Size 10 sense of humor...

[AVGWarhawk]

Those cowardish sand******s simply misconstruct our love and care actions.

Come on Mittel, remove the derogatory word. Not necessary.

[Mittelwaechter]

....however, you forget, she put her life on the line by deploying to Iraq. So I guess she is just an egghead.

Do you forget she puts her life on the line because she wants to do so? She supports her countries politics actively and joins the warmachinery as a volunteer.

The Iraqi folks put their lives on the line because SHE forces them do so! They have to suffer under HER decision to go to war. We may question their will to support their countries politics, but that's their business. As it is ours here at home!

She choses to kill people for life.

[Mittelwaechter]

Those cowardish sand******s simply misconstruct our love and care actions.
Come on Mittel, remove the derogatory word. Not necessary.

You don't like the naming?
It's the military slang (especially US Forces) for Iraqi and Middle East people in general. It expresses the attitude of the humanitarian forces deploed to Iraq.
No need to hide it from public.

I totally agree with you! It's a disgraceful phrase of our heroes!

[AVGWarhawk]

Those cowardish sand******s simply misconstruct our love and care actions.
Come on Mittel, remove the derogatory word. Not necessary.
You don't like the naming?
It's the military slang (especially US Forces) for Iraqi and Middle East people in general. It expresses the attitude of the humanitarian forces deploed to Iraq.
No need to hide it from public.

I totally agree with you! It's a disgraceful phrase of our heroes!

Just because the colorful word is used by the forces does not mean it is ok to show up on the forums.

[AVGWarhawk]

....however, you forget, she put her life on the line by deploying to Iraq. So I guess she is just an egghead.
Do you forget she puts her life on the line because she wants to do so? She supports her countries politics actively and joins the warmachinery as a volunteer.

The Iraqi folks put their lives on the line because SHE forces them do so! They have to suffer under HER decision to go to war. We may question their will to support their countries politics, but that's their business. As it is ours here at home!

She choses to kill people for life.

No, she chose to serve her country whether right or wrong. There is a difference.

[bradclark1]

....however, you forget, she put her life on the line by deploying to Iraq. So I guess she is just an egghead.
Do you forget she puts her life on the line because she wants to do so? She supports her countries politics actively and joins the warmachinery as a volunteer.

The Iraqi folks put their lives on the line because SHE forces them do so! They have to suffer under HER decision to go to war. We may question their will to support their countries politics, but that's their business. As it is ours here at home!

She choses to kill people for life.

No, she chose to serve her country whether right or wrong. There is a difference.
Why feed him?

[Enigma]

Why feed him?

aaaaaaand BINGO!! was his name-O!

[Mittelwaechter]

You mean of course the peace agitators who would prefer we had left Saddam in charge right?

Do we care for Mugabe? (oh - no oil there)
The Young Ill? (oh - he has nukes)
For Musharraf? (oh - he has nukes and he let us run some military bases in his country)
For Abdullah bin 'Abdul-'Aziz Al Saud?

Who's that?

He's the regent of Saudi Arabia. He runs a fine country over there and we love to be his ally. We maintain some important business connections - even Mr. Bush. Who are one of the most important business partners of Mr. Bush in Saudi Arabia?
Please do some research.

Do we care for ... ? (fill in dictator/dumbazz of your choice)

Repeating lies doesn't show you are using your brain. It shows you are using your memory. It shows the constant repeat in the media is effective. It doesn't make them true.

What do you think is the reason why - of all guys - Saddam was chosen?
And do me a favour - think by yourself - don't repeat Fox News.
What's the advantage of this passage at arms.
There has to be some benefit for us. At least we want to see some, for all this investment.

[Mittelwaechter]

No, she chose to serve her country whether right or wrong. There is a difference.

Nice Mafiosi argumentation. Blame the bosses but support the hitmen?

We don't have to care for our decisions?
We obey orders - weather right or wrong?

Life made easy!

Who told me in this thread the people of a country are directly responsible for the deeds of their government?

Oh - sorry I'm wrong! The Iraqi people are resposible for the deeds of their dictator. Maybe because they elected him...

[Mittelwaechter]

Don't assist Mikhail! :D

[Mittelwaechter]

In lack of own arguments the "why feed him" fairies appear on the stage.

A warm welcome chaps!

[AVGWarhawk]

No, she chose to serve her country whether right or wrong. There is a difference.
Nice Mafiosi argumentation. Blame the bosses but support the hitmen?

We don't have to care for our decisions?
We obey orders - weather right or wrong?

Life made easy!

Who told me in this thread the people of a country are directly responsible for the deeds of their government?

Oh - sorry I'm wrong! The Iraqi people are resposible for the deeds of their dictator. Maybe because they elected him...


So, your last statement would indicate the American people are responsible because they elected Bush? I do not support the hitmen that you have made a sweeping collective of all the troops. There are some bad apples. Find me an army that does not have a few bad apples and I will find you the Starship Enterprise in the Milky way. Not all troops obey orders that are wrong but you will find this is the focal point of the news we are spoon fed all day.

[AVGWarhawk]

Don't assist Mikhail! :D

Why not? We disagree on a lot of things. We agree on a lot of things. I enjoy his wit and over all he is darn good guy. :D

[Aramike]

What do you think is the reason why - of all guys - Saddam was chosen?So, your implication is that, if we can't challenge ALL dictators we should challenge NONE? :doh:

Did you stop to think that Iraq was chosen because of its strategically vital location?

[AVGWarhawk]

What do you think is the reason why - of all guys - Saddam was chosen?So, your implication is that, if we can't challenge ALL dictators we should challenge NONE? :doh:

Did you stop to think that Iraq was chosen because of its strategically vital location?

It is strategically fat with oil;)

[Koondawg]

After reading this thread entirely..I choose to grab a big ars snow shovel...hopefully I can stay below ankle deep in BS

KD

[Mittelwaechter]

Well I asked August kindly to do some research on his own. Maybe he would have stumbled upon this page himself. The effect could be more intensive, because no "opponent" gave him the link...


We fully do agree on Mikhayl! :yep:


The American peolple are not directly responsible for the deeds of the government.
And surely not target for any foreign force to be amended.

Our democratic rules keep them away from direct intervention after the elections.

This is one thing we should question in decisions that are fateful for the nation. It probably wouldn't have changed the events. Deep cravings for revenge fed by propaganda of the government and naive media led the way.

Something to learn here?


The American people have been betrayed by their government and the slightly hidden forces behind.
But the majority is responsible for accepting and supporting those deeds and for reelecting Mr. Bush and his administration. All facts are open visible if you are willing to doubt the argumentation of the government.
This will is our noble responsibility to ensure a democracy stays functional.

The bad apples story? Well the bad apples are to find in the government itself. The instructions of Mr. Rumsfeld where undoubtable. Get valuable information! These people have no rights - you don't have to treat them as human.

"This so-called ill treatment and torture in detention centers, stories of which were spread everywhere among the people, and later by the prisoners who were freed were not, as some assumed, inflicted methodically, but were excesses committed by individual prison guards, their deputies, and men who laid violent hands on the detainees." Rudolf Hess, the SS commandant at Auschwitz.



We ask why the world hates the US? The world doesn't.

The Alliance of the Willing is intact.

The majority of the western world is disappointed by its ideologic leader.
They didn't question the Hollywood vision of the American hero fighting for freedom and justice. The intersted ones new about the difference between apearence and reality, but they were the minority. And all governments have some sticky dirt on their shining armor.
But the US dropped their mask and showed an ugly face. Due to the internet the truth is hard to hide theese days. And due to unlimited communication facts spread faster then censorship can keep up with.
The people turned away in disgust. Something is wrong over there, the hero lost his reputation.

Logically the neutral block doesn't support the US by default. But they do realise the facts. These are not in the favour for the US.

The traditional foes have their party. The real intentions of the superpower are unveiled. They allways knew it...

And the Iraqi people are bleeding.

[Mittelwaechter]

What do you think is the reason why - of all guys - Saddam was chosen?So, your implication is that, if we can't challenge ALL dictators we should challenge NONE? :doh:

Did you stop to think that Iraq was chosen because of its strategically vital location?
We should not challenge them by killing their people! This 'collateral damage' is inacceptable. We don't bomb Chicago because the governor is quite quaint.


Iraq was indeed chosen for its location and its oil. You can catch several flies with one strike.
The US economy is dependant on oil. And China and India are on the trip to where? Is it a good idea to have your hands on the first and second rich oil reserves of the world? Is it a good idea to install some permanent military presence in the region to controll all shipping? Is it a good idea to use some weapons and some ammunition to make space for investing in the military industrial complex?
Is it nice to have some American enterprises rebuilding a destroyed infrastructure?
Sell some of our weapons to the Iraqi military? Coca Cola and McDonald's and the other blue chips will be happy about a brand new virgin market...

Who was the next on the list of countries to be liberated?

Saudi Arabia - checked
Canada - checked
Iran - prepared (damn CIA!)
Iraq - checked
Kuwait - checked
United Arab Emirates - ?
Venezuela - prepared (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Fourth_Fleet)

Think!

[Aramike]

The US economy is dependant on oil. This is highly misleading.

The WORLD'S economy is dependent upon oil. Without it, people don't eat, get medical care, have jobs, etcetera.

[Coyote88]

G'damn. :roll:
My little sumbarine joke that started this all has been deleted, but all the nasty stuff remains? Can't figure this forum out.

[Jimbuna]

G'damn. :roll:
My little sumbarine joke that started this all has been deleted, but all the nasty stuff remains? Can't figure this forum out.

Well you can't deny it's started a real lively debate :lol:

[Mittelwaechter]

The US economy is dependant on oil. This is highly misleading.

The WORLD'S economy is dependent upon oil. Without it, people don't eat, get medical care, have jobs, etcetera.

The WORLD'S economic?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/Energy_per_capita.png

Energy Consumption in kilograms of oil equivalent (kgoe) per person per year per country (2001 data).
Darker tones indicate larger consumption (dark grey areas are missing from the dataset). Red hue indicates increasing consumption, green hue indicates decreasing consumption, in the time between 1990 and 2001.
The maximal consumption displayed is 10,000 kgoe p.c. p.a., the only countries with higher values being Qatar, Iceland and the United Arab Emirates. The change in consumption displayed ranges from -38% (Romania) to +94% (Qatar).


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9a/OilConsumptionpercapita.png

Oil consumption per capita!

(Both graphics from Wikipedia. You are free to doubt)

There is a bit more world than from home to work and to Seven Eleven and back. And there are indeed SOME people who don't have access to clean water, medical care or sufficient food.


@ Coyote88: Sorry for capturing your thread. But you should have known joking about brand new facts may cause discussion.
And discussion should be free to develop.

I can stop here!

[Aramike]

The US economy is dependant on oil. This is highly misleading.

The WORLD'S economy is dependent upon oil. Without it, people don't eat, get medical care, have jobs, etcetera.


The WORLD'S economic?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/Energy_per_capita.png

Energy Consumption in kilograms of oil equivalent (kgoe) per person per year per country (2001 data).
Darker tones indicate larger consumption (dark grey areas are missing from the dataset). Red hue indicates increasing consumption, green hue indicates decreasing consumption, in the time between 1990 and 2001.
The maximal consumption displayed is 10,000 kgoe p.c. p.a., the only countries with higher values being Qatar, Iceland and the United Arab Emirates. The change in consumption displayed ranges from -38% (Romania) to +94% (Qatar).




There is a bit more world than from home to work and to Seven Eleven and back. And there are indeed SOME people who don't have access to clean water, medical care or sufficient food.A nation's oil usage and the impact oil has on it's economy are too EXTREMELY different things.

Pick pretty much ANY nation in Africa. They hardly use much oil at all. Yet, a huge portion of their food and medical supplies are brought in by vehicles using ... you guessed it ... oil.

Not to mention how many plastics are created from petrol products.

Just because a nation isn't driving all that much, doesn't mean they aren't impacted by the availability and price of oil.

[August]

What do you think is the reason why - of all guys - Saddam was chosen?

And do me a favour - think by yourself - don't repeat Fox News.

So anything that Fox News may have reported, discussed or opined at any time in the past is out of bounds? :roll: How about you make your argument against removing him from power without repeating the leftist Euro press?

You know what? Don't bother. You couldn't even if you tried given that we've been accused by them of just about everything, including trying to make Iraq the 51st state.

But I am nothing if not fair, so to answer your biased question; the number one reason for removing Saddam from power is because he was a violent dictator who hated our guts and who would undoubtedly take his revenge for Desert Storm the first chance he got, with billions of petro dollars at his disposal to make it happen when he did. That's why he had to be removed from power.

Now you show me another dictator with the same exact attributes Mittelwaechter, including motive, method and means and i'll show you one who deserves similar attention.

[August]

Rudolf Hess, the SS commandant at Auschwitz

Where did you learn your history?

From Wikipedia:

Rudolf Walter Richard Hess (Heß in German) (26 April 1894 – 17 August 1987) was a prominent figure in Nazi Germany, acting as Adolf Hitler's Deputy in the Nazi Party. On the eve of war with the Soviet Union, he flew solo to Scotland in an attempt to negotiate peace with the United Kingdom, but instead was arrested. He was tried at Nuremberg and sentenced to life in prison at Spandau Prison and died there in 1987.

The person you are thinking of is Rudolf Höss who also said:

"Still another improvement we made over Treblinka was that at Treblinka the victims almost always knew that they were to be exterminated and at Auschwitz we endeavored to fool the victims into thinking that they were to go through a delousing process. Of course, frequently they realized our true intentions and we sometimes had riots and difficulties due to that fact. Very frequently women would hide their children under the clothes but of course when we found them we would send the children in to be exterminated."

Which completely contradicts his "individual excesses" statement you quoted (and which i have been unable to verify) and all of which is completely immaterial to anything coalition forces have done in Iraq either individually or more to the point as a matter of policy.

[August]

And in case you didn't know, Saddam stopped leading Iraq since 2003. How come you didn't use these 5 years to go after Mugabe, the house of Saud, Gaddafi, Mubarak, the list is endless and lots of them happen to be your allies.


No need to be sarcastic Mikhayl. Do you want me to reply in kind?

To answer your question: Because we have some idea that we shouldn't just defeat an enemy and leave after demanding crippling reparations, you know, like you French did to the Germans after WW1. (oops sorry that last part just slipped out ;))

Seriously, WW2 taught us that sticking around after the war and helping to get a defeated enemy back on their feet is a good way of keeping budding hitlers from taking power in the ensuing vacuum. Worked for Germany, Japan and Italy but hasn't worked nearly as well in Iraq. Of course we're not playing by the same rules we were back in the later half of the 1940's and maybe if we were Iraq would be much further along in their recovery, maybe not.

Either way making the effort was the right thing to do, don't you agree?

[August]

Well yes sorry for the sarcasm, even though we disagree often you're not one who deserves it I admit, it's just getting on my nerves :D

You make a good point re the "after effort", the problem is that IMO there's no real effort and it doesn't go in the right direction and there's no commitment whatsoever. Maliki has absolutely nothing of a democrat, nothing of a reformist, nothing at all really. He's sectarian and would bow to conservatives and reinstate sharia law in Iraq at the first occasion, I don't see that as a great step toward "democracy", and he holds his position with the blessing of the Bush administration, and you know well that there so much more that could be said about the wrongness of this after war effort.

I will agree that a much better job might have been made of the reconstruction efforts.

What apparently was forgotten in the WW2 "lesson" is that in order for reconstruction to work the entire country has to be kept under rigid military control until new governments can be established and stabilized. That was the situation in the countries of the former Axis, where all three of them were literally awash in allied soldiers for quite a few years after the end of the war.

And since you mentionned France's attitude with Germany after WWI, the so called "US Iraq agreement" could be put alongside the Versailles "diktat" in the minds of many an Iraqi.

Maybe, but you and i both know there is just no comparison between the Versailles treaty and the US/Iraq agreement.

[subchaser12]

So, your last statement would indicate the American people are responsible because they elected Bush?

Bush could not get into office without your votes. If you voted for Bush in 2000 you are ok, I supported him in 2000 because we had no idea how bad he would be. If you voted for Bush in 2004 you do have blood on your hands.

Sorry Bush voters, don't act all innocent, you helped put this man in power. YOU. He could not do it without the Bush voters. Man up and take some of the blame, the right loves to preach all about responsibility to everyone. Practice it.

[Jimbuna]

If you voted for Bush in 2004 you do have blood on your hands.



Are you actually being serious here, or just looking at subtle ways to provoke a reaction from people. http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/1817/thinkbigsw1yo4.gif

[Mittelwaechter]

Rudolf Hess, the SS commandant at Auschwitz
Where did you learn your history?

From Wikipedia:

Rudolf Walter Richard Hess (Heß in German) (26 April 1894 – 17 August 1987) was a prominent figure in Nazi Germany, acting as Adolf Hitler's Deputy in the Nazi Party. On the eve of war with the Soviet Union, he flew solo to Scotland in an attempt to negotiate peace with the United Kingdom, but instead was arrested. He was tried at Nuremberg and sentenced to life in prison at Spandau Prison and died there in 1987.
The person you are thinking of is Rudolf Höss who also said:

"Still another improvement we made over Treblinka was that at Treblinka the victims almost always knew that they were to be exterminated and at Auschwitz we endeavored to fool the victims into thinking that they were to go through a delousing process. Of course, frequently they realized our true intentions and we sometimes had riots and difficulties due to that fact. Very frequently women would hide their children under the clothes but of course when we found them we would send the children in to be exterminated."
Which completely contradicts his "individual excesses" statement you quoted (and which i have been unable to verify) and all of which is completely immaterial to anything coalition forces have done in Iraq either individually or more to the point as a matter of policy.
Sorry for misspelling "Rudolf Hoess". I was quoting the Auschwitz commander as you managed to verify. You can find his translated Nuremberg testimony i.e. here: http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/nuremberg/hoesstest.html

I quoted Hoess to show the bad apples argumentation is not new nor is it very credible as there are documented statements of Mr.Rumsfeld. It's a comparison to the argumentation of a member of the Nazi regime. You probably should have understand that circumstance. No intention to compare the crimes in Auschwitz and Abu Ghraib.

So anything that Fox News may have reported, discussed or opined at any time in the past is out of bounds? :roll: How about you make your argument against removing him from power without repeating the leftist Euro press?
Let me refuse to discuss about the quality of Fox News please. Thank you!

But why do you want me to find some arguments - no thinking man can find - to support Saddam to be untouched in exalted position?

I am with Mikhayl - the people of Iraq should have tried to get rid of him.

We could have offered help to an - underground? - opposition, if existent.
But a majority of the people of Iraq would have had to state their will to get rid of their dictator. There have been international observers in Iraq.
In this case UN Forces - in my opinion the only legal forces on this planet - should have tried to catch him.

As long as no opposition is existent, we must assume the people are willing to bear their fate. No intervention should be made.

But I am nothing if not fair, so to answer your biased question; the number one reason for removing Saddam from power is because he was a violent dictator who hated our guts and who would undoubtedly take his revenge for Desert Storm the first chance he got, with billions of petro dollars at his disposal to make it happen when he did. That's why he had to be removed from power.
Do I understand you right: you buying a gun legalises your neighbour to shoot you?


The whole discussion will last forever. We get used to be devided and we care for this division ourselves for the benefit of those who want to manipulate us.

Let's look forward and try to collect some ideas for solving the problems we and our children will have to face.

I'd love to see a cooperative population on this planet for the benefit of all.
Some radical thoughts? All nations forego their military? A fixed percentage of the gross domestic product is payed to the UN to run the only military forces on the planet. They enforce a nation to keep peace if necessary?

No Veto Powers in the UNO security council? All nations have the same weight?

Some decisions for the planet have to be made differently - nations weight per citizen?

Saved money from military expenses goes into better education for all and help for the poor?

Any ideas? Wishes? Dreams?
Can we build a better world for our children?
Do we love peace? Do we believe that others love it as we do?
Do we want to respect others and think of them as equal?
Do we want to be cooperative?

[Onkel Neal]

So, your last statement would indicate the American people are responsible because they elected Bush?

Bush could not get into office without your votes. If you voted for Bush in 2000 you are ok, I supported him in 2000 because we had no idea how bad he would be. If you voted for Bush in 2004 you do have blood on your hands.

Sorry Bush voters, don't act all innocent, you helped put this man in power. YOU. He could not do it without the Bush voters. Man up and take some of the blame, the right loves to preach all about responsibility to everyone. Practice it.

Well, Bush would have never been in the position to run for re-election in 2004 if he had not won in 2000, so you have blood on your hands too. YOU. Blood. Your hands.

:roll:

[Mittelwaechter]

For the public there was no knowledge of Mr. Bush's intentions in his first election.
No blood on any voters hands.

The reelection is the problem. The public should have known what happens, but the majority supported the events. There may be blood on their hands.

We can assume they have been misled and failed to recognise the propaganda. It happened before and if we are unwilling to learn it happens again.
It's the comfortable believer and never doubt the president attitude that causes bloody hands.
And there are still some incurable defenders, insisting on their refuted views.

[August]

Do I understand you right: you buying a gun legalises your neighbour to shoot you?

Not sure how you got that from what i said but I'd say it's more akin to a neighbor named Adolf Hitler who has repeatedly attacked the other neighbors, has possessed, and used, various poisons and bombs in the past, claims to have more, obstructs the local police in searching for them and continually threatens to attack his neighbors again just soon as he can, while corrupting and bribing certain local officals to put pressure on the cops to stop searching and especially patrolling the neighborhood. Quite a different picture than the friendly gun purchasing neighbor in your analogy.

I am with Mikhayl - the people of Iraq should have tried to get rid of him.

We could have offered help to an - underground? - opposition, if existent.

But a majority of the people of Iraq would have had to state their will to get rid of their dictator. There have been international observers in Iraq.
In this case UN Forces - in my opinion the only legal forces on this planet - should have tried to catch him.

As long as no opposition is existent, we must assume the people are willing to bear their fate. No intervention should be made.

What do you mean majority of Iraqis? Like a vote or something?

First off we did have a lot of Iraqi expat groups as well as Shiite and Kurdish people in country begging us to finish the job we started in Desert Storm. All through the Clinton years the suffering of the Iraqi people under Saddams hand was continually documented. Why do people so easily forget this in their effort to blame George Bush for everything?

Secondly, UN weapons inspectors (not UN forces which imo are a very bad joke) were constantly shadowed by Saddams handlers from the minute they stepped off the plane in country to the time they left. It would have been suicide for an Iraqi to say anything like that to them. Not only for him but his family as well.

Again how could the true will of the Iraqi people be proved to your satisfaction one way or the other? As the scenes of Iraqis tearing down Saddam statues immediately after the war ended showed, they were very glad to see him go. If that doesn't constitute proof of wanting to be out from under his rule I just don't know what would.

[subchaser12]

Well, Bush would have never been in the position to run for re-election in 2004 if he had not won in 2000, so you have blood on your hands too. YOU. Blood. Your hands.

:roll:

Not hardly. I said I supported him in 2000, I didn't vote for him. I was a republican at the time and just gave Bush my 23 year old "hell yeah" over Gore. Remember how boring and routine that election was? It was a party line election. Reps voted for Bush, dems for Gore. There were no issues. Clinton ran such a good presidency the country just wasn't a train wreck in 2000. Clinton got a BJ, big deal. Bush has set back worldwide mainstream acceptance for at least one generation, started 2 losing costly bloody wars over oil, took away more freedom then the terrorists could ever dream with the patriot act and brought the economy to it's knees.

Here is my voting record.

-Entered boot camp at 17 in August 1994, didn't turn 18 until march, so I could carry a rifle for the army but not vote.

-1996 was old enough to vote but I was lugging a M-60 around and was in the field, plus I only thought about beer and more beer back then, not politics. I was a Virginia resident so VA wasn't exactly in danger of going blue.

-2000 Was pro Bush but didn't vote.

-2004 Holy **** this is has been a scary 4 years! Registered and voted for Kerry ASAP. Funny the right hated Kerry but the man has shrapnel in his legs from Vietnam, Bush hid in the national guard for the war. Well you know how chickenhawks are.

-2008 Supported Obama after it was clear the republicans didn't want to run Ron Paul and face reality. Heavily supported Obama but didn't have to vote for him. I'm in a blue state, Rhode Island. This place will vote for a republican as soon as I get a house built on the moon.

[August]

I said I supported him in 2000, I didn't vote for him. I was a republican at the time and just gave Bush my "hell yeah" over Gore. Remember how boring and routine that election was? It was a pary line election. Reps voted for Bush, dems for Gore. There were no issues. Clinton ran such a good presidency the country just wasn't a train wreck in 2000. Clinton got a BJ, big deal. Bush has set back worldwide mainstream acceptance for at least one generation, started 2 losing costly bloody wars over oil, took away more freedom then the terrorists could ever dream with the patriot act and brought the economy to it's knees.

Here is my voting record.

-Entered boot camp at 17 in August 1994, didn't turn 18 until march, so I could carry a rifle for the army but not vote.

-1996 was old enough to vote but I was lugging a M-60 around and was in the field, plus I only thought about beer and more beer back then, not politics. I was a Virginia resident so VA wasn't exactly in danger of going blue.

-2000 Was pro Bush put didn't vote.

-2004 Holy **** this is has been a scary 4 years! Registered and voted for Kerry ASAP. Funny the right hated Kerry but the man has shrapnel in his legs from Vietnam, Bush hid in the national guard for the war. Well you know how chickenhawks are.

-2008 Supported Obama after it was clear the republicans didn't want to run Ron Paul and face reality. Heavily supported Obama but didn't have to vote for him. I'm in a blue state, Rhode Island. This place will vote for a republican as soon as I get a house built on the moon.

So in other words Flamingboat you have never actually supported either the Republicans or Bush. I thought you were perma banned? What are you doing back here using a different name?

[Aramike]

So, your last statement would indicate the American people are responsible because they elected Bush?

Bush could not get into office without your votes. If you voted for Bush in 2000 you are ok, I supported him in 2000 because we had no idea how bad he would be. If you voted for Bush in 2004 you do have blood on your hands.

Sorry Bush voters, don't act all innocent, you helped put this man in power. YOU. He could not do it without the Bush voters. Man up and take some of the blame, the right loves to preach all about responsibility to everyone. Practice it.

Well, Bush would have never been in the position to run for re-election in 2004 if he had not won in 2000, so you have blood on your hands too. YOU. Blood. Your hands.

:roll:LOL ... I've decided that this guy's posts seem to show a clear pattern of using half-truths and outright lies to support his "theories". When confronted with them, he seems to get worked up into a tizzy and just start lashing out. It's best not to point out the simple flaws in Subchaser's arguments.

[subchaser12]

LOL ... I've decided that this guy's posts seem to show a clear pattern of using half-truths and outright lies to support his "theories". When confronted with them, he seems to get worked up into a tizzy and just start lashing out. It's best not to point out the simple flaws in Subchaser's arguments.

This comming from a guy who uses "LOL" In all caps. You have embarrased yourself enough in this thread. It is hardly a half-truth and outright lie to say Bush is the president because people voted for him.

This is a democracy and Bush or Obama became president because he was voted in by the countries citizens. Be a man and take your share of the blame for voting for him if you did. No one wants to admit they voted for him but you people know what they did in the voting booth. If you voted for Bush in 2004 you supported the wars and everything else Bush has done.

This war would not have happend had Bush not been voted it. The war would not have continued had Bush not been re-elected. Bush voters and supports shoulder their share of the blame. Not as much as the trigger pullers, but they wouldn't be in Iraq without your votes.

Sleep on that.

Does Joe voter share as much blame as Cheney, Rumsfeld or the soldiers doing the actual torturing and raping? Of course not. The people screaming Hitlers name and waving his flags don't share as much blame as the soldier marching the jews into the gas chamber either.

You do shoulder some of the blame though if you voted for Bushy in 2004. You gave him the stamp of approval and helped him retain power so that many more people died from 2004-2008.

If Obama goes on a killing spree you better beliave I will be voting against him in 2012.

[August]

If Obama goes on a killing spree you better beliave I will be voting against him in 2012.

Yeah right. You've never voted against a Democrat in your entire life.

[subchaser12]

If Obama goes on a killing spree you better beliave I will be voting against him in 2012.

Yeah right. You've never voted against a Democrat in your entire life.

I'm proud to say it. I am only 31 so there hasn't been much opportunity at any rate.

I know you want to blame all the black people and stupid liberals for Obama's win. Look at me and ask yourself why is a southern white male that has been in the army, infantry at that now a yellow dog democrat.

If you can figure that out you better let the RNC know the answer.

[August]

I'm proud to say it. I am only 31 so there hasn't been much opportunity at any rate.

I know you want to blame all the black people and stupid liberals for Obama's win. Look at me and ask yourself why is a southern white male that has been in the army, infantry at that now a yellow dog democrat.

If you can figure that out you better let the RNC know the answer.

Nice try at playing the racist card, but I don't blame anyone for Obamas win except the republican party (of which i have never been a member BTW). They started spending like Democrats, pissed off their base and it cost them the election. Simple as pie.

What won't be simple is how you're going to justify your "taking a dump on America" words in February when your "O-man" does the same exact thing with that other 4 billion.

[subchaser12]

Nice try at playing the racist card, but I don't blame anyone for Obamas win except the republican party (of which i have never been a member BTW). They started spending like Democrats, pissed off their base and it cost them the election. Simple as pie.



Oh look, another one who won't admit to being a republican despite firing off about 20 pro Bush right wing posts an hour. That is really great because your party has been so utterly destroyed by the Bush family the supportes can't even admit their support and show their face. Instead you all just tow the republican party line and then say things like Aramike "oh I never siad I was a republican, oh I am not in the republican party".

Yeah whatever, how stupid do you think people are? You really think you are fooling anyone into thinking you are just some independant voter being objective and making up his own mind.

Good to see republican is now a bad word. :D

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Strike two.

Last warning people, keep it civil, or this gets shut, simple as.

[subchaser12]

Strike two.

Last warning people, keep it civil, or this gets shut, simple as.

Is is just me or is Star Trek sort of like Star Wars just without all the guns and fighting?

[August]

Oh look, another one who won't admit to being a republican despite firing off about 20 pro Bush right wing posts an hour. That is really great because your party has been so utterly destroyed by the Bush family the supportes can't even admit their support and show their face. Instead you all just tow the republican party line and then say things like Aramike "oh I never siad I was a republican, oh I am not in the republican party".

Yeah whatever, how stupid do you think people are? You really think you are fooling anyone into thinking you are just some independant voter being objective and making up his own mind.

Good to see republican is now a bad word. :D

Well I can see you won't be around here much longer if you keep up making these kind of personal attack posts Subchaser. I would have thought you'd have learned this from your last Subsim tour of duty.

The truth of the matter is that i've never registered for any political party. I have voted for Republicans, I have voted for Democrats and I have voted for Independents in national, state and local elections.

Unlike you I vote for the candidate, not his party. Yeah i have made mistakes (I voted for Jimmy Carter in 1980 for example) but although George Bush was certainly not the best president this nation has ever seen (not by a long shot), even with all his flaws I believe he still did a better job than either Gore or Kerry would have done.

[breadcatcher101]

There's hope for Iraq yet:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8bc_1229642777

Got this off another forum, have a good laugh.

[joegrundman]

This act could be just what's needed to boost consumer spending and therefore the economy, which in turn will increase prosperity, create jobs and a peaceful civic society!

[August]

This act could be just what's needed to boost consumer spending and therefore the economy, which in turn will increase prosperity, create jobs and a peaceful civic society!

If that happens i'll throw my shoes at George Bush too!

[subchaser12]

Well I can see you won't be around here much longer if you keep up making these kind of personal attack posts Subchaser. I would have thought you'd have learned this from your last Subsim tour of duty.



There was no personal attack. I attacked the republicans and since you say you are not a republican there shouldn't be a problem here right. You keep doing this, you jump in the ring with me and sometimes you get some good hits in. Everytime I get a good hit in you start complaining about bans and mods. Pick all the fights with me you want, but don't hide behind the mods skirts because you know I bite back.

If you want to throw tear gas fine, you know I am going to pick it up and throw it back though. Don't comaplain and go "ohh ohh he threw the tear gas canister at me!"

Back to the topic, what democratic presidents have you voted for? From you picture and posts you will have to forgive me for not thinking you are a Clinton fan.

A personal attack would be like be calling you an ahole, jerk, scumbag, rhode islander or whatever. I haven't called anyone any names and you know it.

[August]

There was no personal attack. I attacked the republicans and since you say you are not a republican there shouldn't be a problem here right. You keep doing this, you jump in the ring with me and sometimes you get some good hits in. Everytime I get a good hit in you start complaining about bans and mods. Pick all the fights with me you want, but don't hide behind the mods skirts because you know I bite back.

If you want to throw tear gas fine, you know I am going to pick it up and throw it back though. Don't comaplain and go "ohh ohh he threw the tear gas canister at me!"

Back to the topic, what democratic presidents have you voted for? From you picture and posts you will have to forgive me for not thinking you are a Clinton fan.

A personal attack would be like be calling you an ahole, jerk, scumbag, rhode islander or whatever. I haven't called anyone any names and you know it.

Right. A personal attack is not just limited to name calling. You basically accused me of being a liar did you not?

As for who i have voted for, try actually reading the post you just quoted and you'll find your answer.

[Aramike]

Hmm, I didn't know "LOL" was a sign of anything other than "laughing out loud". Which, quite honestly, I typically do after I read some of the things you write. Sorry if that offends you. I guess because YOU (subchaser) say that I've embarrassed myself, it must be true. Just like Bush "lying". Don't need any evidence to support it, but because you say it... Yeah, right.

And nice try illustrating that you don't use "half-truths" and "lies" by taking a single, clearly obvious, statement of fact to support it. That one single, clearly obvious statement of fact isn't what I was referring to.

I could just as easily use a statement such as "gasoline makes my car go" as "proof" that I'm telling truth. Even people on YOUR SIDE have conceeded points that you merely dodge. To make things worse, you come right on back with the same points which people don't bother to argue anymore, then somehow satisfy yourself that you've "won" the debate merely because you got the last word.

That's why I LOL. :rotfl: Instead you all just tow the republican party line and then say things like Aramike "oh I never siad I was a republican, oh I am not in the republican party".

Yeah whatever, how stupid do you think people are? You really think you are fooling anyone into thinking you are just some independant voter being objective and making up his own mind. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that you don't know the difference between "conservative" and "Republican". :roll:

Well, actually, to be honest, I'm not surprised at all.

[subchaser12]

Right. A personal attack is not just limited to name calling. You basically accused me of being a liar did you not?

As for who i have voted for, try actually reading the post you just quoted and you'll find your answer.

Ok my bad I missed the Carter part. So you voted for a democrat over 2 and a half decades ago but you are quick to say that was a mistake. Again, I'm not letting you off the hook. Your posts show you are obviously a republican, I don't care that you left it off your voter registation. Not that it's important.

My accusation stands. You don't reply to everyone one of my posts attacking the dems and defendinf Bush and the republicans like you do withoue being one. Sorry, but you're no independant.

Let me take a guess at your post Carter voting record.

Reagan
Reagan
Bush
Bush
Dole ( I think that was who ran against Clinton )
Bush
Bush
McCain

[subchaser12]

Hmm, I didn't know "LOL" was a sign of anything other than "laughing out loud".

It's just a sign that you are a younger member of the internet is all. A big all caps LOL is rarely seen on this forum and it was noteworthy. This forum is the older more mature crowd. People who were on the internet back in the 1980's I would wager.

[subchaser12]

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that you don't know the difference between "conservative" and "Republican". :roll:

Well, actually, to be honest, I'm not surprised at all.

When you are done being snarky explain it to me. I want to know because I really don't think I do. I can't keep up with the ever fracturing right wing factions. Are conservatives the people still wishing Reagan would come back from the dead?

Anyway, define it for me. I'm here to learn about my enemies.

[Aramike]

Oh, and so far as that PREPOSTEROUS idea that people who voted for Bush somehow have blood on their hands, I reply with ... SO???

I'm not afraid to make difficult, costly decisions for something I believe in.

Doctors often fix patients by cutting them open. Is the blood on their hands a bad thing, too?

[Aramike]

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that you don't know the difference between "conservative" and "Republican". :roll:

Well, actually, to be honest, I'm not surprised at all.

When you are done being snarky explain it to me. I want to know because I really don't think I do. I can't keep up with the ever fracturing right wing factions. Are conservatives the people still wishing Reagan would come back from the dead?

Anyway, define it for me. I'm here to learn about my enemies.I find it quite telling that you don't know about your "enemies" before you declare that they are your "enemies".

It's that kind of bigotry that is at least partly responsible for the worst events in human history (slavery, holocaust, etc).

Research it yourself.

[subchaser12]

Oh, and so far as that PREPOSTEROUS idea that people who voted for Bush somehow have blood on their hands, I reply with ... SO???

I'm not afraid to make difficult, costly decisions for something I believe in.



Wow thank you Joseph Stalin for proving my point. I guess you can't make an omlet without breaking some eggs now can you.

[August]

[Ok my bad I missed the Carter part. So you voted for a democrat over 2 and a half decades ago but you are quick to say that was a mistake. Again, I'm not letting you off the hook. Your posts show you are obviously a republican, I don't care that you left it off your voter registation. Not that it's important.

My accusation stands. You don't reply to everyone one of my posts attacking the dems and defendinf Bush and the republicans like you do withoue being one. Sorry, but you're no independant.

Let me take a guess at your post Carter voting record.

Reagan
Reagan
Bush
Bush
Dole ( I think that was who ran against Clinton )
Bush
Bush
McCain

Actually that is wrong in a couple of places and say what you want between the two of us only i have the bipartisan voting record.

And no, I defend the choice that i made, unlike you who has steadfastly ignored your beloved Democrats own faults in more threads than this just one.

[subchaser12]

Actually that is wrong in a couple of places and say what you want between the two of us only i have the bipartisan voting record.



This isn't completely fair since you have been voting since right at or before I was born. I would have loved to have a bipartisan voting record but the RNC in it's infinite wisdom put more money and effort into killing Ron Paul's white house bid than Obamas.

[August]

It's just a sign that you are a younger member of the internet is all. A big all caps LOL is rarely seen on this forum and it was noteworthy. This forum is the older more mature crowd. People who were on the internet back in the 1980's I would wager.

Unlike you who with a join date of only two months ago somehow makes you an expert as to what is commonly seen on this forum?

LOL!

[August]

Actually that is wrong in a couple of places and say what you want between the two of us only i have the bipartisan voting record.


This isn't completely fair since you have been voting since right at or before I was born. I would have loved to have a bipartisan voting record but the RNC in it's infinite wisdom put more money and effort into killing Ron Paul's white house bid than Obamas.

Presidential elections aren't the only elections. What republican senators and congressmen have you voted for?

[Aramike]

Oh, and so far as that PREPOSTEROUS idea that people who voted for Bush somehow have blood on their hands, I reply with ... SO???

I'm not afraid to make difficult, costly decisions for something I believe in.



Wow thank you Joseph Stalin for proving my point. I guess you can't make an omlet without breaking some eggs now can you.Heh, how typical of you to ignore counter-points you can't reconcile with in favor of something you think you can debate.

Oh, and the first world leader the "omelet" quote is attributed to is former US President William Howard Taft. However, the quote dates back to at LEAST the late 18th century.

The reason it is commonly associated with Stalin is because of the context in which he used it, trivializing the deaths of people for "The Revolution". In fact, it's a clear case of context over content.

My belief in making hard decisions for what I stand for does NOT mean I believe in making them lightly.

[Aramike]

It's just a sign that you are a younger member of the internet is all. A big all caps LOL is rarely seen on this forum and it was noteworthy. This forum is the older more mature crowd. People who were on the internet back in the 1980's I would wager.Did you say you're 31? I'm older than you. Heck, I like modern rock music and own an iPOD too.

I'm pretty sure LOL has been around for years and years, by the way. In fact, when I was growing up it meant "lots of love". It is not indicative of its user's age in any way.

Any chance you could try to stick to the discussion at hand versus attempting to discredit others with poorly conceived arguments based on an odd misconception you carry?

PS: Why would you be concerned with my age in the first place? Were you hoping I was young so you could attempt to discredit my arguments with some slight against an imagined "ignorant" youth?

Ideas mean a lot more than age.

[subchaser12]

Heh, how typical of you to ignore counter-points you can't reconcile with in favor of something you think you can debate.



I'm not going to write an entire thesis complete with citations every post, I don't have to. You're the guy passionately supporting a dead ideology (conservatism) not to mention the worst American president in modern history if not in America's entire history.

You're on the losing side of history and I just don't have much respect for your views and I especially don't feel the need to exert myself too much in dealing with you. I'm sitting high on the hog after the November 7th landslide. :|\\

The people have spoken.

[Aramike]

See? This is a SPECIFIC EXAMPLE of "lies and half-truths".I'm not going to write an entire thesis complete with citations every post, I don't have to. You're the guy passionately supporting a dead ideology (conservatism) not to mention the worst American president in modern history if not in America's entire history.1: Conservatism is by no means dead. MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of people voted for McCain. In fact, there is much anecdotal evidence postulating that McCain lost in part because he was not conservative enough.

I don't agree that it was the cause for his defeat, but I do believe it did have some impact.

Funny, you sound like Rush Limbaugh 4 years ago with he arrogantly and errantly proclaimed liberalism dead. We saw how correct he was on that...

2: Your "worst president" claim is INCREDIBLY subjective. History is repleat with presidents considered to be the same in their times, only for later those administrations to be considered successful (Truman comes to mind).

Now, if you wanted to actually base your opinions in FACTS, you could state that Bush's approval rating is the lowest in history. That's quite true. However, Presidential approval ratings have only been around since 1937. So, while true, it wouldn't be saying all that much.

3: I know you like to pretend that I'm some kind of Bush supporter (even though I've stated otherwise), but my political mind doesn't work like yours. There are things Bush does that I support. Likewise, there are things he does that I'm against. Judging by your earlier post fawning over Obama, it doesn't work that way with you. In fact, in a different thread you repeatedly PANNED Bush for taking measures that Obama supports! When confronted with that fact, you simply ignore it.

You've consistantly asserted that, somehow August and myself are hiding our ideologies because we're ashamed of them. That's not it at all. It's just that they aren't as simple as yours are. The name "Bush" is neither the embodiment or antithesis of our beliefs.

Clearly, the name "Obama" encapsulates yours. I don't delude myself into thinking that things are just that simple in order to support my arguments.You're on the losing side of history and I just don't have much respect for your views and I especially don't feel the need to exert myself too much in dealing with you. I'm sitting high on the hog after the November 7th landslide. You've already made clear that you don't even know my views.

But I'll respect that, anyway. They're probably far too complicated for you.

As far as "losing side of history" goes, that's probably one of the single dumbest comments made in this thread. Considering that you're referring to present events, there's no way you or anyone else knows how history will judge us.The people have spoken.So? I find it odd that you obviously take so much stock and comfort in that statement considering that the people had spoken in 2004 as well.

By your VERY OWN ARGUMENTS, the people having "spoken" doesn't neccessarily mean that they are right.

PS: Oh, and you don't have to write an entire "thesis" on every comment I make. But, it'd be nice if you read them before making broad, innaccurate comments regarding my ideologies.

[subchaser12]

You've already made clear that you don't even know my views.



You're been spouting the right wing dogma for going on 18 pages now. You can claim you're just too complicated and politcally mysterious if you want but that's laughable. Having fun being a political leper?

Conservatism is dead. You guys lost VA and NC! I mean hello. We got 8 years to go. For every baby boomer that kicks the bucket over the next 8 years hundreds of minority children will replace them. Just the fact that we got a black president now when we thought it would take another 20 years when whites become the minority should tell you something.

I'm hoping the right is dumb enough to go further to the right in 8 years. Those fools are talking about a Palin Huckabee ticket. Go for it and see what happens.

[August]

You've already made clear that you don't even know my views.


You're been spouting the right wing dogma for going on 18 pages now.

And you've been spouting left wing dogma for going on 18 pages now doing a rather bad job of it given the many uncomfortable questions you've had to dodge.

Have you noticed how few of the forums Democrats have come to your support? Think about it.

[Aramike]

You're been spouting the right wing dogma for going on 18 pages now. Wrong. Here's another case you you making stuff up to support your arguments.

I've been spouting a centrist dogma, thank you. And I'll continue to spout a centrist dogma.You can claim you're just too complicated and politcally mysterious if you want but that's laughable. Having fun being a political leper?I'm not simply claiming that it's just too complicated. I'm claiming that it is just too complicated for you.

See, YOU are the one simplifying them with these weak arguments of "you're Republican therefore you're wrong". It's a stupid argument because I'm not even a Republican! Not to mention it ignores the substance of the argument...

Not only do you struggle to refute my points and facts, your very assumption of my political party is wrong!

Again, it's just too complicated for you. Nothing to be ashamed of ... this "debate" thing just isn't for everyone.Conservatism is dead. We got 8 years to go. For every baby boomer that kicks the bucket over the next 8 years hundreds of minority children will replace them. Just the fact that we got a black president now when we thought it would take another 20 years when whites become the minority should tell you something. Care to post of video of your crystal ball at work so we can all bask in its glory?I'm hoping the right is dumb enough to go further to the right in 8 years. Those fools are talking about a Palin Huckabee ticket. Go for it and see what happens.LOL! ...oh, wait, I can't say that...

Umm, this is the new dumbest comment in the thread. Right-wing, left-wing, conservatism, liberalism ... those aren't little sliders that move left or right. Those terms represent ideas. Right-wing ideas can't move further to the right. The ideas are what they are. Ditto for left-wing.

For instance, the idea of low taxes is generally a conservative idea. It can't get more or less conservative. It is what it is.

Funny, though, how your messianic president-elect is moving to the right...

[August]

Funny, though, how your messianic president-elect is moving to the right...

I'll bet he continues to ignore that...

[Aramike]

Oh, and I have to add this: its not just that you don't respond to all points made against you ... it's that you NEVER respond to things that directly refute specifics in your arguments. I could write a book that's nothing more than the things you posit and catalogued facts demonstrating that they are wrong.

I've debated the war many, many times. From both sides, actually (that's a technique I use to try to ensure the integrity of my beliefs). In any case, I've had incredible discussions with MANY liberals who are against the war and have solid facts and ideas to back their arguments up. Debates like those are great because you don't have to spend 80% of the time verifying the veracity of the claims being made.

Would you like me to argue your side for you?

[subchaser12]

At least I am not ashamed to admit my party affiliations publicly.

[Aramike]

At least I am not ashamed to admit my party affiliations publicly.Please stop questioning the courage of my convictions just because you don't understand where I'm coming from. I'm not at all ashamed of what I believe and to even think so is incredibly silly.

I mean, seriously ... if I was ashamed of my views the WHY THE HELL DO I KEEP POSTING THEM?

It's not my fault that no single political party represents my views. And I'm not going to pretend that one does just to satisfy this idea you have that it is just THAT simple...

You should stop pretending that merely identifying yourself as a member of a political party's minions and spewing the standard talking points is somehow courageous.

I kind of think you're a political simpleton as you have this strange and absurd idea that whoever disagrees with you just MUST be a Republican. No offense intended.

You'd be surprised at the things you start to notice if you look at how political parties represent political issues. It's very much the same way you believe people are either liberal or conservative.

I guess you're probably so indoctrinated with it all that official party lines are all you understand. It's a shame.

I don't let people tell me what to believe. I research issues and decide for myself.

Just because someone doesn't hate Bush doesn't mean they completely support him like you seem to believe. I know it's probably too complicated for you, but he's not always wrong just like he's not always right.

And, I believe that using hatred as a basis for a political position is intellectually weak. Ideas are one thing, and should be debated as rationality governs their pragmatism. Emotions, on the other hand, are wildly irrational.

[subchaser12]

At least I am not ashamed to admit my party affiliations publicly.Please stop questioning the courage of my convictions just because you don't understand where I'm coming from. I'm not at all ashamed of what I believe and to even think so is incredibly silly.

I mean, seriously ... if I was ashamed of my views the WHY THE HELL DO I KEEP POSTING THEM?

It's not my fault that no single political party represents my views. And I'm not going to pretend that one does just to satisfy this idea you have that it is just THAT simple...

You should stop pretending that merely identifying yourself as a member of a political party's minions and spewing the standard talking points is somehow courageous.

I kind of think you're a political simpleton as you have this strange and absurd idea that whoever disagrees with you just MUST be a Republican. No offense intended.

You'd be surprised at the things you start to notice if you look at how political parties represent political issues. It's very much the same way you believe people are either liberal or conservative.

I guess you're probably so indoctrinated with it all that official party lines are all you understand. It's a shame.

I don't let people tell me what to believe. I research issues and decide for myself.

You have passionately and vehemently defended Bush's view, party and his failed little war for going on 18 pages now in this thread. No one does that who isn't a republican. Yet you still want to say you aren't a right winger. You make Bill O'Really and Rush Limbaugh look like liberals here.

Again, you aren't fooling anyone.

[subchaser12]

I kind of think you're a political simpleton as you have this strange and absurd idea that whoever disagrees with you just MUST be a Republican. No offense intended.



No, not everyone who disagrees with me is a republican. Someone such as yourself that tows the republican party line on all of their issues better than their own press secretary, yes, that makes you a republican.

Just so you know I can't respond to all your name calling in kind. I have before but it got me in deep trouble here. If I do a mod will instantly appear and jump all over me. You are a right winger so you can ad hominem all you want and get away with it.

Didn't want you to think I was ignoring all the personal attacks, but the mods are since you are a right winger.

[Aramike]

More lies and half-truths. Heck, you don't even know the difference between right wing and left wing politics! :rotfl:

If you actually knew what you were talking about, you'd realize that you'd need to know my positions on dozens of social, economic, and foreign issues before you could even begin to define me politcally. Instead, you make wild assumptions.You have passionately and vehemently defended Bush's view, party and his failed little war for going on 18 pages now in this thread. No one does that who isn't a republican. Yet you still want to say you aren't a right winger. You make Bill O'Really and Rush Limbaugh look like liberals here.

Again, you aren't fooling anyone.I've moderately defended the war and stated the FACT that Bush didn't lie (which people who are against the war agreed with). The Iraq War is not a Republican/Democrat issue, by the way. In fact more than anything I've simply challenged the wild, baseless claims you make.

And being in favor of or opposed to any war does not define political parties.

You really believe the crap you say, don't you?

Here's a link to help you understand the differences between left/right/liberal/conservative: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-Right_politics

You clearly don't even know the difference between the left and the right. Mouthpieces for either party are annoying enough ... a mouthpiece that doesn't even have a clue what he's talking about is even worse.

Getting a little mad, here?No, not everyone who disagrees with me is a republican. Someone such as yourself that tows the republican party line on all of their issues better than their own press secretary, yes, that makes you a republican.Clearly you have no idea what makes someone a Republican, so your ability to make credible, authoratative statements on the subject is questionable at best.Just so you know I can't respond to all your name calling in kind. I have before but it got me in deep trouble here. If I do a mod will instantly appear and jump all over me. You are a right winger so you can ad hominem all you want and get away with it. It always comes back to you whining about name-calling when the facts get in the way of your baseless arguments. Clearly you're just covering for your ignorance regarding the very claims you make.If I do a mod will instantly appear and jump all over me. You are a right winger so you can ad hominem all you want and get away with it. LOL. A guy who thinks the war in Iraq defines what is Right-Wing/Left-Wing thinks he knows what side of the spectrum I belong to.

News flash: you'd need to know someone's positions on A LOT MORE ISSUES before you can define them as on the right or left.Didn't want you to think I was ignoring all the personal attacks, but the mods are since you are a right winger.Typical retreat you make into this claim of personal attacks after you've been destroyed in an argument.

Instead you should try to catalogue your own inaccuracies.

[subchaser12]

More lies and half-truths. Heck, you don't even know the difference between right wing and left wing politics! :rotfl:

If you actually knew what you were talking about, you'd realize that you'd need to know my positions on dozens of social, economic, and foreign issues before you could even begin to define me politcally. Instead, you make wild assumptions.You have passionately and vehemently defended Bush's view, party and his failed little war for going on 18 pages now in this thread. No one does that who isn't a republican. Yet you still want to say you aren't a right winger. You make Bill O'Really and Rush Limbaugh look like liberals here.

Again, you aren't fooling anyone.I've moderately defended the war and stated the FACT that Bush didn't lie (which people who are against the war agreed with). The Iraq War is not a Republican/Democrat issue, by the way. In fact more than anything I've simply challenged the wild, baseless claims you make.

And being in favor of or opposed to any war does not define political parties.

You really believe the crap you say, don't you?

Here's a link to help you understand the differences between left/right/liberal/conservative: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-Right_politics

You clearly don't even know the difference between the left and the right. Mouthpieces for either party are annoying enough ... a mouthpiece that doesn't even have a clue what he's talking about is even worse.

Getting a little mad, here?No, not everyone who disagrees with me is a republican. Someone such as yourself that tows the republican party line on all of their issues better than their own press secretary, yes, that makes you a republican.Clearly you have no idea what makes someone a Republican, so your ability to make credible, authoratative statements on the subject is questionable at best.Just so you know I can't respond to all your name calling in kind. I have before but it got me in deep trouble here. If I do a mod will instantly appear and jump all over me. You are a right winger so you can ad hominem all you want and get away with it. It always comes back to you whining about name-calling when the facts get in the way of your baseless arguments. Clearly you're just covering for your ignorance regarding the very claims you make.If I do a mod will instantly appear and jump all over me. You are a right winger so you can ad hominem all you want and get away with it. LOL. A guy who thinks the war in Iraq defines what is Right-Wing/Left-Wing thinks he knows what side of the spectrum I belong to.

News flash: you'd need to know someone's positions on A LOT MORE ISSUES before you can define them as on the right or left.Didn't want you to think I was ignoring all the personal attacks, but the mods are since you are a right winger.Typical retreat you make into this claim of personal attacks after you've been destroyed in an argument.

Instead you should try to catalogue your own inaccuracies.

Nice, I tell you the mods come down on liberals for personal attack but not right wingers and you use that little bit of information to really crank it up and become a total condescending priick.

Stay classy Aramike. :up:

[Aramike]

Nice, I tell you the mods come down on liberals for personal attack but not right wingers and you use that little bit of information to really crank it up and become a total condescending priick.

Stay classy Aramike. Just because my remarks are sometimes intentionally inciteful doesn't mean they are personal attacks. I have yet to once comment on you personally.

However, I've commented on your ideas, most often quite specifically. If you don't like what I have to say, you can just as easily attempt to refute the basis of my arguments.

See, when I say you're wrong about something, I demonstrate why. You just say that something's wrong, and then proceed to make some generalization irrelevent to the facts being discussed. Heck, even if I *WERE* a staunch Republican (which I'm not), that argument would be weak. To make a claim, one must demonstrate why that claim is true. Saying that any idea is bad just because it's "Republican" is stupid and suggests that perhaps you have nothing to support your claim.

And then, after you're repeatedly faced with SPECIFICS refutting your arguments, you start whining and crying about personal attacks. You know what you COULD do? Try to show me how I'm wrong.

Actually, I doubt that you can do that otherwise you would have already.

Look, you can think I'm a condescending p***k all you want. Honestly, I couldn't care less ... especially not enough to start complaining about it. Oh, and my "condescending" style has been around long before you told me what you percieve to be the mods' behavior, but I suppose you've never met a conspiracy theory you didn't like.

Honestly, and I'm not trying to be condescending here at all ... if you want to debate with the "Big Boys" you would be better off doing some research, getting your facts straight, then sticking to discussing conclusions you've based upon solid, sourced evidence. I mean, *I* could debate against the war better than you can, and you say that I'm a staunch war supporter.

Listen, buddy ... I haven't even begun to debate the Iraq War with you. I've been too busy clearing up your lies, half-truths, and misconceptions. You have no idea where I stand regarding my rationales. And I'm pretty sure what I believe regarding the war isn't the Bush Administration's party line.

[subchaser12]

Nice, I tell you the mods come down on liberals for personal attack but not right wingers and you use that little bit of information to really crank it up and become a total condescending priick.

Stay classy Aramike. Just because my remarks are sometimes intentionally inciteful doesn't mean they are personal attacks. I have yet to once comment on you personally.

However, I've commented on your ideas, most often quite specifically. If you don't like what I have to say, you can just as easily attempt to refute the basis of my arguments.

See, when I say you're wrong about something, I demonstrate why. You just say that something's wrong, and then proceed to make some generalization irrelevent to the facts being discussed. Heck, even if I *WERE* a staunch Republican (which I'm not), that argument would be weak. To make a claim, one must demonstrate why that claim is true. Saying that any idea is bad just because it's "Republican" is stupid and suggests that perhaps you have nothing to support your claim.

And then, after you're repeatedly faced with SPECIFICS refutting your arguments, you start whining and crying about personal attacks. You know what you COULD do? Try to show me how I'm wrong.

Actually, I doubt that you can do that otherwise you would have already.

Look, you can think I'm a condescending p***k all you want. Honestly, I couldn't care less ... especially not enough to start complaining about it. Oh, and my "condescending" style has been around long before you told me what you percieve to be the mods' behavior, but I suppose you've never met a conspiracy theory you didn't like.

Honestly, and I'm not trying to be condescending here at all ... if you want to debate with the "Big Boys" you would be better off doing some research, getting your facts straight, then sticking to discussing conclusions you've based upon solid, sourced evidence. I mean, *I* could debate against the war better than you can, and you say that I'm a staunch war supporter.

Listen, buddy ... I haven't even begun to debate the Iraq War with you. I've been too busy clearing up your lies, half-truths, and misconceptions. You have no idea where I stand regarding my rationales. And I'm pretty sure what I believe regarding the war isn't the Bush Administration's party line.

I hope you are enjoying yourself. As I said I can't respond because there are several people here just hoping I will break it off in you so I can get a ban again. Yeah you heard me August!

Frankly it isn't worth losing access to the community.

[Aramike]

I hope you are enjoying yourself. As I said I can't respond because there are several people here just hoping I will break it off in you so I can get a ban again. Yeah you heard me August!

Frankly it isn't worth losing access to the community.Yeah, sure, pal...

Right ... saying that, "you're wrong because of..." is going to get you banned. Yep.

LOL

:rotfl:

Use whatever you want as a crutch. People like you just want to say anything without being challenged on it. That's weak. How easy it must be to be able to blindly believe something...

I respect people who oppose the war. In fact, in some ways (not entirely) I agree with them. You? I don't respect. Sorry, but it's clear you've got nothing to bring to the table. But worse, when called on it you try to dip out like you're being forced to.

Siddown. :|\\

[subchaser12]

I hope you are enjoying yourself. As I said I can't respond because there are several people here just hoping I will break it off in you so I can get a ban again. Yeah you heard me August!

Frankly it isn't worth losing access to the community.Yeah, sure, pal...

Right ... saying that, "you're wrong because of..." is going to get you banned. Yep.

LOL

:rotfl:

Use whatever you want as a crutch. People like you just want to say anything without being challenged on it. That's weak. How easy it must be to be able to blindly believe something...

I respect people who oppose the war. In fact, in some ways (not entirely) I agree with them. You? I don't respect. Sorry, but it's clear you've got nothing to bring to the table. But worse, when called on it you try to dip out like you're being forced to.

Siddown. :|\\

You're just bitter that your republican boys got slaughtered November 7th. There isn't anything to debate with you. Bush lied and thousands died. The people rose up and tossed the republicans from power. We are going to keep you out of power too, we will never let you all back in the driver seat. You have ten kids? Shonqui does and so do all her friends in da hood, I will be helping get them to the polls in 4 years, and then in 8 years. Your right wing ideas have been tried and tested and been a total failure that almost brought down the country.

You and your kind are the past. The Bush regime was the last big hurah of the right wing political power in America, I hope you enjoyed it because it's over.

Go ahead and hit me with another snarky barrage of insults Mr. Out of Power guy. Don't be bitter you lost.

[Aramike]

I hope you are enjoying yourself. As I said I can't respond because there are several people here just hoping I will break it off in you so I can get a ban again. Yeah you heard me August!

Frankly it isn't worth losing access to the community.Yeah, sure, pal...

Right ... saying that, "you're wrong because of..." is going to get you banned. Yep.

LOL

:rotfl:

Use whatever you want as a crutch. People like you just want to say anything without being challenged on it. That's weak. How easy it must be to be able to blindly believe something...

I respect people who oppose the war. In fact, in some ways (not entirely) I agree with them. You? I don't respect. Sorry, but it's clear you've got nothing to bring to the table. But worse, when called on it you try to dip out like you're being forced to.

Siddown. :|\\

You're just bitter that your republican boys got slaughtered November 7th. There isn't anything to debate with you. Bush lied and thousands died. The people rose up and tossed the republicans from power. We are going to keep you out of power too, we will never let you all back in the driver seat. You have ten kids? Shonqui does and so do all her friends in da hood, I will be helping get them to the polls in 4 years, and then in 8 years. Your right wing ideas have been tried and tested and been a total failure that almost brought down the country.

You and your kind are the past. The Bush regime was the last big hurah of the right wing political power in America, I hope you enjoyed it because it's over.

Go ahead and hit me with another snarky barrage of insults Mr. Out of Power guy. Don't be bitter you lost.Blah, blah, blah ... more empty, meaningless, unsupported, RACIST assertions...

Come back when you learn how the world works and stop deluding yourself. I mean, you have to try to be as empty as you clearly are.

Next.

[AVGWarhawk]

Obviously a worldwide trend has started. Perhaps we can cash in on a shoe novelty:hmm:

[August]

Back to topic, shoes are now officially offensive in "western culture" as well:

http://www.newsday.com/iphone/ny-nymta1218,0,5427568.story

Ain't nobody going to toss away the shoes they were wearing with weather like we're having around here today :yep:

"Jesus Bill why are you walking around in the snow in your stocking feet?"

"I got so mad at somebody i threw my shoes at them"

:doh:

[Aramike]

Back to topic, shoes are now officially offensive in "western culture" as well:

http://www.newsday.com/iphone/ny-nymta1218,0,5427568.story

Ain't nobody going to toss away the shoes they were wearing with weather like we're having around here today :yep:

"Jesus Bill why are you walking around in the snow in your stocking feet?"

"I got so mad at somebody i threw my shoes at them"

:doh:Heh, ditto that. It's not even Christmas and I'm ready to move south...

[Iceman]

http://archive.gulfnews.com/region/Iraq/10268220.html

I'm sure he apologized spontaneously all by himself.

Someone probably coaxed him with a shoe..lol..I couldn't resist lol. :)

That man has been being tortured ever since that happened while the people on this board call him a "coward". He hasn't been seen for 4 days. I'm sure his face is so destroyed we could not recognize him anyway.

I'm sure they will say he killed himself in prison after they torture him until he dies.

That's ok Maliki, enjoy being a tryant now. Your time will come fast big man when America pulls out.

Did I miss something?

I watch the evening news every..evening..lol...and I dont remember seeing anything reporting that this man was beaten like you say...do you have the gift of prophecy or do you have connections in high places...or are you Assuming he was beaten.

I would actually like to know....I find it hard to imagine he was beaten being such a public thing...he will probably become a millionare when he writes a book about the event or makes a movie I would think.


http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20081218/capt.f0f275cfaf5d49c1b2769413b48c563a.turkey_iraq_ bush_shoes_ank109.jpg?x=213&y=295&xc=1&yc=1&wc=295&hc=409&q=100&sig=ySn3r1skVFBilndqKHk0Cg--
dat is a big show to fill... lol...funny how people over there can now march and protest without fear of being killed by they're government...funny how that democracy thing works. :)

[Aramike]

Did I miss something?

I watch the evening news every..evening..lol...and I dont remember seeing anything reporting that this man was beaten like you say...do you have the gift of prophecy or do you have connections in high places...or are you Assuming he was beaten.

I would actually like to know....I find it hard to imagine he was beaten being such a public thing...he will probably become a millionare when he writes a book about the event or makes a movie I would think.I think there were some ALLEGATIONS that he was beaten, but in any case, judging by subchaser's arguments, those aren't what he based his claim on. And, they were just allegations from clearly biased sources.

I'm still waiting for him to post a video of his crystal ball, btw. :rotfl:

[Digital_Trucker]

And this is how democracy works : http://cpj.org/reports/2008/12/for-sixth-straight-year-iraq-deadliest-nation-for.php
Maybe I misinterpreted something in the story, but exactly how does that piece demonstrate how democracy works?

[Aramike]

And this is how democracy works : http://cpj.org/reports/2008/12/for-s...nation-for.phpHeh, go Iraq!!!

Kidding.

But it's not surpising considering that the media is the least trusted profession (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081218/lf_nm_life/us_jobs_doctors_survey;_ylt=Aia12y9DnKPs9kcheMRIdH MazJV4) of all.

:ping:

[subchaser12]

http://archive.gulfnews.com/region/Iraq/10268220.html

I'm sure he apologized spontaneously all by himself.

Someone probably coaxed him with a shoe..lol..I couldn't resist lol. :)

That man has been being tortured ever since that happened while the people on this board call him a "coward". He hasn't been seen for 4 days. I'm sure his face is so destroyed we could not recognize him anyway.

I'm sure they will say he killed himself in prison after they torture him until he dies.

That's ok Maliki, enjoy being a tryant now. Your time will come fast big man when America pulls out.

Did I miss something?

I watch the evening news every..evening..lol...and I dont remember seeing anything reporting that this man was beaten like you say...do you have the gift of prophecy or do you have connections in high places...or are you Assuming he was beaten.

I would actually like to know....I find it hard to imagine he was beaten being such a public thing...he will probably become a millionare when he writes a book about the event or makes a movie I would think.


:)

Everything that happens isn't on the evening news. It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what happened. He offended Maliki the great puppet leader of Iraq. Maliki as you know does control some thugs right now. The man was dragged away by his goons and hasn't been seen since. When people piss off a strong man of any kind in Iraq and get dragged away you know what is happening to them. Torture and death awaits them.

Do you think Maliki and his thugs sent the guy out of the country on a first class ticket to a posh European spa? Wake up man.

[subchaser12]

Did I miss something?

I watch the evening news every..evening..lol...and I dont remember seeing anything reporting that this man was beaten like you say...do you have the gift of prophecy or do you have connections in high places...or are you Assuming he was beaten.

I would actually like to know....I find it hard to imagine he was beaten being such a public thing...he will probably become a millionare when he writes a book about the event or makes a movie I would think.I think there were some ALLEGATIONS that he was beaten, but in any case, judging by subchaser's arguments, those aren't what he based his claim on. And, they were just allegations from clearly biased sources.

I'm still waiting for him to post a video of his crystal ball, btw. :rotfl:

It's only what happens to 99.99% of the people who "vanish in the night" in Iraq. Hey, if he walks out of Iraq without a scratch on his face and we see him on Oprah with his book I will be glad to come here and say I was wrong.

Hell I will be amazed to ever see the guy vertical again. Of course since I don't have proof of his fate we must assume he is getting massaged by a couple of hot blondes courtesy of Maliki and friends right?

[subchaser12]

I hope you are enjoying yourself. As I said I can't respond because there are several people here just hoping I will break it off in you so I can get a ban again. Yeah you heard me August!

Frankly it isn't worth losing access to the community.Yeah, sure, pal...

Right ... saying that, "you're wrong because of..." is going to get you banned. Yep.

LOL

:rotfl:

Use whatever you want as a crutch. People like you just want to say anything without being challenged on it. That's weak. How easy it must be to be able to blindly believe something...

I respect people who oppose the war. In fact, in some ways (not entirely) I agree with them. You? I don't respect. Sorry, but it's clear you've got nothing to bring to the table. But worse, when called on it you try to dip out like you're being forced to.

Siddown. :|\\

You're just bitter that your republican boys got slaughtered November 7th. There isn't anything to debate with you. Bush lied and thousands died. The people rose up and tossed the republicans from power. We are going to keep you out of power too, we will never let you all back in the driver seat. You have ten kids? Everything that happens isn't on the evening news. It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what happened. He offended Maliki the great puppet leader of Iraq. Maliki as you know does control some thugs right now. The man was dragged away by his goons and hasn't been seen since. When people piss off a strong man of any kind in Iraq and get dragged away you know what is happening to them. Torture and death awaits them.

Do you think Maliki and his thugs sent the guy out of the country on a first class ticket to a posh European spa? Wake up man.does and so do all her friends in da hood, I will be helping get them to the polls in 4 years, and then in 8 years. Your right wing ideas have been tried and tested and been a total failure that almost brought down the country.

You and your kind are the past. The Bush regime was the last big hurah of the right wing political power in America, I hope you enjoyed it because it's over.

Go ahead and hit me with another snarky barrage of insults Mr. Out of Power guy. Don't be bitter you lost.Blah, blah, blah ... more empty, meaningless, unsupported, RACIST assertions...

Come back when you learn how the world works and stop deluding yourself. I mean, you have to try to be as empty as you clearly are.

Next.

Now you want to call me racist, ha. Shonqui is a real person. I'm not spelling her name right. I said earlier I didn't vote because I am currently the resident of a blue state. On election day I was back down south getting African Americans to the polls and all their family members. I know how things work. There were so excited to get to vote for someone who gave a crap about them for a change.

You know what African Americans are right? Well guess what, they exist and they can vote. Virginia went blue so my efforts paid off.

How did you help McLame during the election? I bet you didn't leave your keyboard did you. I like to duke it out on forums but come election time you need to get out there and do some work.

So like I said, when are white people going to start having 8 kids each again like the 1950's? Better get cracking or you will probably never see another white president, let alone a republican one.

[Digital_Trucker]

So like I said, when are white people going to start having 8 kids each again like the 1950's?
Right about the same time you grow something other than igneous mineral formations in your cranium.

BTW, I thought you were a democrat and a tree hugger. It's not a very "green" idea to be having 8 kids, is it?

Oh, and speaking of racism, isn't it racist to imply that only non-white people have 8 kids? Oh wait, I guess it's not, it's just flamingboat logic. Guess you don't know any white Catholics or Mormons, do you? Stupid question on my part, of course you don't, you're stuck in flamingboat land.

Oh, you might want to take a trip to the eye doctor. I noticed you said you were 31 in an earlier post. I think you might be dyslexic.

[subchaser12]

Oh, and speaking of racism, isn't it racist to imply that only non-white people have 8 kids? Oh wait, I guess it's not, it's just flamingboat logic. Guess you don't know any white Catholics or Mormons, do you? Stupid question on my part, of course you don't, you're stuck in flamingboat land.

Oh, you might want to take a trip to the eye doctor. I noticed you said you were 31 in an earlier post. I think you might be dyslexic.

I know one mormon that has 2 kids and is stopping. Some catholics that have 2 at the most.

I'm 31 alright. Generation X is growing up and voting Democratic baby. Deal with it. You think being a liberal is just a young kid phase people grow out of? Think again.

Oh you want to call me dyslexic? Since you are in a wheelchair I thought you of all people would not make lite of implied medical conditions. Well I will admit I am not the best writer in the world. I had all my girlfriends do my homework in college. Doing your own homework is for nerds not getting any ass.

[Digital_Trucker]

Oh, and speaking of racism, isn't it racist to imply that only non-white people have 8 kids? Oh wait, I guess it's not, it's just flamingboat logic. Guess you don't know any white Catholics or Mormons, do you? Stupid question on my part, of course you don't, you're stuck in flamingboat land.

Oh, you might want to take a trip to the eye doctor. I noticed you said you were 31 in an earlier post. I think you might be dyslexic.
I know one mormon that has 2 kids and is stopping. Some catholics that have 2 at the most.

I'm 31 alright. Generation X is growing up and voting Democratic baby. Deal with it. You think being a liberal is just a young kid phase people grow out of? Think again.

Oh you want to call me dyslexic? Since you are in a wheelchair I thought you of all people would not make like of implied medical conditions. Well I will admit I am not the best writer in the world. I had all my girlfriends do my homework in college. Doing your own homework is for nerds not getting any.

I noticed in all that, that you didn't address the racial nature of your statement regarding whites resuming having 8 kids (implying that non-whites were the only ones having lots of kids). Typical of your approach, so it shouldn't surprise me.

I'm fully aware that being liberal is not just a young kid thing, after all, the liberals in Congress are hardly children. The implication was that you, in particular, are rather childish. My apologies for not putting the sarcasm notation next to the dyslexic remark, I thought you'd get it. Sorry you didn't get to exercise your brain by doing homework, that might explain some things.

And you're right it's not nice of me to make "like" (sic) of medical conditions, implied or otherwise. You assume, wrongly, however that a disabled person can't make light of their condition. I make jokes about my own disabilities all the time. My problems with your previous remarks were that they weren't very light-hearted and seemed obviously meant to evoke a response (which you got, unfortunately).

I'll now do what I should have done to begin with and resume skipping right over your posts.

[Aramike]

I'll now do what I should have done to begin with and resume skipping right over your posts.Here, here. I think we'd all be better off not giving this bigot a chance to try to justify his beliefs.

[subchaser12]

I'll now do what I should have done to begin with and resume skipping right over your posts.Here, here. I think we'd all be better off not giving this bigot a chance to try to justify his beliefs.

You guys can't get enough of my posts. You are like the guy watching somethng crappy on TV holding the remote control acting like he is just about to change the channel the whole time.

Like Aramike here. He said many pages ago he was done with me. He declared he was above me and claimed to pack his ball and go home, or so he said. Did he? Of couse not, he hangs on every word I say and he has been for days.

I can come in here and just fart and I can set my watch by the time it takes Aramark to come sniff it and try and see what I had for breakfast.

Back to the point, by a show of hands here who has 7 siblings? 6? 5? 4? Tell me, who here has a high number of siblings that I was accused of bigory for stating you don't have?

It's just statistics. Fewer and fewer white Christian families are having multiple kids because they can't afford it.

[Aramike]

Yeah, sure. That's how it is, bigot.

[subchaser12]

Yeah, sure. That's how it is, bigot.

Looks like someone doesn't have 8,7,6 or 5 siblings eh? I'm right again. Imagine that. I know you have spent some time in academia, probably too much. Out here in the real world you won't always have a milk crate full of evidence to back up every word you speak. You don't need it though.

You should have quit this post while you were on top. Your arrogance allowed you to chase me farther and farther into the jungle. Now look at what Mr. MasterDebater has been reduced too. More petty name calling.

You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows.

Bob Dylan

[Aramike]

Yeah, sure. That's how it is, bigot.

Looks like someone doesn't have 8,7,6 or 5 siblings eh? I'm right again. Imagine that. I know you have spent some time in academia, probably too much. Out here in the real world you won't always have a milk crate full of evidence to back up every word you speak. You don't need it though.

You should have quit this post while you were on top. Your arrogance allowed you to chase me farther and farther into the jungle. Now look at what Mr. MasterDebater has been reduced too. Petty name calling.

You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows.

Bob DylanRight. You do a great job of patting yourself on the back, by the way. I guess you've probably have had a lot of practice at it... :rotfl:

[Digital_Trucker]

Right. You do a great job of patting yourself on the back, by the way. I guess you've probably have had a lot of practice at it... :rotfl:

:up::rotfl::up:Smacked the nail directly on it's flat little head.

[baggygreen]

I will say this about the whole little tangent this thread took from shoe-throwing to demographics and voting patterns.

Is a white man refusing to vote for a black man racist? Remembering your answer, is a black man refusing to vote for a white man racist?

it cuts both ways.

It was done to death during election time, but anyone who voted in this fashion and stats showed there were a lot of them on both sides of the fence, are dimwits who should have their rights to vote revoked. Something so important as voting and they selected on skin colour rather than policy? stupidity.

Now, back on topic, i've gotten 14 on www.sockandawe.com (http://www.sockandawe.com). Slowly getting better :D

[subchaser12]

Is a white man refusing to vote for a black man racist? Remembering your answer, is a black man refusing to vote for a white man racist?

it cuts both ways.

It was done to death during election time, but anyone who voted in this fashion and stats showed there were a lot of them on both sides of the fence, are dimwits who should have their rights to vote revoked. Something so important as voting and they selected on skin colour rather than policy? stupidity.



If you really like the persons platform and are only voting against him over race that of course is a bit racist. We are all a bit racist to one degree or another. It doesn't mean you are a Klan member. It's natural to prefer your own race. No one would call someone an outright racist for marrying their own race, it's a given who we all prefer.

My take on the election race issue is this. I don't see it as the greatest achievement for African Americans because Barney could have beaten whoever the republican was after Bush. I see that as a cheap shot. Could an African American win on a good day like Clinton? No. I like Obama and I am glad he is there but let's be honest, he got the drunk America that would not have given him his number sober.

Yes there were white people who would not vote for anyone that was black, look at West Virginia. I've been to West Virginia and trust me when I say they didn't vote against Obama over policy issues. Now having said that I will be the first to admit more blacks by far voted for Obama just because he was black than whites voting against Obama for the same reason. You have to ask yourself though, how many blacks are republicans in the first place? For how many African Americans was it really a tough call who to vote for? It's not like the African American community had a tough choice here, they are already in the democrat category. The democrats have been courting African Americans for years because the right never needed to, and don't exactly have the best track record with the bottom tax brackets versus their generosity to those at the top. Then when Obama won the democratic primary it was really a no brainer.

As far as policy goes, elections are not about policy. Elections are about emotions. I'll use two extreme examples from the left and right. The far right wants Jesus for all, guns, more guns, wars and no abortion. Did Bush and his powerful position at the height of his power ban abortions, lift the machine gun ban, put bibles back in school? No, yet the right supports their man anyway because they "feel" the republicans are more supportive than the other guy. Now the extreme left. They want free healthcare ala Britian, weed laws like Amsterdam, no death penalty and no wars. Do they get it? No, Obama isn't anti-war, all I see from him so far is lets all go to Afganistan. Weed? Free healthcare, dream on. Obama is a moderate that adopted the Clinton style which is tried and true.

[Iceman]

Man...I asked for evidence, or known facts as to if anyone knew if this man was "Beaten"...don't proceed to lecture me on the evils of men...keep to the facts and quit swirling away into fantasy land.

Don't ASSume he was beaten or make statements that are not backed up by fact..it only makes u look like an ass...if anyone really cares in this thread lol.

Got facts post em...donkey (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJq8lF6lZxM)

[subchaser12]

Got facts post em...donkey (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJq8lF6lZxM)

At least I didn't steal my name from a crappy 80's Tom Cruise movie. Bush's comment on the video was funny. "So he wants to throw his shoes, that's what people do in a free society to get attention". He called Iraq a free society, what a jokster. I'm going to miss that Bush sense of humor. That's a good one George, almost as funny as when you joked about Saddam building nukes. He should do stand up.

http://www.juancole.com/2008/12/al-zaidi-injured-pleads-guilty-mosul.html

[UnderseaLcpl]

I wish I knew what had happened to this thread.

[subchaser12]

I wish I knew what had happened to this thread.

The usual. Bush fanboys vs. everyone else.

[Aramike]

I wish I knew what had happened to this thread.

The usual. Bush fanboys vs. everyone else.LOL. You deleted your post where you claimed to be leaving the discussion because you're the "bigger" guy. :rotfl:

Actually, I think it's more like "Smart People w/ Reasonable Arguments vs. Subchaser12". :doh:

[Aramike]

Man...I asked for evidence, or known facts as to if anyone knew if this man was "Beaten"...don't proceed to lecture me on the evils of men...keep to the facts and quit swirling away into fantasy land.

Don't ASSume he was beaten or make statements that are not backed up by fact..it only makes u look like an ass...if anyone really cares in this thread lol.

Got facts post em...donkey (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJq8lF6lZxM)I don't think subchaser12 has ever seen a fact he didn't hate and dismiss.

[joegrundman]

Alright children. Enough now

[Aramike]

Alright children. Enough nowYeah, you're right. It's just too damned easy...

[subchaser12]

Man...I asked for evidence, or known facts as to if anyone knew if this man was "Beaten"...don't proceed to lecture me on the evils of men...keep to the facts and quit swirling away into fantasy land.

Don't ASSume he was beaten or make statements that are not backed up by fact..it only makes u look like an ass...if anyone really cares in this thread lol.

Got facts post em...donkey (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJq8lF6lZxM)I don't think subchaser12 has ever seen a fact he didn't hate and dismiss.

Oh excuse me, I don't have a video showing the guy getting beaten and tortured. Care to show me your proof that he is being treated humanely and having his human rights and any injuries from the tackle taken care of? If you have any proof he is just a okay then his family and the rest of the world would like to chat with you, no one else has seen him since.

[Aramike]

Man...I asked for evidence, or known facts as to if anyone knew if this man was "Beaten"...don't proceed to lecture me on the evils of men...keep to the facts and quit swirling away into fantasy land.

Don't ASSume he was beaten or make statements that are not backed up by fact..it only makes u look like an ass...if anyone really cares in this thread lol.

Got facts post em...donkey (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJq8lF6lZxM)I don't think subchaser12 has ever seen a fact he didn't hate and dismiss.

Oh excuse me, I don't have a video showing the guy getting beaten and tortured. Care to show me your proof that he is being treated humanely and having his human rights and any injuries from the tackle taken care of?Hmm, making big, bold claims then asking others to disprove them...

Aliens have taken over the bodies of our government officials. Prove me wrong, bigger man. :rotfl:

[subchaser12]

Man...I asked for evidence, or known facts as to if anyone knew if this man was "Beaten"...don't proceed to lecture me on the evils of men...keep to the facts and quit swirling away into fantasy land.

Don't ASSume he was beaten or make statements that are not backed up by fact..it only makes u look like an ass...if anyone really cares in this thread lol.

Got facts post em...donkey (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJq8lF6lZxM)I don't think subchaser12 has ever seen a fact he didn't hate and dismiss.

Oh excuse me, I don't have a video showing the guy getting beaten and tortured. Care to show me your proof that he is being treated humanely and having his human rights and any injuries from the tackle taken care of?Hmm, making big, bold claims then asking others to disprove them...

Aliens have taken over the bodies of our government officials. Prove me wrong, bigger man. :rotfl:

I'll take straw men for 400 Alex.

[Aramike]

Man...I asked for evidence, or known facts as to if anyone knew if this man was "Beaten"...don't proceed to lecture me on the evils of men...keep to the facts and quit swirling away into fantasy land.

Don't ASSume he was beaten or make statements that are not backed up by fact..it only makes u look like an ass...if anyone really cares in this thread lol.

Got facts post em...donkey (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJq8lF6lZxM)I don't think subchaser12 has ever seen a fact he didn't hate and dismiss.

Oh excuse me, I don't have a video showing the guy getting beaten and tortured. Care to show me your proof that he is being treated humanely and having his human rights and any injuries from the tackle taken care of?Hmm, making big, bold claims then asking others to disprove them...

Aliens have taken over the bodies of our government officials. Prove me wrong, bigger man. :rotfl:

I'll take straw men for 400 Alex.Trabeck: The clue is, this person makes a continuous series of bold claims, never bothering to back them up with factual evidence.

Contestant: Who is subchaser12?

[subchaser12]

Trabeck: The clue is, this person makes a continuous series of bold claims, never bothering to back them up with factual evidence.

Contestant: Who is subchaser12?

Comming from the guy who says Bush didn't lie.

[Aramike]

Trabeck: The clue is, this person makes a continuous series of bold claims, never bothering to back them up with factual evidence.

Contestant: Who is subchaser12?

Comming from the guy who says Bush didn't lie.He didn't. People on your side even agree with that.

He was WRONG.

Being wrong isn't lying. You should look the word up.

[subchaser12]

Trabeck: The clue is, this person makes a continuous series of bold claims, never bothering to back them up with factual evidence.

Contestant: Who is subchaser12?

Comming from the guy who says Bush didn't lie.He didn't. People on your side even agree with that.

He was WRONG.

Being wrong isn't lying. You should look the word up.

Funny you mentioned aliens earlier. What branch were you in?

[Aramike]

Trabeck: The clue is, this person makes a continuous series of bold claims, never bothering to back them up with factual evidence.

Contestant: Who is subchaser12?

Comming from the guy who says Bush didn't lie.He didn't. People on your side even agree with that.

He was WRONG.

Being wrong isn't lying. You should look the word up.

Funny you mentioned aliens earlier. What branch were you in?Take a leak, hit refresh, read subchaser12's garbage. Nice routine.

[subchaser12]

Trabeck: The clue is, this person makes a continuous series of bold claims, never bothering to back them up with factual evidence.

Contestant: Who is subchaser12?

Comming from the guy who says Bush didn't lie.He didn't. People on your side even agree with that.

He was WRONG.

Being wrong isn't lying. You should look the word up.

Funny you mentioned aliens earlier. What branch were you in?Take a leak, hit refresh, read subchaser12's garbage. Nice routine.

You obvisouly can't get enough of it.

[Aramike]

Trabeck: The clue is, this person makes a continuous series of bold claims, never bothering to back them up with factual evidence.

Contestant: Who is subchaser12?

Comming from the guy who says Bush didn't lie.He didn't. People on your side even agree with that.

He was WRONG.

Being wrong isn't lying. You should look the word up.

Funny you mentioned aliens earlier. What branch were you in?Take a leak, hit refresh, read subchaser12's garbage. Nice routine.

You obvisouly can't get enough of it.Yeah, reading the poor grammar, bad spelling, and baseless points is pretty funny when considering it comes from a 31 year old.

[PeriscopeDepth]

You two should get your own subforum. :lol:

PD

[subchaser12]

You two should get your own subforum. :lol:

PD

We are registered at Target.

[Aramike]

You two should get your own subforum. :lol:

PD

We are registered at Target.That was actually pretty funny. :yep:

[subchaser12]

You two should get your own subforum. :lol:

PD

We are registered at Target.That was actually pretty funny. :yep:

I was hoping you would laugh.

[Aramike]

Subchaser and Aramike are one and the same.Busted.

I wanted to create two distinctly opposed identities. The first one, Aramike, would be someone who would attempt to make reasonable arguments supported by the data available and uninfluenced by political affiliations.

The second, subchaser12, was designed to act as a counter-balance, only originating its arguments from the sphincter. :|\\

[Aramike]

Yeah well, when I said the "same" I really meant the same ;)Cute.

[Jimbuna]

Bugga!!...I was just getting cosy.

http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/6942/popcorncowtx0.gif

[Digital_Trucker]

Subchaser and Aramike are one and the same.

Actually he is the same as someone else, but it's not Aramike. He seems to be working on the same "exit strategy" as the last time, too.

[subchaser12]

Subchaser and Aramike are one and the same.

Actually he is the same as someone else, but it's not Aramike. He seems to be working on the same "exit strategy" as the last time, too.

I decided to be the bigger man and walk away Digital Trucker....

[Digital_Trucker]

Subchaser and Aramike are one and the same.
Actually he is the same as someone else, but it's not Aramike. He seems to be working on the same "exit strategy" as the last time, too.
I decided to be the bigger man and walk away Digital Trucker....

Why do I find that insanely hilarious:rotfl:? Never mind, I don't need (nor do I want) and answer, it's a rhetorical question.

[subchaser12]

Why do I find that insanely hilarious:rotfl:? Never mind, I don't need (nor do I want) and answer, it's a rhetorical question.

Such wit, here how about a standing ovation?

[baggygreen]

Am I the only one confused?:doh: