|
FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
![]() |
Dec 28th, 2003 02:05 PM | |||||||||
Protoclown |
OH SNAP YOU REALLY TWISTED THAT ONE AROUND ZING! |
||||||||
Dec 27th, 2003 06:34 PM | |||||||||
The One and Only... | I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids.I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids.I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids.I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. I will not make fun of older kids. | ||||||||
Dec 27th, 2003 06:33 PM | |||||||||
mburbank | I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids. | ||||||||
Dec 27th, 2003 04:29 PM | |||||||||
The One and Only... |
Mainly that only those who stongly oppose Bush on ideological grounds seem to care about the lies. In other words, that it doesn't bother the mass of people in the US. It irks me, but not to the degree it has irked others on this board... |
||||||||
Dec 27th, 2003 12:08 PM | |||||||||
Zhukov |
I really wish you would. Quote:
Quote:
So you are a 'Liberal', and you do care about lies, so what does the original sentence mean? |
||||||||
Dec 27th, 2003 11:34 AM | |||||||||
mburbank | I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids. | ||||||||
Dec 26th, 2003 04:07 PM | |||||||||
The One and Only... |
Define "liberalism." It is a very sketchy term these days. It used to mean a doctrine that supported a free society, but now it refers to the Left-Wing (which, ironically, is a little different from what it used to be as well). I was just using liberalism as a catch-all term for political stances that favor radical action opposed to reactionary, conservative action. |
||||||||
Dec 26th, 2003 04:00 PM | |||||||||
Command Prompt |
Quote:
|
||||||||
Dec 26th, 2003 03:48 PM | |||||||||
The One and Only... |
Quote:
I consider myself a liberal (ever hear of classical liberalism?). |
||||||||
Dec 26th, 2003 03:48 PM | |||||||||
kellychaos |
It IS hard to differentiate. ![]() |
||||||||
Dec 26th, 2003 03:45 PM | |||||||||
The One and Only... | Who, Rumsfled? | ||||||||
Dec 26th, 2003 02:08 PM | |||||||||
kellychaos |
Re: DONALD RUMSFLED'S CHRISTMAS CARD Quote:
![]() |
||||||||
Dec 26th, 2003 01:53 PM | |||||||||
mburbank | I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids. | ||||||||
Dec 26th, 2003 09:19 AM | |||||||||
Zhukov |
Quote:
|
||||||||
Dec 26th, 2003 09:11 AM | |||||||||
The One and Only... |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||
Dec 25th, 2003 03:03 PM | |||||||||
mburbank | I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids.I will not make fun of little kids. I will not make fun of little kids. | ||||||||
Dec 23rd, 2003 10:42 PM | |||||||||
ranxer |
i guess we don't look at it the same way. the results that outwheigh most any benefits you can name are things like a -reduction in respect etc. worldwide, -a huge dept of lies to maintain, -monster presence to maintain that is still a gamble with many lives and violates many rules of a just society, -which costs a ton -involves many of our family members, coworkers etc. that are being exposed to the hell of war. not to mention innocents and unwilling combatants. -an increase in number of enemies, (defending what they see as attacks on thier homeland -a repeat of pre-emptive military imperialism that only the U.S. is allowed to do. reaffirming the notion that war solves problems etc these long term problems created by the bush administration have driven a new spurt in a security police state economy but the cost will be coming in for many years. plus, part of this economic 'recovery' is a borrowing on the future that may backfire. |
||||||||
Dec 23rd, 2003 09:40 PM | |||||||||
The One and Only... |
But Max, you are again talking about politics, not policy, which is what I care about. Ranx, I doubt that ousting Saddam has been a bigger hindrance than help to national security. I just don't think that the cost of the war was worth the benefit. |
||||||||
Dec 23rd, 2003 05:32 PM | |||||||||
Zebra 3 |
Quote:
But to be fair, although the US gov't was the most active, other countries also casted morality aside and traded with Hussein including the UK, France, Germany, Russia and my own country, Canada. It's worth noting, then Canadian Minister Foreign Affairs Lloyd Axworthy has recently been on TV to admit Canada's involvement in dealing with Hussein, and mentioned that morality was never at play when dealing with the dictator's regime. |
||||||||
Dec 23rd, 2003 02:52 PM | |||||||||
ranxer |
Quote:
i think this cartoon sums it up in so many ways ![]() as far as democracy the rumsfeld way .. i kinda like this as a christmas card too.. (1.2meg)http://www.capedmaskedandarmed.com/video/love.mov |
||||||||
Dec 23rd, 2003 01:19 PM | |||||||||
mburbank |
No. I am arguing that the shock and horror about what a monser Saddam was is hypocrisy. We always new exactly what kind of monster he was and as long as he was using WMD against our mutual enemies, it was fine with us. We only went to war with him when he invaded a country more valuable to us than he was, and we osuted him with extreme force not because of his evil nature, but because we could not control him. If by 'diplomacy' you mean feeding a rabid dog your enemies, then yeah, sure. But I think that's a kind of sugary name for it. I'm not arguing that America should act in it's own interests. I'm questioning what those interests are. Since I think we are currently ramping up the threat to America, I'm arguing the converse. I would amend your statement to read 'Everything America does attempts to favor the sliver of society it's current administration aligns itself with.' |
||||||||
Dec 23rd, 2003 12:58 PM | |||||||||
The One and Only... |
I'm not following your point. Diplomacy failed, we couldn't reshape Saddam after the Gulf War, so we went to war again. We all realize that everything America does is in its favor, right? Are you arguing that it shouldn't be that way? |
||||||||
Dec 23rd, 2003 12:11 PM | |||||||||
mburbank |
OAO is right. I should have been clearer. As VP W. was 'out of the loop' to the point of non existance. Rumsfeld himself was acting on orders and no role whatever in policy. He was also 'out of the loop', as were Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, Baker, poindexter and popular radio host Oliver North, who was only following orders that came from someone but not Regan, who was Out of the Loop himself. During the time we supported Sadaam and winked at his use of poison gas, there actually was no administration. People in the current adminstration who served during that time in key positions acted under the assumption that there was in fact an adminstration and a policy, but you can't blame them or even ask wht they were thinking at the time and how it relates to what they are thinking now because no thinking was taking place and it isn't part of the canon and that's just a photoshop picture and even if it isn't it's old news and who cares. |
||||||||
Dec 23rd, 2003 12:00 PM | |||||||||
KevinTheOmnivore |
Yeah, se, technically speaking that was the second gulf war, but then again, with that region's history of violence, I guess it could've been the 119th gulf war, but I digress.... Point is, and I think this is what Max meant, George Bush was Reagan's VP. It was Rumsfeld, also a part of that administration, who normalized relations with the Butcher of Baghdad. These men, in no specific order, knew full well what this man HAD done, and what he was capable of. And you're right, we DID fight him in the early 90s. Why? If he was so rotten, why did we leave Iraqi rebels out to dry and be executed and tortured (perhaps not in that order)?? |
||||||||
Dec 23rd, 2003 11:46 AM | |||||||||
The One and Only... | Umm... we FOUGHT Iraq during Daddy W's administration. Gulf War, anyone? | ||||||||
This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. |