He took the largest surplus in the history of our nation and converted it to the largest deficit in the history of our nation --in a mere three years. That 's a pretty astounding accomplishment.
Rob Kall: He 's got three more years. What do you think he 'll do in those next three? My God!
Well it 's pretty scary to think of what he could do in the next few years. I think it 's pretty obvious to everyone now that we 're headed on a downward spiral as a nation --our worldwide credibility, he has utterly destroyed it. He 's basically given Osama Bin Laden everything he wanted. He 's gotten our troops out of Saudi Arabia, which is what Osama wanted. He 's basically bankrupted our nation, which is what Osama wanted. He 's given Osama more jihadi recruits than he could have ever dreamed of. How many times does he have to keep giving the enemy the exact thing that they want? What they want is a holy war and he 's giving them the holy war that they want. I 've told people for years that I think World War Three started on September 11, 2001. And it has just taken a while for the people of the United States to realize that. I think the rest of the world realizes it, but we don 't. The majority of Americans still don 't realize it. They don 't want to admit it
He 's already said it 's a global war on terror numerous times. Rumsfeld 's said it. How many nations do you have to have attacked before you call it a world war? Spains been attacked. London 's getting attacked. We 're getting attacked. Granted those terrorist attacks are random and all that --but there are a lot of other attacks --Indonesia, Russia ... The thing I fear most is that eventually if either Russia or China line up against on the opposite side, we are in serious trouble. Fighting the war against terror alone is bad enough, but if China or Russia were to line up against us, like, if we were to attack North Korea or if we were to attack Iran, we cannot beat China and Russia. We would have a hard time beating one of them alone, but there 's no way we can beat both of them.
There 's a fallacy that we won the cold war. That whole premise that we won the cold war totally forgets that China is a very viable nation and is actually the other superpower. There 's this myth that we 're the only superpower in the world. Well that 's just BS. China is kicking our butt economically. They have the largest military in the world. How can people say we 're the only superpower.
Correct. And they have the capability and the structure in place that will allow them, eventually, to surpass us because their work ethic is so phenomenal, plus they have five times the population we have. I don 't know. It 's a scary thing. It 's a good idea to remain friends with as many people as possible, specifically people like China and Russia. But there 's something here, historically, that we have that nobody else has ever had in the history of mankind. And that is the greatest communication tool of all time --the internet, which allows people from all over the world to become friends with one another. Lack of communication has been the classic cause of war throughout time and now we finally have a tool that breaks that down. We 're kind of losing our excuses to keep fighting these wars when we have the ability to communicate with the people we may consider our enemy and talk to them and try to work problems out. But then you get leaders like Bush and either you 're with us or against us and don 't want any compromise and go around just attacking nations at his will, starting unprovoked wars. And the rest of the world looks to us as a leader. He 's setting the precedent that it 's okay to just attack this country or that country and take it over just because we feel like it. WE make up some lame reason why we 're going to do it and then it turns out it wasn 't true. But hey, we 'll make another reason while we 're there.
What happens when Russia decides they want to take a country and take it over, or China decides they want to attack Taiwan and take it over. Hey. Taiwan has WMD. We 're going to invade Taiwan because they have WMDs they 're going to use on us. What kind of justification can we use to argue against them doing that? We certainly don 't, with everything going on with the economy the way it is, hurricane Katrina and now Rita, do we have the wherewithal to try to stop China from taking over Taiwan if they wanted to. I don 't think we do really.
Rob Kall: Since you had this Andy Warhol 15 minutes of fame moment, has it changed your attitudes or your politics or beliefs any way? Strengthened, weakened, intensified?--
Well, something kind of odd happened. I 've received literally thousands of emails, 95 to 98 percent of which were supportive. A few were not. Some were threatening.
I got on a website, democraticunderground.com just to talk to some of these people that were sending me these emails and ****** the extremists on the left are just as hypocritical as extremists on the right. I tried to discuss issues with compromise and what I see as real world solutions. I consider myself a realist. People try to label me a liberal because of what I said, but I think of myself as a realist and, so I got on that website and was trying to just discuss some issues and debate a little .... And after about two days, they banned me from the site. They couldn 't handle any dissension from their dogma. I was basically pointing out their hypocrisy and then suddenly my threads were locked (discussion threads on an electronic bulletin board) and they removed me ....
To me that just proves that they want to point the finger at the right wing for being extreme and they 're just as extreme in their views. For instance, we were discussing the gay marriage issue. I tried to think of a realistic compromise for that issue, because I tried to see both points of view on that issue, which, from the right wing perspective, the word marriage, has historically, for thousands of years, has always been between a man and and a woman. That 's just history. You can 't negate history to satisfy a politically correct agenda. And I agree with that. I call the left wing extremists the PC utopia fascists because they have this politically correct utopia vision in their minds and that 's nice, utopia 's a nice idea, but reality is nowhere close to utopia.
I have no problem with homosexual couples. I tried to offer a compromise. Why can 't there be a simple compromise based on the reality of the sexual preferences of the individuals and have two terms --one, homosexual marriage, and two, heterosexual marriage? Very simple, based on the sexuality of the people involved. It seems like a pretty simple, realistic solution where both sides are getting what they want. Homosexuals would be getting their legal rights as far as benefits, insurance, etcetera and but no, they couldn 't have it that way. And the thing is the right wing people wouldn 't want to have it that way either .... But I think homosexuals should have something.
Now someone else suggested, "Why don 't we have a civil union? " and I said fine, I would be okay. I would be fine with a civil union and get government out of church altogether. Just have civil union as the legal term for all couples regardless of sexuality. And I think that 's a fine compromise too. But when I pointed out the hypocrisy of what they are saying ... they 're demanding that we change the definition of a word that has been that way for thousands of years, just to fit their political agenda to me that 's just wrong. You can 't just suddenly say, OK, we 're gonna call oranges grapes because it fits our political agenda and if you don 't like calling oranges grapes, then you 're a bad person and you 're ignorant and you 're a bigot, because you won 't call oranges grapes. You understand my point there.