Off Topic Messages

Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:27 am

I only hate one person.......one of those rich oil sheiks.

Sheik Yerbooty :wink:

Sun Aug 07, 2005 7:05 am

ah...people i wouldn't cry over for a minute if they got blasted in a terrorist attack--kofi annan, jesse jackson and what's that other guy that was being a jerk at the dncs...i keep getting him confused with jesse jackson. oh yeah, al sharpton.

god, they are pathetic and embarassing.

Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:12 am

These recent comments are too silly to address.

However, I would like to amend one of my earlier comments about the inability of the right to criticize this administration. Outside the heat of the moment, I did remember that there have been some members of the Republican party who have spoken out against what this president is doing to this country in particular former New Jersey Governor and Bush's first EPA chair Christie Todd Whitman, former Congressman and talk show host Joe Scarborough (who supports the president but not his deficit spending policies) and hardline conservative columnist Paul Mulshine among others. My comments painted a picture of an unthinking party-line monolith and that is just not the case.

.

Sun Aug 07, 2005 7:13 pm

A quote from Chris Rock

The whole country's got a fuked up mentality. We all got a gang mentality. Republicans are fuking idiots. Democrats are fuking idiots. Conservatives are idiots and liberals are idiots.

Anyone who makes up their mind before they hear the issue is a fuking fool. Everybody, nah, nah, nah, everybody is so busy wanting to be down with a gang! I'm a conservative! I'm a liberal! I'm a conservative! It's bullshit!

Be a fuking person. Listen. Let it swirl around your head. Then form your opinion.

No normal decent person is one thing. OK!?! I got some sh*t I'm conservative about, I got some sh*t I'm liberal about.


I could not agree more, so that is why I make light of all of the ignorant political posting that goes on at this web site. Quite frankly most every political view on here is that of an idiot and a follower. I will form my opinions election year after hearing the platforms of the candidates (unique concept huh?)

By the way LTB, I was not enquiring for a response from you for my silly posting. Quite frankly I would like to hear absolutely nothing you got to say on politics as they are all canned responses drilled into your head through generation after generation. I am quite sure you sound just like your parents.

Please go back to doing what you do best on this board that has made you such a fan favorite.

Sun Aug 07, 2005 7:39 pm

Its funny to me how people point out Republicans disagreeing with this or that as proof that the president is wrong or such.

The facts are that loyalty among Republicans have dwindled..but that doesn't mean a thing. It is how they finally vote that matters and not what they tell the press. On the other hand you got Liberals who time and time again will follower their candidate right down to the fiery pits of hell.

Kerry was a weak candidate and his views were assinine at best. He was a fan of big candidate and was doing nothing for the common man. Funny how the mean ol "rich" Presidents want to keep everyone down, but lets take a real look...

Where did Kerry win all his votes??? Do you remember the map by country? How about his proposal for the buy in to the government insurance....i.e. further distancing us from private competition. Ok so he was for the war in Iraq...but not at that time. But hey..he voted for it anyway??? Idiot. What about needing the "global approval" in order for us to make decisions concerning the U.S. Our asses would be nuked before he could make a decision..that is if he wasn't selling out to the U.N.'s time table.

Those views alone are why I voted for Bush...that and the fact that Kerry was trying to stand on Clinton and Carter's shouldiers. To me in the words of Bogie, don't bring up paris(bad Presidents) that is poor salesmanship!

We needed a leader, not a puppet that would bend at every whim. This war will end and we are not going to lose. Though I have been wrong before concerning MJ(can't believe that complete crap to this day), this is one conflict that we just can't walk away from. Monumental wars are not always easy, but keep in mind we are not trying to take ground and we are not there to murder innocents. Thus it is going to take a while. The problem is that we have an MTV/Internet generation who have a short attention span. They get bored in a five minute commercial let alone an actual war that takes years. Iraq should have been handled right the first time, but it was pollitics(left and right) that stopped us from going further. Well this has been a long time coming and we are in it. It will end, but hopefully when it should and not because some deadheads can't stand another casuality. War is hell, and there will be deaths. But like I quoted before..freedom is not free.

Incidently noone has even commented about the Russians that were saved by the U.S.A. and U.K. Damn they didn't even support us and we still stopped our conflict to save those soldiers. Perhaps we will win Ali's through this gesture...doubt it.

Mon Aug 08, 2005 5:37 am

genesim wrote:Doc, they tried to steal the election the first time and lost on every count.


To suggest the Democrats tried to steal that election is ludicrous. If the shoe had been on the other foot, Republicans would have been in full support of a Bush appeal. Gore had several hundred thousand more votes nationally, was ahead on electoral college votes without Florida and on the first count lost Florida by only a few hundred votes. Of course recounts were going to be requested under those circumstances. Given the stakes, it would have been madness not to.

Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:22 am

Over 1,000 views and, to date, not a single coherent comment on whether the Web link in question contains information of interest. For many, it certainly does.

DJC

Re: .

Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:34 am

Quite frankly most every political view on here is that of an idiot and a follower.


Except of course.......yours. Funny how that happens :lol:

Since we're quoting comics......I'll pick Carlin

"You ever notice how anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anybody driving faster than you is a maniac?? I mean it's uncanny......you are ALWAYS the one driving just the right speed." :lol: :lol:

Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:48 am

Genesim- My comment was not to show that the administration is wrong because Republicans are dissenting but to show my comment to wrong to indicate that everyone wants to protect this essentially destructive and wrongheaded president. This is also not to say that there isn't part, such as yourself, that believes the President's approach is the right one. However, sometimes these facts are easy to forget when you get surveys that show most Bush supporters still believing there were WMD in Iraq and that Iraq had a link to 9/11 despite both being demonstrably untrue.

I do feel that there should have an effort by the right to call the president on the carpet but the majority of party leaders have been unwilling to do so. The Downing Street memo is huge. The 9/11 commission report was huge. The Valerie Plame incident was an enormous abuse of power and access. And frankly all this aside the president should be vigorously condemned for pushing the country into a "pre-emptive" war with a country that posed no immediate threat. No connection to 9/11, no WMD.

I will point out again that there were no protests against the invasion of Afghanistan. Why? Because there was a direct link to Bin Laden and 9/11. If there had been WMD, if there had been a link to 9/11, Bush's job approval rating would be through the roof and there would be far less criticism.

I agree that we can't just leave but I don't believe we should have been there in the first place. It is a marathon and not a sprint but all the evidence at this point indicates that all the invasion did was exacerbate an already bad situation. And it may be very well be true that we should have gotten rid of Hussein after the first war, it's also true though that this may be the reason why we didn't pursue that tactic as even in 15 years there has never been a decent occupation plan. Interestingly enough had we moved forward against Hussein at that time, there might not be any need for the troops in Saudi Arabia which have caused so much dismay amongst the Islamic community. However, you can't even say that for a stone fact because as we are seeing right now there has to be something to replace Hussein and there's really no way to guarantee that will be a benevolent force or even a pro-US force.

Dr. I did access the link and there was indeed some solid info there. However, a lot of this stuff has come out already. The flaws in the Bush information have been rigorously detailed for many months in many mainstream books and publications. It's there for anyone who wants to read it.

Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:51 am

funnily enough, there's only a dwindled 30% of iraqis who don't like democracy still. the rest are saying how much things are improving since saddam (an evil bastard who killed millions of his own people) went BYE-BYE.

funny how all the middle eastern countries are starting to take interest in the fact that iraq is working, and the people are starting to ask more from their governments concerning voting and the like. hmmm...and it ain't workin' huh? how did you think it was supposed to work?!

"...shout hallelujah, com'on get happy, get ready for the judgment day..." lol

liberals are so pessimistic and stuck with coal up their asses turning into diamonds, thinking the worst because worse news is better news for them, and they will lie to get it. :roll: :lol:

bush will go down in history as a great president along the lines of our other wartime presidents. com'on name 'em. i dare ya. oh yeah, they are some of our greatest. bush is one of many.

unfortunately those past presidents didn't have liberal wannabe-hippies that live in beverly hills and over by the hollywood sign trying to teach the uneducated masses of kids by hippie professors out of bezerkly. we need to return to the healthier wwII pro-america mentality in this country.

the liberal future of america is a group of mtv teenyboppin' idiots that can't tell you what year the american bicentennial was (no kidding, i watched this horror right before my eyes on that mtv 70s house show--they couldn't add 200 to 1776)!!! and this is the get out the vote crowd. pathetic. :lol: seen any drummer boy quarters lately?

Re: .

Mon Aug 08, 2005 10:53 pm

Blue-Gypsy wrote:A quote from Chris Rock

The whole country's got a fuked up mentality. We all got a gang mentality. Republicans are fuking idiots. Democrats are fuking idiots. Conservatives are idiots and liberals are idiots.

Anyone who makes up their mind before they hear the issue is a fuking fool. Everybody, nah, nah, nah, everybody is so busy wanting to be down with a gang! I'm a conservative! I'm a liberal! I'm a conservative! It's bullshit!

Be a fuking person. Listen. Let it swirl around your head. Then form your opinion.

No normal decent person is one thing. OK!?! I got some sh*t I'm conservative about, I got some sh*t I'm liberal about.


I could not agree more, so that is why I make light of all of the ignorant political posting that goes on at this web site. Quite frankly most every political view on here is that of an idiot and a follower. I will form my opinions election year after hearing the platforms of the candidates (unique concept huh?)

By the way LTB, I was not enquiring for a response from you for my silly posting. Quite frankly I would like to hear absolutely nothing you got to say on politics as they are all canned responses drilled into your head through generation after generation. I am quite sure you sound just like your parents.

Please go back to doing what you do best on this board that has made you such a fan favorite.


I love how people come on this board and tell others to be quiet. What's the point? Shut down conversation? Yes, do go elsewhere if you're overburdened. (But I do like Rock's quote...)

I finally reviewed this thread the other day and enjoyed all of the contributions: Genesim, DJC, Scatter, LiketheBike,etc. They actually seem to be getting somewhere, that is, when it doesn't descend into name-calling, political labeling and personal animosity.

The "Downing Street" memo seems to confirm what was obvious for a long time: the President had his heart fixed on "taking out" Saddam, whether wise or not. That said, I'm more interested in where we go from here - and when do we leave that godforsaken hell-hole and foreign policy debacle.

Then (or rather, now), let's head-on confront our porous borders and the true evil that radical Islam poses to us all.

(See "London Attacked" thread for more on that if you missed it...)

I should say that President Bush deserves the second-guessing he is finally getting - on nearly all of his policies.

Here's to the 2006 elections and 2008. It's a pity both parties are wretched, however. Both of them leave me unsatified.

At least you folks in the UK have some other choices, right or left.

Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:04 pm

I do not believe we are going nowhere...nor do I believe it was without just cause to go in the first place. It all comes down to certain countries wanted us to no get involved because of their undercover dealings.

Sadaam needed to be taken out of power..the sooner the better.

He did kick out UN inspectors at gunpoint and the fact that he refused to comply unless we were on HIS timetable is even more proof positive.

The fact that Bush wanted to go to war even earlier gives him more credibility that he did indeed wait before a decision was reached.

The moment that the UN inspectors were kicked out it was ultimatum time. Then again it should have been finished in the first place so anything between then and now was all good. I support the removal of a threat to world security..and the fact that he wasn't as armed as Libya, Iran, S. Korea..etc., means nothing to me.

Doesn't make Sadaam less of a threat in my book. Matter of fact, seeing that we had been to war and we didn't finish the job in the first place makes him a perfect example to start with.

Though I supported George Bush Sr.....he isn't half the politician his son is. Sr. had a tendancy to sway with what ever was popular at the time. We need a leader, not a popularity chaser.

Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:06 pm

Whaaaa? Greg, I didn't make the list?

:(


Where's the web link for facts on UN's Oil-For-Food Scandal involving Iraq?

Where's the web link for facts about Clinton's 1998 Attack of Iraq.
What's the bodycount numbers on that unjustified attack?

When USS Cole was attacked by bin Laden's trash in 2000, killing American sailors, when Clinton was told of the news, how long did he sit there frozen (getting a blowjob from under the desk) before he responded to the attack?
7 minutes? 4 minutes? 20 minutes?

Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:10 pm

You know, Graceland Gardener, I actually meant to put you in there.


:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:

I'm serious.

I really enjoyed the back and forth between all of you.


Let's just keep it civil and continue to debate !

More, not less!

Re: .

Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:34 pm

Gregory Nolan Jr. wrote:
I love how people come on this board and tell others to be quiet.


Who have I told to be quiet? Just start talking about something else. You know as well as I do that DJC and LTB have both ridiculed those who do not share their same beliefs. Anyhoo, I am glad you love it because it is quite obvious I am not going any where.
Last edited by Blue-Gypsy on Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:41 pm

Here's a link to a rather compelling article dealing with the connections between Iraq/Hussein and Al Qaeda:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/P ... 4yqqnr.asp

And another on the Clinton administration's policy towards Iraq/Hussein and Al Qaeda:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/P ... 7uwabl.asp

Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:53 pm

thanks Pete

my questions about links was rhetorical but glad replied to.


Clinton administration officials said that the attacks were in part retaliatory and in part preemptive.


hmm.

Although their political parties are different, this President is doing something that the previous President even did: making preemptive strikes against [muslim regions] in retaliation to attacks against US interests.

some people think Bush invented that nasty term preemptive strike.

Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:54 pm

Pete -

Please. Our own government has declared no connection between "Iraq/Hussein and Al Qaeda" ... and the Weekly Standard has a very well-known conservative agenda.

DJC

Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:58 pm

Weekly Standard...a conservative agenda.
So?

ha

click that little Image button on any of Doc's posts.

his "personal" site => moveon.org
has a very well-known and notorious leftwing agenda.

Re: .

Tue Aug 09, 2005 12:52 am

Blue-Gypsy wrote:
Gregory Nolan Jr. wrote:
I love how people come on this board and tell others to be quiet.


Who have I told to be quiet? Just start talking about something else. You know as well as I do that DJC and LTB have both ridiculed those who do not share their same beliefs. Anyhoo, I am glad you love it because it is quite obvious I am not going any where.


Gyp: I guess I read into that from this comment you directed at LTB:

Quite frankly I would like to hear absolutely nothing you got to say on politics as they are all canned responses drilled into your head through generation after generation. I am quite sure you sound just like your parents. Please go back to doing what you do best on this board that has made you such a fan favorite.


I'll let the guy defend himself, but I took that as you telling LiketheBike to get lost and basically stick to the music, so to speak. Why? Because you disagree? Personally, I like his input (and Graceland Gardener's :lol: ) and don't want either to go away. I also fully expect that each will tell the other where they can go with each other's ideas, but I hope we can keep it civil.

So I'm just checking and I'm glad you welcome them here.

Image
Scatter & Doc, just hangin'

Re: .

Tue Aug 09, 2005 1:29 am

I'd like to buy the world a home and furnish it with love,
Grow apple trees and honey bees, and snow white turtle doves.

I'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony,
I'd like to buy the world a Coke and keep it company.

Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:35 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:Pete -

Please. Our own government has declared no connection between "Iraq/Hussein and Al Qaeda" ... and the Weekly Standard has a very well-known conservative agenda.

DJC


Yeah..again, why be bothered by facts. I guess last weeks threats were made by Peter Pan....

Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:10 am

Graceland Gardener wrote:his "personal" site => moveon.org
has a very well-known and notorious leftwing agenda.

Message to Stump: nowhere in this topic do I mention that Web site, so your comment is -- typically -- worthless.

And, Stump, while you're at it, please explain their "notorious leftwing <b>[ sic ]</b> agenda" -- I don't see it. Is it the part where they help people register to vote? Or is it the area where they advise citizens to write their Congressmen if the issue merits it? How "leftwing" ...

DJC

Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:19 am

Look at Doc...always a specialist in name calling and yet with absence of substance when it comes to any debating skills.

Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:26 am

genesim wrote:Look at Doc...always a specialist in name calling and yet with absence of substance when it comes to any debating skills.



don't worry. He will become conservative over time.

Likethebike will too.

Their concerns will eventually be their own retirement plan,
and their own children and grandchildren,
raising teenager daughters maybe,
and yes, they'll become more conservative in their rational!

Conservatism is the common denominator.

Even the most radical leftwing kook mellows eventually.
Didn't Jane Fonda become a born-again Christian?

Thinking/acting rightwing awaits you Doc.
Hide and watch.

:D