and hypocritical to boot.

Either way, BO/left has some &#039;splainin&#039; to do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it fair to say that you are all taking position 3, asks Ruminator?</p>
<p>NOTHING I have said even alludes to the question of whether the president would have been negligent not to have invaded Iraq at the time. While I am not surprised that your mind  reading skills are inadequate, I would simply point out IF you are one of those who pride yourself on being high context, as liberals are wont to do&#8230;..DON&#8217;t.</p>
<p>Most of the comments I read were making a simple low-context point that the left &#8211; BO hollered the loudest about principles &#8211; crucified Bush for preemptive war while supporting BO for contemplating preemptive war against Pakistan.</p>
<p>IF their objection was a matter of principle, it should withstand the test of time. IF their objection was simply one of logistics or opinion about the scenario, then the ying-yanging about principle is/was nothing more than a load of politicized crap and hypocritical to boot.</p>
<p>Either way, BO/left has some &#8216;splainin&#8217; to do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Last Angry Man</title>
		<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/comment-page-1/#comment-78196</link>
		<dc:creator>Last Angry Man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 10:46:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=5967#comment-78196</guid>
		<description>Jb, someone once asked me to describe, in a sentence, people who would expect such things - to go to a homeless shelter and expect haute-cuisine, or how their children comport themselves out in the real world, etc. - the whole ball of wax we might call &quot;effete Liberal.&quot;  The best description I could achieve was, &quot;it&#039;s as if they all believe they&#039;re French nobility, circa 1750.&quot;  All that&#039;s lacking is the powdered wigs, buckled shoes, and fake beauty-marks.  They are the beneficient Lords, and we are unwashed peasants.

Whether Michelle Obama realizes it or not, I will guarantee that at least 50% of the shelter residents present were thinking, &quot;what IS this crap,&quot; and &quot;who IS this moron?&quot;

Truth.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jb, someone once asked me to describe, in a sentence, people who would expect such things &#8211; to go to a homeless shelter and expect haute-cuisine, or how their children comport themselves out in the real world, etc. &#8211; the whole ball of wax we might call &#8220;effete Liberal.&#8221;  The best description I could achieve was, &#8220;it&#8217;s as if they all believe they&#8217;re French nobility, circa 1750.&#8221;  All that&#8217;s lacking is the powdered wigs, buckled shoes, and fake beauty-marks.  They are the beneficient Lords, and we are unwashed peasants.</p>
<p>Whether Michelle Obama realizes it or not, I will guarantee that at least 50% of the shelter residents present were thinking, &#8220;what IS this crap,&#8221; and &#8220;who IS this moron?&#8221;</p>
<p>Truth.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ruminator</title>
		<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/comment-page-1/#comment-78194</link>
		<dc:creator>ruminator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 01:23:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=5967#comment-78194</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s a bit like asking, &quot;in your opinion, should I have worn  the pin-stripe suit instead of the black one last Friday?&quot; What you ought to be asking is, &quot;is regret a productive activity?&quot;
Nevertheless the decision to invade Iraq, supported by many, but spearheaded by Bush, will be debated for decades.
Position (1): Bad decision, not justified at the time
Position (2): Defensible decision
Position (3): Not only defensible, but for the president not to invade Iraq at the time would have been negligent.
Is it fair to say that you are all taking position #3?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a bit like asking, &#8220;in your opinion, should I have worn  the pin-stripe suit instead of the black one last Friday?&#8221; What you ought to be asking is, &#8220;is regret a productive activity?&#8221;<br />
Nevertheless the decision to invade Iraq, supported by many, but spearheaded by Bush, will be debated for decades.<br />
Position (1): Bad decision, not justified at the time<br />
Position (2): Defensible decision<br />
Position (3): Not only defensible, but for the president not to invade Iraq at the time would have been negligent.<br />
Is it fair to say that you are all taking position #3?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jb</title>
		<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/comment-page-1/#comment-78193</link>
		<dc:creator>jb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 01:14:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=5967#comment-78193</guid>
		<description>Hey y&#039;all,

As it happens, I worked for decades overseas with poverty stricken individuals from &quot;third world countries&quot; if I may be so politically incorrect. The &quot;guys&quot; I worked with were utterly grateful that their children no longer had flies on their eyeballs and distended abdomens AND had a chance to go to schol. Never mind the dirt floors and cardboard computer simulations. 

Yes, I get pissed off watching our obese and spoiled so-called-disadvantaged kids squander opportunities that the rest of the world can only imagine!

I am NOT surprised to note that you guys have volunteer bonafides. Nuff said.

On a side note, I am delighted to hear that your experiences with soup kitchens do not include waygu beef or arugula.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey y&#8217;all,</p>
<p>As it happens, I worked for decades overseas with poverty stricken individuals from &#8220;third world countries&#8221; if I may be so politically incorrect. The &#8220;guys&#8221; I worked with were utterly grateful that their children no longer had flies on their eyeballs and distended abdomens AND had a chance to go to schol. Never mind the dirt floors and cardboard computer simulations. </p>
<p>Yes, I get pissed off watching our obese and spoiled so-called-disadvantaged kids squander opportunities that the rest of the world can only imagine!</p>
<p>I am NOT surprised to note that you guys have volunteer bonafides. Nuff said.</p>
<p>On a side note, I am delighted to hear that your experiences with soup kitchens do not include waygu beef or arugula.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Last Angry Man</title>
		<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/comment-page-1/#comment-78189</link>
		<dc:creator>Last Angry Man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2009 22:10:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=5967#comment-78189</guid>
		<description>Jb, I semi-retired in January as a Supervisor at a very large homeless shelter here.  On rare occasion, a really big festive meal would be made up, but even then it was good, solid food.  We had everyone from John Kerry through Max Cleland officially visit us, and THEY didn&#039;t get fed like that.

Arugula?

*Guffaw!*</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jb, I semi-retired in January as a Supervisor at a very large homeless shelter here.  On rare occasion, a really big festive meal would be made up, but even then it was good, solid food.  We had everyone from John Kerry through Max Cleland officially visit us, and THEY didn&#8217;t get fed like that.</p>
<p>Arugula?</p>
<p>*Guffaw!*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sedonaman</title>
		<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/comment-page-1/#comment-78184</link>
		<dc:creator>sedonaman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2009 17:55:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=5967#comment-78184</guid>
		<description>jb:

I do volunteer work at my church’s St. Vincent de Paul food redistribution center. We give out bags of non-perishables once a week, and during the week on a case basis. Most of the donations are date-expired store surpluses and hence a cross-section of what you find at your average big-box grocery store, including a few luxury items. We have a food drive twice a year for parishioners, and we get some luxury items there too ... caviar comes to mind. Items such as these are usually the result of someone getting a gift box for Christmas and donating what they don’t want.
What amazes me is the number of vegetarians. We have one volunteer who makes up special bags for them, and you’d be surprised at how many canned goods have meat products in them. Then we have what I call vegetarian vegetarians – those who won’t eat even fish. My first thoughts are that, 1) it’s a lot of trouble to provide specialized service to someone who is choosing a different lifestyle, and 2) hey if you’re hungry, how can you be so picky? We get artisan bread donated by a local bakery, and yeah, it’s day-old, but what does a fellow I call Pokie-mon want? He pokes the bread to be sure it’s fresh! [Like, he can’t make bread crumbs out of it if it was hard?] But the understanding comes when you realize that they run the gamut from those who are in true, temporary need to those who are chronic abusers of our charity. Since I have yet in my five years seen only a few who might be categorized as truly hungry, I conclude that our average case is using our help to supplement her budget, and that’s fine. My heart goes out to the kids, and we try to have a special something for them, like a protein bar. One pre-school girl use to come with her mother and father [these were in real need]. I asked her what kind of cereal she would like, and she replied, “I’ll take whatever you give me.” Kinda made up for the Pokie-mons.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>jb:</p>
<p>I do volunteer work at my church’s St. Vincent de Paul food redistribution center. We give out bags of non-perishables once a week, and during the week on a case basis. Most of the donations are date-expired store surpluses and hence a cross-section of what you find at your average big-box grocery store, including a few luxury items. We have a food drive twice a year for parishioners, and we get some luxury items there too &#8230; caviar comes to mind. Items such as these are usually the result of someone getting a gift box for Christmas and donating what they don’t want.<br />
What amazes me is the number of vegetarians. We have one volunteer who makes up special bags for them, and you’d be surprised at how many canned goods have meat products in them. Then we have what I call vegetarian vegetarians – those who won’t eat even fish. My first thoughts are that, 1) it’s a lot of trouble to provide specialized service to someone who is choosing a different lifestyle, and 2) hey if you’re hungry, how can you be so picky? We get artisan bread donated by a local bakery, and yeah, it’s day-old, but what does a fellow I call Pokie-mon want? He pokes the bread to be sure it’s fresh! [Like, he can’t make bread crumbs out of it if it was hard?] But the understanding comes when you realize that they run the gamut from those who are in true, temporary need to those who are chronic abusers of our charity. Since I have yet in my five years seen only a few who might be categorized as truly hungry, I conclude that our average case is using our help to supplement her budget, and that’s fine. My heart goes out to the kids, and we try to have a special something for them, like a protein bar. One pre-school girl use to come with her mother and father [these were in real need]. I asked her what kind of cereal she would like, and she replied, “I’ll take whatever you give me.” Kinda made up for the Pokie-mons.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sedonaman</title>
		<link>http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/05/11/pakistan-never-attacked-us/comment-page-1/#comment-78182</link>
		<dc:creator>sedonaman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2009 17:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intellectualconservative.com/?p=5967#comment-78182</guid>
		<description>jb:

R: “Trust me when I note that my kids seldom/never have the same experience as if they were paying $30 a meal, but of course, it all goes back to my intent.”

That’s the Leftists’ refuge of last resort when confronted with the reality that their schemes have failed to produce actual &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;results&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt;.

R: “…Presumably, I love my kids but if I fed others the same meals, it could only be because I want them to suffer.”

You could be feeding them a heart attack ... but, above all, we gotta keep the Victim Industrial Complex going because it&#039;s the foundation of all Leftist ideology.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>jb:</p>
<p>R: “Trust me when I note that my kids seldom/never have the same experience as if they were paying $30 a meal, but of course, it all goes back to my intent.”</p>
<p>That’s the Leftists’ refuge of last resort when confronted with the reality that their schemes have failed to produce actual <b><i>results</i></b>.</p>
<p>R: “…Presumably, I love my kids but if I fed others the same meals, it could only be because I want them to suffer.”</p>
<p>You could be feeding them a heart attack &#8230; but, above all, we gotta keep the Victim Industrial Complex going because it&#8217;s the foundation of all Leftist ideology.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

