Want to talk about our genocidal friend Mahmoud Ahmadinejad coming to new york?
Want to talk about congressional democrats accusing General David Petraeus of being a liar when he reported mostly good news in Iraq?
I don't know if my heart is in this. Someone else do the hard part.
We could come up with nicknames for Iran's dictator (i.e., Ahmadnutjob, Amadamadingdong, Ahmadinnerjacket).
Hillary Clinton.
Said that we wouldn't withdraw until we'd accomplished our mission.
That's all well and good, except that when Petraeus said the same thing she told him to his face that the claim required a "willing suspension of disbelief."
She also voted to use the power of the purse to defund the war.
So Hillary supports unconditional withdrawal when a republican is in office, but not in the hypothetical scenario where she's in office.
I wonder why that might be? Only reason I can think of is that she knows withdrawal will result in the collapse of the middle east and an engineered defeat of the American military and wants that to happen on a Republican's watch.
But that's literally treason, so that can't be right, can it?
quote:
Vernaltemptressing:
Ahmadinnerjacket
I am never, ever going to call him anything else.
quote:
Maradon!'s fortune cookie read:
blah...blah...blah...
She'll say anything to get elected. She is counting on the voters tendency of selective-hearing, and saying what the voter wants to hear to gain their vote.
In other words, she doesn't have a spine.
However, that could possibly be because she gets enough money from red china to be able to risk the moveon.org AKA George Soros money that the rest of the candidates depend on.
Kinanik fucked around with this message on 09-24-2007 at 11:31 PM.
quote:
Maradon! got all f'ed up on Angel Dust and wrote:
I will grant her that she has more of a spine than any other democratic candidate on the roster currently. She's flirted oddly close to "pro-war" sentiments in the past.However, that could possibly be because she gets enough money from red china to be able to risk the moveon.org AKA George Soros money that the rest of the candidates depend on.
I'm not sure you can count Hilary out of the list of candidates depending on Soros. She was one of the many democrats who voted not to condemn MoveOn.org and the NYT over the General Petraeus ad.
the US is like living proof that democracy doesn't work because the more engaged you people get in politics, the stupider you get, and the less you accomplish. does anything even happen in the US anymore, or do you just go around accusing each other of being from the other party?
VOTE RON PAUL MC Jensizzle fucked around with this message on 09-25-2007 at 08:10 AM.
And we've got some fucking retarded citizens.
While I'm sure that there's significant overlap above, at least half of our country's population is indeed fucking retarded.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
Vernaltemptress impressed everyone with:
Classic example
If only Hitler were a bit more cuddly, then we probably would have joined with him in WWII. Though to be fair, Churchill is fairly cuddly on his own.
Wow.
quote:
Vernaltemptress had this to say about Duck Tales:
Classic example
That is genuinely frightning.
quote:
Maradon! has a secret obsession with Richard Simmons, as evidenced by...
You can always spot the politically indifferent and ignorant by their disdain for and wildy inaccurate perception of politics.
What are you, 16? 
quote:
MC Jensizzle's fortune cookie read:
What are you, 16?
Are you a libertarian Jens
Are you
And Andrew Ryan.
A MAN CHOOSES
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
Karnaj painfully thought these words up:
How do you know that's not Al Powell? Magic?
Al Powell liked twinkies, Carl Winslow was all about the donuts.
quote:
Delphi Aegis put down Tada! magazine long enough to type:
Al Powell liked twinkies, Carl Winslow was all about the donuts.
Those were for his wife. She was pregnant.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
x--NaimahO-('-'Q) :
The DailyKos: Proving that crazies exist on both sides of the aisle.
You know that every single democratic presidential candidate for 2008 attended the Daily KOS convention this year, right?
There are crazies on both sides of the aisle all right, but on the left they comprise the core constituency with a fringe of moderates.
quote:
Maradon! Model 2000 was programmed to say:
You know that every single democratic presidential candidate for 2008 attended the Daily KOS convention this year, right?There are crazies on both sides of the aisle all right, but on the left they comprise the core constituency with a fringe of moderates.
I guess the "jesus freak" base on the other side doesn't count? Don't get me wrong, both sides do obviously have their retards, but to make a sweeping generalization like saying "most democrats are fringe crazy pinko-commies" is pretty retarded. There are plenty of large voting blocks among the democrats that wouldn't be automatically considered crazy - such as labor unions (whether or not they have a place in modern society is another topic entirely, so don't derail on this) and African-Americans.
quote:
In a disastrous attempt to be funny and clever, Mr. Parcelan wrote:
Are you a libertarian JensAre you
RON PAUL
quote:
Maradon! had this to say about Robocop:
Hillary Clinton
The thing about the whole Petraeus report was that he and the ambassador seemed to accent the good things (which is fine), but failed to point out the ongoing problems. It's one of those minutia points. Hil can still say "we'll leave when the region is stable" blah blah blah because it insinuates she has some idea how to bring that about, and leaves her free to criticize how Bush is handling things.
The really irritating thing about Petraeus' report was the cynicism it engendered. When Bush pushed the surge, and people were concerned where he was heading with it (keep in mind, Bush for a while there didn't like being backed into a corner about it being necessarily temporary), he said "Wait until we hear how it's going". Everyone KNEW that it wasn't REALLY going to be a full report. I knew it was going to be even more of a load when the first thing (practically) that the General said was that he hadn't spoken to the White House about what he was about to say to the Committee. (Turns out they had a copy of his speaking notes that he gave them, but he maintains he didn't consult with them on what he was going to say, which I believe for cynical reasons.) The man has honor. The man is doing a job we all KNOW is virtually impossible to accomplish. We KNOW he's being forced into a mouthpiece situation like every other general the administration has tapped (including former generals like Powell). He could have skipped the "look at our progress!" pap and given people the hard facts. Instead he accented the positive and downplayed the negative. If I'm in the emergency room, I don't want the doctor to mitigate bad news by telling me that at least I get to keep my hair. It's irritating.
And I loathe Hillary Clinton. My friend Steve wants her to win just so we get Bill back in the spotlight, which would be amusing, but she's just...gah. At least Obama is tossing some (comparitively) drastic statements out there, like the comment about *GASP* talking to some of these people we've maintained little diplomatic communication with.
As for the Middle East, I doubt there's much we can do there at the moment. In the end, I think Iraq is going to inevitably be a stage for the Saudis, Iranians, and whoever else to play out their sectarian strife on. The United States will end up in a damage control role (at best). And if those idiots in Israel pick a fight with Iran...ugh.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
Ja'Deth Issar Ka'bael obviously shouldn't have said:
As for the Middle East, I doubt there's much we can do there at the moment. In the end, I think Iraq is going to inevitably be a stage for the Saudis, Iranians, and whoever else to play out their sectarian strife on. The United States will end up in a damage control role (at best). And if those idiots in Israel pick a fight with Iran...ugh.
Wait a minute, who is picking a fight with whom? Which country is it that is funding a terrorist organization to send rockets into the other on a daily basis? If memory serves me correctly, Ehud Olmert hasn't ever said that Israel's divine mission is to wipe Iran off the map.
Jesus Christos, when did Israel-bashing on the left become so popular? Why are so-called 'liberals' marrying with neo-fascist states and organizations against the only democratic republic in the region?
Ugh indeed.
The other half involves a great deal of paying attention to boring shit, and I don't have the patience. In the end, whoever gets elected won't do everything, and will do shit wrong. Other people will crucify them, or praise them into canonization. As such, and with the issues I had with the previous election, and not understanding how.. the guy who won the popular vote could lose the election.. I mean.. really.. what the fuck?
Anyway. I had a discussion the other day with the girlfriend, about Lewis Carroll. It seems that she is of the mind that he was a pedo who raped little kids and took pictures. Myself, I see it as the image people have of Carroll today, is skewed as he did not live today. The morals and cultures of Victorian England were far different than they are now. The rumors of his alleged sexual exploration with children, that he stammered around adults,and was only comfortable with small children, didn't arise until years after his death. And the defined age of a child is also much different today than it was then.
Yes, he did photograph young people in varied states of undress. However, he also photographed a shitload of other shit. Like lizards, and doggies and stuff. Nobody accuses him of fucking the pets or the local foliage. However, there were far more rumors at the time of him courting Alice's older sister, and banging her governess.
How does this tie into the topic at hand?
Easy. Neither the girlie or I were arguing the whole truths. We were actually arguing two sides of the same thing, while ignoring valid points of the other side, as well as other aspects of Carrolls life. It was a pointless argument because of this.
However.. It was entertaining because it was a discussion of applied culture and morals and ethics and shit from today, forced upon times long past. As opposed to acceptance of the morals and culture of times past.
The rich will be heavily taxed, the poor will be heavily supported; the middle class will still be fucked.
Clinton has no desire to end the divisiveness in American politics; she'd much rather make the divide between Democrat and Republican even more than it is.
Clinton is violently pro-censorship of all things.
Clinton has no idea on how to end the war or further healthcare.
Her platform, as such, is: "Vote for me because I'm the opposite of Bush." She's kicking it a step up from Kerry's failed idea.
quote:
Lazzay had this to say about Punky Brewster:
Wait a minute, who is picking a fight with whom? Which country is it that is funding a terrorist organization to send rockets into the other on a daily basis? If memory serves me correctly, Ehud Olmert hasn't ever said that Israel's divine mission is to wipe Iran off the map.Jesus Christos, when did Israel-bashing on the left become so popular? Why are so-called 'liberals' marrying with neo-fascist states and organizations against the only democratic republic in the region?
Ugh indeed.
First off...
Israel has, since it's origin, had a mentality of "we are a tiny country surrounded by enemies who want us destroyed" and for a long time, that was true. However, Egypt and Jordan (Israel's neighbors, both Islamic nations) have both-signed non-aggression treaties. Also keep in mind that even countries who'd rather Israel didn't exist but harbor no direct plan to attack (Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, etc) are more concerned with the Palestinian situation than they are with wiping Israel off the map. In fact, in that area of the world it's generally only Iran's President who outwardly does such definitively insane things like deny the Holocaust and declare his desire to wipe Israel off the map. By all indications, the populace of Iran doesn't want that; they don't even like Ahmadinnerjacket that much. Syria doesn't want that, save for it's own kooks. The only GROUPS of people who want Israel gone are extremist groups, and elements of the Iranian government (Ahmadinnerjacket and his Republican GoonSquad, for instance).
Israel, on the other hand, has slipped. They used to have Mossad, which they employed to maximum effect. Now they practically carpet bomb large areas of civilian-held territory (Lebanon!) to try and make people stop lobbing clumsy rockets over the border into mostly-unoccupied territory that Israel is illegally holding in the first place. Now said rocket-lobbers ARE insane assholes, but Israel has no concept of balanced reciprocal response. While it may be satisfying to bomb things back to the stone age, at least the United States wields it's bombing runs like a scalpel rather than the gratuitous excess of violence Israel tends to display. Likewise, regarding things like Palestine, for every step people like Ariel Sharon (who finally came to his senses) try to make in setting up a two-state solution, you have people like Benjamin Netenyahu (who's name I have likely butchered horribly), who demonstrate an appallingly-unrecalcitrant militant-theocratic mentality of "our way or no way" which of course gives all the crazies more to feed on. Keep in mind, most of the countries in the Middle East (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, etc) are desperately trying to put down these kooks on their own turf. It isn't these governments trying to hurt Israel, it's them preferring that Israel be hurt rather than their own innocents.
And every time Israel goes off half-cocked with threats or militant actions in Palestinian territories that result in civilian casualties and an even more dire humanitarian aid disaster in those locations, the United States is inevitably drawn into an argument (as often as not by Israel) over whether or not Israel is right. It costs us social currency with the world and pisses EVERYONE (even our Western European allies) off when we blindly cover for Israel. Israel acts like a mouthy younger sibling who picks fights with bullies with no care for how it would resolve things were it on it's own, because Israel assumes that the United States will always give them an alternative to the brinksmanship Israel gets itself into.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
Lebanon allows Syria to dictate its politics so that it, too, is forced to allow terrorists to attack through its countries.
Israel makes no distinction between terror cells and countries that allow them to act through them.
Tread carefully.
