Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 133

Thread: Platitude's

  1. #1
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,281
    Post Thanks / Like
    I notice it alot that when a lefty makes an attempt at moral posturing, he/she always uses platitudes, and it pisses me off to no end. :D

    This is a general example of what I'm talking about:

    You get some sanctimonious windbag like Ted Kennedy, say something like "Racism is wrong". And they say it with that thespian society tone, punching their fist into their palm, as if they have just made some profound statement.

    [i]DUH[/i]. [b]OF COURSE IT'S WRONG, ***HOLE!!![/b]

    And yet, we, the unwashed masses engage in a game of [i]emporer's new clothes[/i] and validate the platitude with the assumption that, by virtue of Ted saying it, somehow he is morally superior, and as a democrat, his party, as a whole, is morally superior to the opposition.

    Ya follow the point I'm making, or should I go back to posting pictures of Devo?

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    Teddy was recently involved in a Big Speech to promote his bill which attempts to raise the minimum wage from $5-and-change to $7 per hour. He said, "I don't know why George Bush is waging war against poor people," to deafening applause. Ben Affleck was even on hand to lend him his support.

    People think there is a free lunch, and platitides like this are never considered beyond Stage One. If you oppose raising the minimum wage by 30%, you obviously hate poor people, I guess. It is just blatant pandering by Teddy and his ilk, and most people don't even know anything about basic economics, all they hear is, "Well, $7 is a lot more than $5.50, so yeah...why would any rational person oppose this measure, unless they blatantly hated poor people."


    It's a complete joke. As if companies are just going to sit back while their payroll costs go up by 30%. Sure, they'll just absorb that cost no problem. Nah, they won't scale back employment numbers, unemployment won't go up...nah, that'll never happen because of this. Hell, they'll probably hire even MORE people now that costs are more prohibitive. Raising wages to above market equilibrium will have absolutely no effect whatsoever on anything!

    The funny thing is, after unemployment goes up, we'll have to write more and more unemployment checks. But never fear everyone, Teddy will be back a year from now after this happens, yammering on about raising taxes to fund all of the problems his raising of the minimum wage created! He'll say, "Times are tough, our poor people need our help. George Bush doesn't want to raise taxes and he hates poor people."

    Incremental increases are okay, (even though I don't even agree philosophically with the concept of a minimum wage). But you cannot shock a system by imposing a greater-than 30% increase...unless your goal is to increase unemployment. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch, Teddy! Things is, he KNOWS it. He does. He just doesn't care because the people he is pandering to DON'T know it and are too lazy to look past the platitudes because Democrats ostensibly "care" about poor people while conservatives care about "the rich." 99% of the Democratic Party Platform relies on the public being too stupid to figure out what is is they are actually doing....

  3. #3
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,672
    Post Thanks / Like
    Dont fool yourself. The Dems don't care about poor people. What they care about is getting votes. BUYING votes if you will.

    Here in NJ governer McGreevey just proposed an interesting change in tax policy. A huge tax hike for families earning over $500,000 per year combined with a slight reduction in taxes for the rest of us. At first glance I thought great. Screw the rich bastards. They should pay more.

    Then I thought about it some more. McGreevey is trying to buy my vote. The guy is promising me freebies at the expense of someone other then me. It sounds great in theory. Problem is the Dems have made this their policy. Contrary to what they'll tell you the people who suffer the most are middle class people like myself.

    They promise universal healthcare.... I've allready got that..
    They promise prescription drug benefits.... Got that too..
    They promise housing for all................too late I've allready got that
    They promise to tax the rich and give to the poor.....

    Those ideas sound great. Problem is someones got to pay for them. Theese people try to stay in office by offering people free stuff. Plain and simple. They dont care about poor people. Quite the opposite. They're just buying their votes.

  4. #4
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,757
    Post Thanks / Like
    ALL politicians are the same, either LEFT or RIGHT. The only thing that changes in their version of extremism and self-promotion.

    No Politician cares about me, the great ol' average "middle-class". They only care about their own power, their own personal well-being and their own abillity to get re-elected.

    Watching these left/right fights make me laugh every time I read them, as if you all actually think there is ANY difference between Bush and Kerry (again, beyond which way their extremeism goes).

    Both of these men will do what all politicians do, whatever is best for them and their fellow extremists. Period.

    What America needs (although it will never happen) is more than two parties. Americans deserve options, you know DEMOCRACY (well, Representational Republic actually).

    Right now, there IS no middle ground, there IS no moderate option. There is only two conflicting versions of extreme-ism.

    I can vote for Kerry, who will destroy our millitary, give abortions to everyone (heck 12 is old enough, right?), let the UN (damn French) run the USA and will give all of my tax money to the unwashed lazy welfare state. Nice.....

    Or I can vote for Bush, the great Holy Crusader, who will put GOD in everything, wage war on the mongrel A-rab (making more terrorists), let in all the Mexicans (the 51st State right?) and give my tax money to oil conglomerates.....Great.....

    So, which option is better, eh? YOU convince me how either option is good for ME! Maybe then I will side with one or the other. Till then, I simply abstain...what other choice do I have?

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Warfish[/i]@May 4 2004, 01:56 PM
    [b] ALL politicians are the same, either LEFT or RIGHT. The only thing that changes in their version of extremism and self-promotion.

    No Politician cares about me, the great ol' average "middle-class". They only care about their own power, their own personal well-being and their own abillity to get re-elected.

    Watching these left/right fights make me laugh every time I read them, as if you all actually think there is ANY difference between Bush and Kerry (again, beyond which way their extremeism goes).

    Both of these men will do what all politicians do, whatever is best for them and their fellow extremists. Period.

    What America needs (although it will never happen) is more than two parties. Americans deserve options, you know DEMOCRACY (well, Representational Republic actually).

    Right now, there IS no middle ground, there IS no moderate option. There is only two conflicting versions of extreme-ism.

    I can vote for Kerry, who will destroy our millitary, give abortions to everyone (heck 12 is old enough, right?), let the UN (damn French) run the USA and will give all of my tax money to the unwashed lazy welfare state. Nice.....

    Or I can vote for Bush, the great Holy Crusader, who will put GOD in everything, wage war on the mongrel A-rab (making more terrorists), let in all the Mexicans (the 51st State right?) and give my tax money to oil conglomerates.....Great.....

    So, which option is better, eh? YOU convince me how either option is good for ME! Maybe then I will side with one or the other. Till then, I simply abstain...what other choice do I have? [/b][/quote]
    Warfish - I agree strongly about the need for more than two parties. However, I disagree with the "Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum" characterizations of the Dems and the GOP, especially for this election. I think there are substantive differences between the two parties. You say they are "all the same," and then in virtually your next breath you go on to paint them as polar extremists. I know you "qualified" your assertion that they are all the same, but simply painting with the broad brush of "extremism" is a cop-out, IMO. Ghandhi and Stalin were both "extremists" but there were major differences between the two.

    That said, I can largely identify with your sentiments. I voted for Pat Buchanon in 2000, and voted for Alan Keyes in the GOP primaries in the build up to that general election.

    I think abstaining is also a cop-out. I suspect you may enjoy lampooning each party as cartoonish in their extremism as a way of being able to stay "above the fray" and poke fun at everyone, without the burden of ever showing your cards or being asked " well, what's YOUR solution?." Of course politicians are all jerks and of course they are motivated by naked self-interest and ambition. Simply realizing this is no feat in and of itself - a moose knows this. "Destroy our Military, give abortions to everyone, holy Crusader, give my tax money to oil conglomorates (which doesn't even make sense)??" - I mean, c'mon. That is just a lame attempt at "analysis." I can appreciate that you may enjoy being able to mock anyone who has "taken a side" in this election, but at least be realistic enough to realize that this is VERY easy to do and don't be so arrogant about it. Not everyone who is voting for Bush or Kerry thinks they are perfect and has no reservations whatsoever about the future of this country if their favorite wins. Pointing out flaws, real or perceived, is no substitute for structured thinking.

    BTW - I agree that the US "political machine" is virtually impenetrable for third parties. However, when people like YOU abstain, all that does is further this nonsense. If everyone who was as disenchanted as yourself actually got off their a$$ and voted for third parties, things would change. Instead, people either stay home or hold their nose and vote for the lesser of two evils. Ross Perot got 1 out of every 5 votes in 1992. He was a difference-maker. Ralph Nader got 3% of the poopular vote in the closest election in US history in 2000. He made a difference. How many people do you think wanted to vote for Perot in 1992 but thought they were "throwing their vote away" and so didn't? How will thie EVER change if YOU don't do anything about it? Vote for Nader! Vote for a write-in third party candidate! I am sorry, but sitting back and not voting and then railing against EVERYONE and "the system" is an intellectually lazy, cowardly cop out. Your apathy is part of the reason why things are the way they are. You want credit for being "insightful?" Fine. Show me some real insight. But *****ing about everyone, refusing to stand up and be counted and laughing at those that do is a complete joke.

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,672
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@May 4 2004, 02:33 PM
    [b] I voted for Pat Buchanon in 2000, and voted for Alan Keyes in the GOP primaries in the build up to that general election.
    . [/b][/quote]
    Buchanon?? What were you thinking???

  7. #7
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,757
    Post Thanks / Like
    Jets5ever: You make some very interesting and valid points. Be assured thoight, that I do not "stay above the fray" simply to mock each side.

    My problem, is that my personal vies either fall inot the libertarian camp (which both sides hate equally) or fall into one or the other (Conserv/Liberal) side, often depending on the issue, my beliefs on one isse go to one side, and on another issue go the other!

    Makes it hard to really get behind either. Both do many many things I cannot stand. So I stay out of it (Nader, while a better and slightly more sane option than Perot was, is still a non-vote in the grand scheme).

    Modern politics is defined by Money, not freedom or democracy. We live in a duocracy, a nation of Right and Left, with no middle to be found anymore. There IS no middle option that I see (Nader is almost completely a lefty).

    I don't have a problem giving me feelings on issues, even if other disagree (I know they often will, that is the nature of Freedom):

    I am Pro-Capital Punishment (Conserv)
    I am Pro-Gun Ownership (Conserv)
    I am Pro-Choice (in certain cases, and up to a certain point) (Moderate/Liberal)
    I am ANTI-Religion in Goverment (Liberal)
    I am ANTI-Organized Religion in ANY form, honestly (Radical?)
    I am Pro-the War in Afganistan vs Terrorists of 9/11 (Conserv)
    I am ANTI-the War for Oil in Iraq (Liberal)
    I am ANTI-Welfare (Conserv)
    I am ANTI-Bush's Mexico Policy (Liberal)
    I am ANTI-Political Correctness (Radical?)
    I am ANTI-UN (Conserv)
    I am ANTI-US as World Policeman (Liberal)
    I am Pro-Drug Legalization (Liberal/Libertarian)
    I am Pro-Small Unintrusive Goverment (Libertarian)
    I am ANTI-Giving Money to other nations (Radical?)
    I am ANTI-US involvement in the Middle East (in Israel or the Arab States) (Radical?)

    I could go on, but why bother.

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,281
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@May 4 2004, 09:35 AM
    [b] Teddy will be back a year from now after this happens, yammering on about raising taxes [/b][/quote]
    They finally finished "The Big Dig".

    How tragic, Joe, John and Robert die young, and this... this piece of garbage, the bottom of the Kennedy barrel, lives.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,281
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@May 4 2004, 02:33 PM
    [b] I think abstaining is also a cop-out. I suspect you may enjoy lampooning each party as cartoonish in their extremism as a way of being able to stay "above the fray" and poke fun at everyone, without the burden of ever showing your cards or being asked " well, what's YOUR solution?." Of course politicians are all jerks and of course they are motivated by naked self-interest and ambition. Simply realizing this is no feat in and of itself - a moose knows this. [/b][/quote]
    ;)

    Outstanding!

  10. #10
    Waterboy
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,713
    Post Thanks / Like
    You know what the problem is? On one side you have a bunch of people who pound their chests and say "I am a republican" and go cast their votes for a republican leader regardless of who he(or she) is. On the other side you have Dems who pound their chests saying "The democrats care about the little guy, I'm a democrat" and they go drop their vote for the Democratic candidate regardless of who he (or she) is. Somewhere in the middle there are people who swear up and down "I won't be a hostage to a political party" so they go throw their vote to the Independent party, again knowing very little about him.

    Lastly, you have people like myelf who look at all these candidates and says "man I wouldn't even have any of these guys run my business much less my country but oh well, I believe in 5% of what choice B has to say which is more than any other, I'll vote for him to lead my country" :blink:

    We painstakingly choose between 50 candidates to become Miss America in the beauty pageant. Yet we are content with the idea that we neeed only 2-3 choices to decide who leads our nation. :rolleyes:

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,281
    Post Thanks / Like
    There is no moral relativism from where I sit; THE LEFT JUST PLAIN SUCKS:

    [url=http://www.ukemonde.com/news/usefulidiot.html]http://www.ukemonde.com/news/usefulidiot.html[/url]

  12. #12
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,672
    Post Thanks / Like
    This whole argument about both sides being equally looney is rediculous. I see a large portion of the libs on this board who are happy when our soldiers die. They're happy that our soldiers got caught doing stupid stuff. Anything to make Bush and America look bad makes them happy. Now thats looney. Kerry considders the capture of OBL or the creation of new jobs to be a catastrophe! Thats looney! Theres no worse act than wanting the worst for this country. Thats what I call looney.

  13. #13
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,112
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by chiefst2000[/i]@May 5 2004, 02:22 PM
    [b] This whole argument about both sides being equally looney is rediculous. I see a large portion of the libs on this board who are happy when our soldiers die. They're happy that our soldiers got caught doing stupid stuff. Anything to make Bush and America look bad makes them happy. Now thats looney. Kerry considders the capture of OBL or the creation of new jobs to be a catastrophe! Thats looney! Theres no worse act than wanting the worst for this country. Thats what I call looney. [/b][/quote]
    westcoastmole makes an idiotic comment and you think most libs on this board luv to see soldiers killed??????????????? do not question bush's decision to INVADE Iraq or you are anti american

    warfish I am pro/con exactly as you are on the list, only I think handguns should be banned but not rifles,shotguns

    Boozer76 that was a very good post

    5ever- you seem to be a very well educated & informed poster and 95% of your responses are well thought out and informative(maybe a little long winded at times) and I enjoy reading your point of view,though sometimes I don't agree with you. At least your not throwing rocks & bottles at the "anti conservatives" like chief2000 & spirit of weeb

    just my 2 cents worth

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    dunkirk, ny
    Posts
    3,243
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Warfish[/i]@May 4 2004, 03:03 PM
    [b] Jets5ever: You make some very interesting and valid points. Be assured thoight, that I do not "stay above the fray" simply to mock each side.

    My problem, is that my personal vies either fall inot the libertarian camp (which both sides hate equally) or fall into one or the other (Conserv/Liberal) side, often depending on the issue, my beliefs on one isse go to one side, and on another issue go the other!

    Makes it hard to really get behind either. Both do many many things I cannot stand. So I stay out of it (Nader, while a better and slightly more sane option than Perot was, is still a non-vote in the grand scheme).

    Modern politics is defined by Money, not freedom or democracy. We live in a duocracy, a nation of Right and Left, with no middle to be found anymore. There IS no middle option that I see (Nader is almost completely a lefty).

    I don't have a problem giving me feelings on issues, even if other disagree (I know they often will, that is the nature of Freedom):

    I am Pro-Capital Punishment (Conserv)
    I am Pro-Gun Ownership (Conserv)
    I am Pro-Choice (in certain cases, and up to a certain point) (Moderate/Liberal)
    I am ANTI-Religion in Goverment (Liberal)
    I am ANTI-Organized Religion in ANY form, honestly (Radical?)
    I am Pro-the War in Afganistan vs Terrorists of 9/11 (Conserv)
    I am ANTI-the War for Oil in Iraq (Liberal)
    I am ANTI-Welfare (Conserv)
    I am ANTI-Bush's Mexico Policy (Liberal)
    I am ANTI-Political Correctness (Radical?)
    I am ANTI-UN (Conserv)
    I am ANTI-US as World Policeman (Liberal)
    I am Pro-Drug Legalization (Liberal/Libertarian)
    I am Pro-Small Unintrusive Goverment (Libertarian)
    I am ANTI-Giving Money to other nations (Radical?)
    I am ANTI-US involvement in the Middle East (in Israel or the Arab States) (Radical?)

    I could go on, but why bother. [/b][/quote]
    i am much like you...i don't agree with any one party all the time...it depends on the issue...

    someone should make a thread with a bunch of issues and everyone says pro or con...no debate just pro or con...

    it would just be interesting to see how people stand on different issues...

    I would do it, but im too lazy...maybe later tonight...

  15. #15
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,672
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by joewilly+May 5 2004, 03:00 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (joewilly @ May 5 2004, 03:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--chiefst2000[/i]@May 5 2004, 02:22 PM
    [b] This whole argument about both sides being equally looney is rediculous. I see a large portion of the libs on this board who are happy when our soldiers die. They&#39;re happy that our soldiers got caught doing stupid stuff. Anything to make Bush and America look bad makes them happy. Now thats looney. Kerry considders the capture of OBL or the creation of new jobs to be a catastrophe&#33; Thats looney&#33; Theres no worse act than wanting the worst for this country. Thats what I call looney. [/b][/quote]
    westcoastmole makes an idiotic comment and you think most libs on this board luv to see soldiers killed??????????????? do not question bush&#39;s decision to INVADE Iraq or you are anti american

    warfish I am pro/con exactly as you are on the list, only I think handguns should be banned but not rifles,shotguns

    Boozer76 that was a very good post

    5ever- you seem to be a very well educated & informed poster and 95% of your responses are well thought out and informative(maybe a little long winded at times) and I enjoy reading your point of view,though sometimes I don&#39;t agree with you. At least your not throwing rocks & bottles at the "anti conservatives" like chief2000 & spirit of weeb

    just my 2 cents worth [/b][/quote]
    If we didn&#39;t throw some rocks and bottles it wouldnt be any fun. As for most libs on this board, many didnt disagree with WCM&#39;s idiotic comments. They say the same things in a more reserved way. You clearly missed the point of the post.

    [b]Anything to make Bush and America look bad makes them happy. Now thats looney. Kerry considders the capture of OBL or the creation of new jobs to be a catastrophe&#33; Thats looney&#33;[/b]

    You might disagree with my politics but you could never say I dont want whats best for this country. If Clinton were president I would never root for more American casualties, nor would I be happy when a few stupid soldiers commit an act so foolish as to jeopardize the entire mission.

    If all Democrats were like you and Fish that would be fine. Problem is their leadership leans more towards WCM then they do towards you.

    Thats right. Nancy Pelosi (Socialist), Kerry, Daschle, Gore??? These so called leaders of the democratic party are all extremely leftist. They are pulling the entire party to the left. Its getting to the point where they could be considered loons as well.

  16. #16
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,112
    Post Thanks / Like
    chiefs, I don&#39;t post here much but read it a lot. a cool & interesting way to keep up with current events I think.
    You&#39;re right, the rock throwing does jazz it up a bit, & often very funny on both sides. I voted for clinton both times & am glad I did. I reluctantly voted for gore. I will vote for bush not because I think he&#39;s the right choice but a better choice than kerry. I am not impressed with kerry at all & hate all the bushbashing he does. Its easy to sling mud at whomever is in the whitehouse, but he goes overboard at a time when we don&#39;t need it. I just think the billions of &#036;&#036;&#036;s spent could be better used in more covert operations and sealing up our own borders than throwing it at that wasteland called the middleast.
    The British Empire went broke policing & financing all their colonies & I fear the us is being spread very thin with fingers in too many pots. sad but true we should all beware of what is now called the european union. They are going to grow & grow & become quite powerful in future years

    oh yeah, I really don&#39;t think most libs here are taking any pleasure in troops dieing

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,281
    Post Thanks / Like
    Boozer76 and Warfish...

    You guys present yourselves as the "voice of reason", but that&#39;s a cop out.

    Really, what would you suggest I do? Lay down like a rug and let the Left steamroll over me, and destroy this country?

    You know, it just pisses me off to no end when I see this POS John Kerry addressing crowds, telling us how when he becomes president, he&#39;s going to "Get our friends in the UN involved in our efforts to help Iraq", when, because these scumbags- the french, particularly- were running their little oil for fraud racket, and we have 700 dead armed servicemembers BECAUSE WE COULDN&#39;T GET ENOUGH MILITARY SUPPORT.

    There a bunch of co**suckers. So please, spare me the moral relativism speech.

  18. #18
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,757
    Post Thanks / Like
    Moses: I DO try to be a voice of reason when it comes to many issues. And I think you are missing a point here:

    Yes, the Left Wing IS friggin insane, and DO seem to revel in things that screw America and Americans. I don&#39;t like that ****e any more than you do. Unlike what someone posted above, I am NOT a Democrat....

    However, the issue of "Moral Relativism" IS valid. While many on the Right might be sane and just want whats best for America, there IS just as much insanity there as on the left, except the insanity on the right sounds alot like Nazi-ism. Some examples from this weeks Talk-Radio of the Right:

    --Anyone who disagrees with the US war or questions our tactics/motivations/morals should be shot, regardless if they are Americans citizens or not.

    --Americans should give up their Bill of Rights for the betterment/safety of the State.

    --Torture, Murder and Rape are all acceptable actions against captured terrorists.

    --All Muslims are inherantly evil and they should be wiped from the face of the Earth.

    Remind you of anyone, der Furor perhaps?

    Face it man, the Right and Left both take EVERY issue to the extreme, and never find common ground in a logical middleground (or slight left or right bent).

    *SIGH* Man, I hate Americans being killed just as much as any of you. I hate what happened on 9/11 just as much as any of you. I want retribution and revenge just as much as you do. But I refuse to lower myself top the level of mine enemy. It is supposedly our moral fibre that makes Western Civilization superior to others. If we allow ourselves to degrade to the level of the hateful and ignorant Muslim Extremists (like the Nazi&#39;s before them), then what has become of our "superior" moral fibre?

    EDIT: Of course, the fact the Right Winger Supreme Bush made a public APOLOGY for the actions of a few bad apple soldiers DOES make me sick. This IS was, and s**t DOES happen. While we should make sure it doesn&#39;t happen again, there is NO WAY wew should be apologizing to anyone for it. Bad Business and bad precedent for Bush to apologize like that.

  19. #19
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,281
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Warfish[/i]@May 5 2004, 10:49 PM
    [b] Some examples from this weeks Talk-Radio of the Right:

    --Anyone who disagrees with the US war or questions our tactics/motivations/morals should be shot, regardless if they are Americans citizens or not.

    --Americans should give up their Bill of Rights for the betterment/safety of the State.

    --Torture, Murder and Rape are all acceptable actions against captured terrorists.

    --All Muslims are inherantly evil and they should be wiped from the face of the Earth.

    [/b][/quote]
    BS, BS, BS.

    First of all, what joe schmoe says on "right wing radio" is a far cry from the seditious thoughts, behavior, and action of government official, both elected and appointed, from the left. You and I, anybody that calls up Michael Savage, is at liberty to voice an opinion, however outrageous or silly it may be.

    But show me one example of where any of those kooky thoughts were verbally expressed by an elected or appointed republican.

    dude, it comes down to this:

    Who do you feel safer with? Bush and his cabinet, or Kerry and his?

    I don&#39;t want to die from the side effects of serin gas, man. I don&#39;t want to go down like that.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    [b]You can&#39;t handle the truth&#33; Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who&#39;s gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago&#39;s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don&#39;t want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don&#39;t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.
    We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use &#39;em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it&#33; I&#39;d rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don&#39;t give a damn what you think you&#39;re entitled to&#33;
    [/b]

  20. #20
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,672
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Warfish[/i]@May 5 2004, 10:49 PM
    [b]
    --Anyone who disagrees with the US war or questions our tactics/motivations/morals should be shot, regardless if they are Americans citizens or not.

    --Americans should give up their Bill of Rights for the betterment/safety of the State.

    --Torture, Murder and Rape are all acceptable actions against captured terrorists.

    --All Muslims are inherantly evil and they should be wiped from the face of the Earth.

    Remind you of anyone, der Furor perhaps?


    EDIT: Of course, the fact the Right Winger Supreme Bush made a public APOLOGY for the actions of a few bad apple soldiers DOES make me sick. This IS was, and s**t DOES happen. While we should make sure it doesn&#39;t happen again, there is NO WAY wew should be apologizing to anyone for it. Bad Business and bad precedent for Bush to apologize like that. [/b][/quote]
    Those 4 so called quotes are crap. Where did you get that from? Its completely fictional. If your going to make comments on conservative radio you should listen to it before you comment. What host said those things? To whom do you attribute those quotes???


    Also, Bush did not apologize for the actions of those soldiers. Where did you hear that? No where in his comments yesterday was there an apology.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us